Vogt affidavit

Post Reply
gsgs
Posts: 470
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:02 am

Vogt affidavit

#1

Post by gsgs » Sat Dec 14, 2013 1:36 am

------------edit-------------- subsequently Epectitus posted this extensive detailed survey about the Vogt affidavit:[/break1]scribd.com/doc/194384601/20-Shades-of-Vogt] planning to move this first post later and reservethis place as an index into this thread with links to the important results,links,summaries,files,posts---------------since this seems to be a sensitive subject here, I post it to fema-camp 7.5please don't post the usual humor/spam/ridiculing here, only investigating theissue itself, feel free to ignore if you are not interested, tia.Douglous Vogt in Nov.2013 had posted a 72-pages pdf, which he labels affidavit,but which mainly is an article about perceived anomalies in Obama's birth certificate.This could be part of a forthcoming book with Paul Irey or/and intended to be used in lawsuits.there is a secret affidavit and a public affidavit, the public affidavit comes in at least 2 versions,one of which is (easily) searchable and convertable to text:[/break1]vectorpub.com/pdf/Notice_of_Commision_of_Felony_13cv1880_Affidavit.pdf]http://www.vectorpub.com/pdf/Notice_of_ ... idavit.pdfpage 35 : Xerox workcenter 5745page 36: 12newsnow.com has a higher quality jpg than the obf-jpg ! , 7.3MB vs. 2.0MBpage 41: figure 30, unsharp mask --> halo-----------------------------------------------WND with 1351 comments:[/break1]wnd.com/2013/12/universe-shattering-twist-in-obama-birth-probe/]http://mobile.wnd.com/2013/12/universe- ... rth-probe/> Using their combined experience of 80 years in this realm, they [Vogt+Irey] conducted extensive > examinations of the ‘copy’ that was used as the basis for the PDF document.



gsgs
Posts: 470
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:02 am

Vogt affidavit

#2

Post by gsgs » Sat Dec 14, 2013 2:09 am

he gives 20 "points of forgery"


let's see which of them we can debunk, or which were debunked already earlier





p=page,f=figure,[]=point of forgery





[code


[01]:Registrar's Stamp


[02]:Registration date


[03]:Certificate number


[04]:no Seal


[05]:wrong form width


[06]:Content Errors, age=25


[07]:holes and notches in the letters


[08]:White Halo


[09]:Color Shift, 150 DPI of security paper


[10]:Typewriter line spacing is inconsistent


[11]:Flush left margin type


[12] :D ancing Type, lower case letter above baseline


[13]:Word spacing problems


[14]:The punctuation error


[15]p57,f54:Kerning of Letters


[16]:Letter Spacing


[17]:Multiple Type Faces


[18]:Miss Alignment of type baseline to the forms lines


[19]:Registrar's Stamp


[20]:JBIG2 lossless Compression


[/code]



gsgs
Posts: 470
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:02 am

Vogt affidavit

#3

Post by gsgs » Sat Dec 14, 2013 2:31 am

Vogt had an earlier affidavit in 2011 ("final affidavit")I remember this debate from May 2011:[/break1]obamaconspiracy.org/2011/05/reply-to-douglas-vogt/]http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/05/ ... glas-vogt/Woodman addresses Vogt's points on page 87-91 Oddities in the date stampspage 117 : does a lack of text curvature mean fraudpage 125: is there an official sealpictures of thousands of death certificates, Missouri 1910-1962all sorts or irregularities in the types[/break1]sos.mo.gov/archives/resources/deathcertificates/#searchdeat]http://www.sos.mo.gov/archives/resource ... searchdeatfor example Smith,1961:[/break1]sos.mo.gov/archives/resources/deathcertificates/Results.asp?type=advance&tLName=smith&tFName=&sCounty=all&tYear=1961&radSearch=Exact&radFNSearch=Exact&sMonth=all]http://www.sos.mo.gov/archives/resource ... sMonth=allwho can spot things as in Obama's BC, complained about by Vogt



User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 9680
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Vogt affidavit

#4

Post by Mikedunford » Sat Dec 14, 2013 3:02 am

since this seems to be a sensitive subject here, I post it to fema-camp 7.5


please don't post the usual humor/spam/ridiculing here, only investigating the


issue itself, feel free to ignore if you are not interested, tia."Investigating" what issue? That is, by the way, an honest question.





