“Then why haven’t you contacted him yourself? Are you afraid of the truth? Why has the fantasy writer attempted to obtain the University of Hawaii transcripts? Afraid of the truth?”
I assume you meant to write NOT attempted to obtain the U of H transcripts.
There is no need to contact Corsi because there is no credible indication (certainly not provided by you) that Corsi changed his mind about Stanley Ann being in Seattle from Fall 1961 through Spring 1962.
IIRC, the U of H detailed transcripts which include the UW course credits have been put up on the web and corroborate the letter from the UH registrar. UW transcript from the late 1970’s confirms the UH transcript and the Mercer HS graduation in 1960.
Exactly right. Of all the whoppers told in defense of Mal-Val, this one about Corsi super-secretly reneging on his former position & revealing it ONLY to David is the biggest. [& no, calling Dr. Corsi ‘Jerry’ doesn’t make it true. Duh.] If Corsi is an honest man—& ALL the evidence points to the FACT that he is honest, credible & of the highest personal integrity—then he wd OWE it, at a bare minimum, to those who purchased his bk to set the record straight. To sell a bk in large part on the basis of research/facts that later turned out to be false, & not tell anyone publically about it is fraud—pure & simple.
Just be aware, all readers of this thread: David is accusing Corsi of FRAUD. Corsi sold his bk in significant part on the strength of his uncovered facts disproving the myths of Dreams. Now David claims that Corsi has joined the ranks of Obama-defenders & agreed w then—& contrary to what he wrote in his bk—that SADO was NOT in Seattle in the fall of ‘61. However, Corsi hasn’t let his fans/the buyers of his bk in on this new info. He’s revealed it ONLY to David. Everyone else, Corsi has allowed to go on believing [since all of his articles & most of his interviews, in which he states these facts, are still on the web] research/evidence he now knows to be false.
Give. Me. A. Break.
To break it down, for anyone still struggling to grasp what’s going on, here’s an illustration. Suppose a leading conservative investigator uncovers PROOF of who killed the homosexual choir director from Trinity United [Obama’s home church] & also all the details as to WHY this man was murdered execution style (immediately prior to Obama’s presidential run announcement). The investigator writes a bk about it & sells quite a few copies.
Some yrs later a person on the web says, ‘No actually, the author has changed his position fundamentally on part of that bk. The touted proof is not nearly as strong as it once was.’
People search the web & find no indication that the author has changed one iota of what was written. In every available article & interview, he stands by his facts.
Who you gonna believe? If there is any question in your mind, there is no hope for you anyway. Enjoy your misperception.
Re: SADO in Washington state in 1961 :
See this link http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/2991236/posts
Post # 866 clarifies that SADO also was in Hawaii in 1961.
The author of the article found that SADO’s SSN was used in Washington state in 1961.
And his LFBC shows his mother as (Stanley) Ann Dunham - but one of the layers shows that the name that was there was Ann D.....something, and (Stanley) was squeezed in, in brackets, and to which ‘unham’ has been added to the capital ‘D’ to create the name of the ‘mother’ - and you still think we can’t question every document we see?
What IF that transcript is a similar amalgum of the records of a number of students?
The LFBC is an amalgum imo of the birth records of the child born in January, the child referred to in the adoption memo and the birth of another child, because the date and the name of the mother weren’t ‘suitable’ they used a certificate number more suitable to the date they claimed zero was born. It had to be in August because that gave her time to ‘graduate’ from Mercer and enroll in Hawaii. But what lets them down is that no one saw her there, the BC shows the date of birth of a child who lived for only one day - it was lodged on the same day the birth/death of Virginia was published - and the first time SAD physically shows up in Hawaii is when the boy is more than two years old.
But you cannot deal with these anomalies, because you have staked your very existence here on the validity of the documents - presented to you in cyberspace which you have never seen - just as no one has seen or held the LFBC, nor the so-called U of WA transcript, which it seems to me, Jerome Corsi accepted on face value when it was sent to him by e-mail without provenance.
He’s no fool. He’ll deal with that in his own time and in his own way, without leaving himself open to accusations of libel. He lives in the real world, in which everyone knows who and where he is.
Unlike your anonymous self.
The mother starts off as Ann D.....and doesn't become Stanley Ann Dunham Obama until they squeeze the Stanley in behind one bracket (the initial bracket on the left is on another layer) and they added 'unham' and Obama to the 'D' and presto, there's your 'mother'. But what we really should be looking for is Ann S who has a surname commencing with 'D'. But that's just far too complicated.