Posted on 01/05/2012 1:02:54 PM PST by Red Steel
"Basement Bloggers" would be Dr. CON, Foggy-OBots, Zotted FR troll EnderWiggins and et al....
Ole Parsy went away by himself. He went to play over at TheFogBow.com.
I threw that idea out there a while back before I knew about Bates numbering of the certificates, merely as a possible explanation for the sequence problems, but I wasn't trying to claim it was THE explanation or that I had all the facts. This fellow seems unnecessarily snippy about it.
Here’s my post from April 27, 2011:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2711204/posts?page=90#90
Here’s my post from April 27, 2011 about the “checkbook” notion:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2711204/posts?page=90#90
Next thing you know, Virginia is actually a Charles Calthrop.
Dean sent out a call for this to be cross posted - so I did, also adding the rest of the story of the trip in July 2010 by “Researcher” to Honolulu, where she was the first to contact Duncan and his mother. She (Researcher) also did ALL of the original legwork on the Virgina Sunahara research.
“Most of you know/recall that the Post&Email, and this blog,(myveryownpointofview) did several posts/articles on the research that we did into the Virginia Sunahara angle in July of 2010.
Basically it had been suggested that obama may have usurped a birth certificate number from an infant that had been born, then passed away, within the same time frame that is obama’s birthday. Ala Bill Ayers style. So we tried to look into it while Researcher was in Honolulu.
Long story short, back when our Researcher met Duncan, she did not tell Duncan that we were looking to determine if Virginia’s BC number had been usurped by obama. She had never actually planned to meet the Sunaharas, so that part of the research trip was spur-of-the-moment, and the decision to be overly-cautious was agreed to by all three of us. We felt the delicacy of the situation, and since Researcher was alone, we felt it best and safest to be very limited in the contact with Virginias’ family. And the line of questions.
We had tried several attempts afterwards to engage Duncan, and to have him consider a trip to the Honolulu Dept. of Health to request Virginias’ birth certificate, but he never responded. Because he had never responded, I felt it would be too risky for Researcher to travel back to Honolulu in an attempt to convince Duncan in person. Then WND made a call to Mrs. Sunahara (Duncan’s mother) in mid-May 2011, and she told him flatly that they had no interest in trying to obtain Virginias’ birth documents.
At that point I felt it was likely a lost cause to involve the family.
Then Dean met Duncan, and ......
Ping!!!
Upon closer inspection, we learned that the number assigned to Virginia's birth certificate is 151-1961-01180, and realized that, statistically, that number simply cannot be legitimate.
Now, here's what's wrong with that number: we all know that the last group of numbers on the "certificate" Barack Obama claims is his official record is 10641, and his certificate was supposedly processed on August 8, 1961. We also know that the Nordyke twins were assigned the numbers 10637 and 10638, and their certificates were processed on August 11, 1961. Virginia Sunahara's birth certificate states that it was processed on August 10, 1961, but the number it was assigned is 443 higher than the Nordyke twin whose certificate was stamped with the number 10637.
Virginia's number, 01180, is not 443 higher than the twins number, it is 9457 LOWER. I can only assume the author is comparing 1180 to 637, which is actually a difference of 543, not 443. But in fact the comparison is between 1180 and 10637, a difference of 9457.
Then the “1” and the “0” are transposed.
Or “a difference of 9457” is even a more absurd difference in the document numbering by the state of Hawaii.
They had a typo - the actual number is 011080
And yes, I am certain that it is in fact 011080 - before anyone calls me names :)
If 151-1961-01180 can’t be her real number, whose number is it? What time frame does this number indicate? Who has 151-1961-01179 and 151-1961-01181? When & where were they born?
With corrected numbers:
If 151-1961-011080 can’t be her real number, whose number is it? What time frame does this number indicate? Who has 151-1961-011079 and 151-1961-011081? When & where were they born?
From the article:
“We know that there were 17,616 births in Hawaii in 1961, which shows a statistical average of 48 births per day. To arrive at the number now assigned to Virginia’s birth certificate, nine to ten days would have had to have lapsed after the Nordyke twins’ certificates were processed, but Virginia’s processing date was the day BEFORE the Nordyke’s.”
151-1961-011080 could be:
a/ number of *another dead person*
b/ number of a trusted and politically reliable person.
c/ Obama’s real number, having just swapped it with the Sunahara file number.
Option b/ would be safest, if a suitable person was born at the correct time.
sfl
This is what I am confused about. Could someone explain please? Let’s say 10641 was really Virginia Sunahara’s birth certificate number. She was born on the 4th. Her certificate was processed on the 10th. The Nordyke twins were born on the 5th (?). Their records were processed on the 11th. Why then are their numbers, 10637 and 10638, lower than the number processed on the 10th? Isn’t this the same problem as with Obama? Am I missing something here?
Thanks!
Option D:
Virginia was in two hospitals in less than 24 hours of her birth. One in a billion chance of this happening.
Hospital A sends copy of vital records with patient to Hospital B.
Nurses are dilligent. Very diligent.
Nurse from Hospital A sends BC to HDOH on day 1.
Nurse from Hospital B sends same BC data on day 2, along with Death Certificate. Both are legit in every way.
HDOH processes first BC, the one Obama eventualy steals.
HDOH processes second BC, along with first, stamps second BC as filed, but is confused, sets it aside. 10 days later, it gets stamped with later number, total confusion at HDOH.
Obama has Phone it in “Junk” that sits in limbo. Never gets a BC. Filed but never accepted, and sent to the News papers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.