Vogt's credentials are not likely to stand up under voir dire, and there is little chance that any American court would permit him to testify as an expert on any of the topics he attempts to discuss in his affidavit. Even if he was permitted to testify as an expert in some narrow area related to scanner sales, he would not be permitted to testify to things like the actual operation of scanner software without demonstrating expertise in that area, either. Setting all that aside, though, there is still nothing in the affidavit that would seem to warrant any sort of serious consideration.





But, if you wish serious discussion, I am willing to humor you. If nothing else, a quick examination of the litany of fail that is the Vogt affidavit may take my mind off the Constitutional Law and Business Associations finals I took yesterday and today.





I have no expertise in scanners, copiers, or imaging software, so I do not intend to comment on the likelihood that certain features of the images presented were or were not created as the result of the operation of whatever software. I do, however, have some training in the areas of science and the law, as well as a basic understanding of how government offices function, so I think there are some contributions that I can make to this discussion.





-----





¶¶1-2 of the linked affidavit describe Vogt's credentials. They are charitably described as questionable, at best.





¶¶3-7 deal with an alleged inconsistency involving the registrar's stamp on the short form. Vogt's methodology in investigating and presenting this is so sloppy as to render his comparison entirely meaningless. For example:





1: Vogt claims to compare the stamp to ones taken from "authentic" birth certificates. However, Vogt does not specify how he knows that these certificates are actually authentic. This is a problem, because these are his control samples, and he has failed to demonstrate that they are actually valid controls.





2: Vogt claims that the stamp is created by an embossing stamp that provides even pressure the length of the signature. He does not provide any basis for this knowledge. Vogt has no claimed basis of knowledge that would lead a reasonable observer to believe that he knows for a fact what make and model of machine are used in the Hawai‘i DoH. Unfortunately, without knowing what sort of machine is actually used, there is no way to reasonably assess the likelihood that any particular anomaly might arise during the routine use of the machine. For example, if the machine used is one where the template is wrapped around a roller, which creates the impression with a pass of the roller across the document, what happens if the operator moves the paper slightly while the machine is operating?





3: The images we are viewing in the Vogt affidavit have been modified by Vogt from other images. We do not know what precise process created the originals Vogt used, and we do not know if the originals were even all created using the same process. Again, there's no way to know if these are valid comparisons.





4: Vogt makes a great deal over the deviation from parallel he claims to see in the Obama certificate stamp. But he makes no note of the obvious fact that the bottom of the document is, itself, not a straight line. (See his Figure 1.)





5: Vogt claims a "release date" for one of his comparison certificates (DeCosta) based on when the person who put the certificate on the internet "thinks" they did so. He does not publish anything to indicate if the certificate was actually issued on a specific date.





I could continue with this section, but I think the point is clear. It is unreasonable to proceed to any sort of in-depth analysis of the differences that Vogt claims exist between the Obama certificate and his controls, because we have absolutely no reason to know if we can make any sort of valid comparison between the two. We do not know how much Vogt manipulated the images himself. We do not know if all the images he claims to have worked from were created using the same software. We do not even know if they were all created using scanners, or if one or more were simple photographs. Without more information, any comparison is simply meaningless, because we do not know if we are actually comparing similar things.





I am not going to go much farther, since I've taken enough time on this, except to point out that Vogt's analysis of Hawai‘i law is also flawed. In addition to having no expertise in law (Hawaiian or otherwise), Vogt manages to conduct his analysis using a statute (HRS §338) that was not yet in effect in 1961. Comparing certificates from then with the law now is another meaningless exercise, and illustrates only Vogt's ignorance.


"I don't give a fuck whether we're peers or not."
--Lord Thomas Henry Bingham to Boris Johnson, on being asked whether he would miss being in "the best club in London" if the Law Lords moved from Parliament to a Supreme Court.

User avatar
Slartibartfast
Posts: 6984
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

Vogt affidavit

#5

Post by Slartibartfast » Sat Dec 14, 2013 6:19 am

Mike,Thank you for explaining the pointlessness of the endeavor that gsgs is proposing. As I suggested on the Monckton thread and you have described here, the way to refute crank claims like those of Mr. Vogt is to do the experiments and analyses correctly in order to demonstrate the flawed methodology. This is also exactly the approach that John Woodman took in his debunking. It is too bad that, instead of learning from the example that Mr. Woodman set, gsgs seems bound and determined merely to focus on addressing picayune technical details piecemeal while ignoring the methodological defects which make the technical issues irrelevant. Talk about missing the forest for the trees.


