Written by ahmed zaki
1st sign
what si this 3 after An ? it just does not make sense to see such an error
2nd sign
the 1 is just too thick
3rd sign
the 1 and the An are leveled (one the same line) and if you verify all these forged stamps we can see that the distance and level between the 1 and the An is the same, also it is on the same base (i.e. leveled correctly). The original printed had two moving plates one for the "1" and the other for the "An" therefore you can see genuine stamps the An is sometimes below the level of 1, and sometimes it changes position.
4th sign
The "G" of Baghdad is not like any G seen on a genuine stamp, seems to be more circular than the genuine which is somehow oval.
5th sign
the "O" of OCCUPATION is the hardest part to be forged, we can clearly see how the O is disturbed and look closer to a round circuit than to an oval as the original.
6th sign
the "S" of BRITISH is very much different, this one is rounded ends while the original has extensions on both ends of the S.
And another one below
beside signs from last post, some new things are here:
sign 7:
in no way we can find a crescent without the ink, all "awlad alshohadaa" used in Iraq were inked by the British forces on the hands of the indians that came with them.
sign 8: unlike what we see on this stamp, on the originals the 1 is moved away from An so that they become on both sides of the crescent, as i stated earlier the 1 and An are moveable parts, that is not the case here.
sign 9: we can see that the IN BRITISH are very close to each others, this is not the case in the original and this also goes on other stamps which tells us that they are fixed parts in the forged printing.