"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 6188
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Vogt affidavit

#6

Post by Sam the Centipede » Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:48 am

Mike,





Thank you for explaining the pointlessness of the endeavor that gsgs is proposing. As I suggested on the Monckton thread and you have described here, the way to refute crank claims like those of Mr. Vogt is to do the experiments and analyses correctly in order to demonstrate the flawed methodology. This is also exactly the approach that John Woodman took in his debunking. It is too bad that, instead of learning from the example that Mr. Woodman set, gsgs seems bound and determined merely to focus on addressing picayune technical details piecemeal while ignoring the methodological defects which make the technical issues irrelevant. Talk about missing the forest for the trees.But also, Vogt's claims have exactly the same nature as previous "it's a forgery!" claims, a catalog of minor points that the author claims prove forgery. All similar previous claims have been thoroughly refuted. It is reasonable to infer - without detailed investigation - that these claims have the same characteristics as previous claims and can be ignored.





gsgs needs to learn something about probability and Bayesian analysis. There is no plausible reason why this birth certificate should be forged, given that the Department of Health in Hawai'i confirm its correctness. I'm not talking about the Full Faith thingy, but the fact that if the DoH want to make a birth certificate, they can make one that is completely genuine, on paper. Not only that, but any analysis has to be conditioned on the very plausible and near-certain fact that Mr. Obama was born in Hawai'i, as claimed, and the implausible notion that any misdeeds could be so successfully covered up.





It is not necessary to refute every little detail in order to refute an argument. The birth certificate is not a forgery, so it is reasonable to assume that any "inconsistency" identified by a birth could be explained, if one could be bothered.





The settled will of the relevant Fogbots seems to be "oh for heaven's sake, we've refuted everything so far, we can't be bothered.".





Extraordinary claims require an extraordinary level of evidence. A small dungheap of assertions by a biased and dishonest man do not come close to even providing one iota of good evidence. Especially when he won't release his biggest claim, of who the "forger" might be, which we can assume because he knows he would immediately be sued for defamation.





If a three-year old child says to the world heavyweight boxing champion "I can beat you easily, let's fight", is it necessary to see the child beaten to a bloody pulp to see the falseness of the child's claim? Gsgs want that fight!



User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 27096
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Vogt affidavit

#7

Post by Foggy » Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:05 am

... he won't release his biggest claim, of who the "forger" might be, which we can assume because he knows he would immediately be sued for defamation.I don't think he'd be sued. You still have to prove damages for defamation, and nothing Vogt says about anyone is going to reach a wide enough audience to cause real damages. In my case, the birthers have been trashing me for almost three years now by my real name, but if I've suffered any loss of reputation in the eyes of anyone I care about it's news to me. I simply have no damages from oceans of defamation.





I think Vogt is keeping the name secret for the exact reason he says he is: He's delusional enough to believe his own tripe, and he thinks if he spills the name (which he has) that the forger will have time to scrub the evidence. I think he honestly believes that.








'Course, the fact that now Zullo has said he identified the wrong person is going to hurt Vogt's reputation with the people he cares about, to wit, the birther community. He should sue Zullo for defamation, yo.


Mr. William L. Bryan is the root of a great deal of criminal mischief. And yet, Mr. Bryan remains at large.

gsgs
Posts: 470
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:02 am

Vogt affidavit

#8

Post by gsgs » Sat Dec 14, 2013 12:04 pm

this is bigger than before, 72 pages, 20 points, 15 BCs, book



User avatar
realist
Posts: 34570
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Vogt affidavit

#9

Post by realist » Sat Dec 14, 2013 12:17 pm

this is bigger than before, 72 pages, 20 points, 15 BCs, bookBigger in volume perhaps but no bigger in fact.Quantity does not equate to quality.Activity does not equate to accomplishment.Et cetera.


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

gsgs
Posts: 470
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:02 am

Vogt affidavit

#10

Post by gsgs » Sat Dec 14, 2013 12:39 pm

other examples for lower case letters above the baseline (12th point)from Missouri death certificates frolm 1961
Last edited by Reality Check on Thu Aug 06, 2015 5:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Removed attachments



User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 6188
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Vogt affidavit

#11

Post by Sam the Centipede » Sat Dec 14, 2013 12:55 pm

other examples for lower case letters above the baseline (12th point)from Missouri death certificates frolm 1961What is the point of this crap, gsgs?Everybody who has ever used a typewriter, especially a manual one, knows that letters can shift up and down depending on the position of the platen (the roller) and twist as the long type bars flex, and change alignment if the paper slips or is deliberately moved to get it in a new position. An electric typwriter might show less variation (I'm guessing) but mechanical devices never function with 100% precision, and a golfball printhead won't always strike the paper identically.What next, will you demonstrate that the sky is blue and that the sun rises in the east?You are on a fool's errand.Vogt is an idiot. Don't get into an idiot fight. You both end up covered in stupid.



User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 27096
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Vogt affidavit

#12

Post by Foggy » Sat Dec 14, 2013 2:34 pm

gsgs, let me try just once to get you to understand this.Here in America, there's only ONE final, absolute authority that can say whether a birth certificate is valid, and that's the state government that issues vital records for that state.In other words, if the state government of Hawaii says the birth certificate is valid, it's valid. There's no power on Earth that can contest that ruling.And the government of Hawaii has said many times in many ways that this birth certificate is valid. The state government of Hawaii has a link on an official web page to the PDF at the White House, and [link]that web page says,http://health.hawaii.gov/vitalrecords/faq-obama/[/link]:On April 27, 2011 President Barack Obama posted a certified copy of his original Certificate of Live Birth.For information go to [/break1]whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/27/president-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate]http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/ ... ertificateDo you see that? Are there any words there that you don't understand? The state government of Hawaii -- the only final, absolute authority on the birth certificate -- says that the one on the White House website is "a certified copy of his original Certificate of Live Birth". So you are wasting your time and the time of everyone here looking for clues to show whether it's valid or a forgery. It's valid. It's not a forgery.Also, a PDF is not a birth certificate. In order to rule whether it's valid or a forgery, a document examiner must examine the PAPER document. Any discussion as to whether a PDF is valid or a forgery is, quite simply, stupid.You're giving credibility to known liars with a racial bias against the president in order to pretend that there's a possible issue here. There's not one. Like everything the birthers say, it's all just lies based on hatred and stupidity.Please acknowledge that you understand this.


Mr. William L. Bryan is the root of a great deal of criminal mischief. And yet, Mr. Bryan remains at large.

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 16034
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Vogt affidavit

#13

Post by Suranis » Sat Dec 14, 2013 4:34 pm

Plus, what you are posting there are letters that have been altered by a compression rastering algorithm. If you want post up a snapshot of the BC, try the AP copy of the BC, as its much closer to the original that Obama picked up. Vogt says that the original looks like the PDF and the AP copy comes from that because it was faxed, but Vogt is an idiot and a liar. There isn't a thing in his so called affidavit to my knowlage that wasn't spoken about in john Woodmans book, and the reason he is still talking about it is that he is an idiot and a liar not because he has found some new anomaly that needs to be explained.Plus, as I keep saying, they could have written the thing on toilet paper with crayon and if it bears the stamp of Hawaii and the Hawaii DOH says it's legit, then its legit.


Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43903
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Vogt affidavit

#14

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sat Dec 14, 2013 5:01 pm

Perhaps I can help.





gsgs, this is not Megan Fox.








It's a photo of Megan Fox.





You can determine all the layers and halos, and measure the freckles all you want. But it's irrelevant to the fact that it is only a depiction of the real thing.





If you want to discuss photography, then you can do that. But taking apart the photo because someone says that Megan Fox is a fake, and that this photo is a construct and there is no such person walking around, is not going to resolve whether Megan Fox is real or not.





And all the people who keep responding to the artifacts of an algorithm of a stored image, well I'm surprised at you. You should be contacting Megan Fox instead.



User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 16034
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Vogt affidavit

#15

Post by Suranis » Sat Dec 14, 2013 5:03 pm

Are you advising me to violate the restraining order Stern? :o


Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43903
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Vogt affidavit

#16

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sat Dec 14, 2013 5:04 pm

Well, you can contact the photo then, Suranis.



User avatar
ZekeB
Posts: 14783
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:07 pm
Location: Northwest part of Semi Blue State

Vogt affidavit

#17

Post by ZekeB » Sat Dec 14, 2013 6:15 pm

The photo is the real thing. I'm going to have Suranis thrown into the hoosegow.


Ano, jsou opravdové. - Stormy Daniels

Nech mě domluvit! - Orly Taitz

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 15130
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Vogt affidavit

#18

Post by Reality Check » Sat Dec 14, 2013 7:37 pm

gsgs





I think to understand the level of frustration with this type of discussion you have to put things into perspective (here that means look at the totality of the evidence).





First, no birth certificate that has been verified to be issued by a state of the United States has ever been questioned in such a fashion as the Birthers who have gone apoplectic over having the LFBC shoved up their asses. Not one, not ever in 224 years since the adoption of the Constitution. Let me repeat that. Not one. Not ever. So the Birthers are trying to jump a very high bar. It is called the Constitution. Foggy explained it well.





Second this same bunch of morons has trotted out the following claims that have all been debunked:





[*:3irimadt]PDF's don't ever, ever have layers. Oh really? Woodman found hundreds of PDF's on Google Books with layers.


[*:3irimadt]When they were shown to be wrong on that one they said that yeah you found PDF's have layers but the ones Woodman found have too many layers. (CCP 1st press conference). Wrong again. I produced PDF's with exactly nine layers quite easily on a Xerox WorkCentre.


[*:3irimadt]OK but the certificate number is not in sequence with the Nordyke twins. Neither is almost every other BC from August 1961.


[*:3irimadt]The Registrar's seal spells "the" as "txe". No it doesn't it is just an example of partial inking of the stamp. Ah'nee's daughter's certificate from 2011 also has "txe".


[*:3irimadt]The hospital name is wrong. No it is exactly the same as on several contemporary certificates.


[*:3irimadt]African was not a valid race entry. No many examples of "African" as a racial designation are easily found from before and after 1961.


[*:3irimadt]"9" is the wrong code for "African". Only if you use the codes from 1968 and even then who gives a fuck?


[*:3irimadt]No compression algorithm would cause the exact duplicates of letters seen in the PDF. No, JBIG2 compression on a Xerox WorkCentre does exactly that when it creates PDF's.


[*:3irimadt]Garrett Papit "MRC compression never creates more than one monochrome masking layer. Wrong again. Yyou are reading a simplistic description of the algorithm and not looking at the real world applications like a Xerox WorkCentre, which does exactly that.


[*:3irimadt]Mark Gillar: No program would create a clipping mask that would hide part of the document. Sorry Mark you lose. Preview on OSx does exactly that.


[*:3irimadt]Zebest: Well, no algorithm would ever make halos around the letters. Except documents scanned on a Xerox WorkCentre with MRC compression.


[*:3irimadt]Irey: well when I blow up this copy of a copy of a copy 400 times I see difference in the letters when I do this and apply sharpening that completely destroys information. What can I say about Irey except you can't fix stupid?


[*:3irimadt]I could go on for at least that many more.


Now Vogt comes along with his silly childish claims such as "embossed metal seals are better than rubber stamps seals and birth certificates are really import documents so they had to have used a metal seal even though I pulled that claim right out of my ass."





gsgs, How long would you argue with a child who answers every explanation with "Why?" Probably not for more that a round or two. Then you would move on to another subject. Birther "experts" like Vogt are like that petulant child except without the excuse of age nor the protection of being cute. They deserve only ridicule.


"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43903
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Vogt affidavit

#19

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sat Dec 14, 2013 7:53 pm

RC - You and everyone who plays will be called on to go on for many many many more.Repeatedly.And it will never stop.



User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 16034
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Vogt affidavit

#20

Post by Suranis » Sat Dec 14, 2013 8:03 pm

That's what I thought about Megan Fox :((


Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes.

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 15130
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Vogt affidavit

#21

Post by Reality Check » Sat Dec 14, 2013 8:03 pm

I know. I was just trying to be civil and had a few minutes to kill. I promise to stop.


"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 15130
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Vogt affidavit

#22

Post by Reality Check » Sat Dec 14, 2013 8:05 pm

I know. I was just trying to be civil and had a few minutes to kill. I promise to stop.PS: I am now watching one of the movies on your favorites list, White Christmas. :D


"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 16034
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Vogt affidavit

#23

Post by Suranis » Sat Dec 14, 2013 8:06 pm

Oh go on RC. Just one more time.[sekrit]Ok, even I don't want to know where I get these gifs. :-?[/sekrit]


Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes.

User avatar
nbc
Posts: 4179
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:38 am

Vogt affidavit

#24

Post by nbc » Sat Dec 14, 2013 8:07 pm

I am with gsgs here, yes it is a pdf copy, however some have foolishly argued that it is somehow fake, just like a photograph of Megan Fox can be faked. So the question is: How can one explain the artifacts that are found by some? Is it evidence that the document was forged, manipulated, optimized, or is it just the outcome of a workflow.Understanding this will silence those who are not interested in what the DOH of Hawaii has to say...



User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 15130
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Vogt affidavit

#25

Post by Reality Check » Sat Dec 14, 2013 8:08 pm

=))


"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

Post Reply

Return to “FEMA Camp 7½”