Skip to comments.Kenyan Birth Certificate - 1964 Divorce Timeline
Posted on 08/02/2009 12:58:22 PM PDT by BP2
My first take is that the dates DO match up for 1964 events surrounding the Obama's 1964 divorce.
Here we go:
Ann filed for Divorce Jan. 20, 1964 (Inauguration Day what are the odds?), and the date was set by the presiding judge for the trial to commence 30 days after Obama SR would have responded to his notification, sent to Cambridge, Mass (Cambridge what are the odds? ).
Judge Samuel P. King who granted the divorce last I heard was retired and alive (for now) in his 90s in Hawaii -- MAY or MAY NOT have asked to see the Marriage Certificate. BUT, I bet Judge King asked to see Obama JR's Birth Certificate to confirm Ann's claims that Obama SR was in fact the father. That is standard policy to have a Birth Certificate in case the mother asks for child support from the father (or Welfare) later after the divorce. Judge King probably told Ann to produce a birth certificate before or at trial, which would have been sometime in mid- to late-February 1964 HAD Obama SR answered his notice that was sent to Cambridge.
When Judge King wrote the order on Jan. 23, he had his clerk notify Obama SR via what's referred to as a "knock and nail". That is, the postman leaves the notification on the door for (generally) 10 days and retrieves it after that time passes -- signed or unsigned. That order was sent on Jan. 23 via airmail from Hawaii and was probably posted on Obama SR's door Jan. 27-28.
Obama SR's notification was unsigned by him and apparently IGNORED -- either he didn't want to accept it OR he was NOT at that location.
However, Judge King granted the divorce to Ann Obama (which changed back to Ann Dunham) exactly 60 days from when the original order was request by Ann by default.
NOW, my guess is that Judge King asked to see Obama JRs Birth Certificate before he'd be willing to grant the divorce, either at trial or by default on March 20, 1964. Ann probably didnt have the birth certificate when she filed on Jan 20. That's when this birth certificate would have been generated -- before trial for the 1964 divorce.
Important side note: the Certificate issue date of Feb 17, 1964, is JUST A FEW SHORT MONTHS AFTER KENYA BECAME INDEPENDENT on Dec. 12, 1963. TO THIS DATE, this may be the only certificate on Kenyan file today if British documents were sent to the UK for archiving leading up Kenya becoming an independent nation.
If you note the date on the Certified Copy, it was created by the Registrar in Kenya on Feb. 17, 1964. The Kenyan Birth Certificate would have been issued in the midst of the divorce -- AFTER the divorce was filed by Ann in Hawaii on Jan. 20, but BEFORE the divorce was granted by Judge King on March 20.
Furthermore, it's quite plausible that once Ann actually had this Kenyan birth certificate in her hands, and the divorce was granted on March 20, her attorney, George Kerr, counseled her on Hawaiian birth certificate "loopholes" and told her how to file for a Hawaiian "Certificate of Delayed Birth" to get Welfare or OTHER support for young Obama as a child of a non-supporting foreign national.
As Hawaiian law allows, that CODB could have been "converted" later to a Certificate of Live Birth (long birth certificate) in the 60s or 70s, which would then be a "root document" of the famed Certification of Live Birth (short birth certificate on "Fight the Smears") we see today presented as "proof" of birth of Barack Hussein Obama II, reportedly in Hawaii (note: the abstract Certification of Live Birth certificate did not exist in Hawaii until November 2001).
I cant personally vouch for the veracity of the Kenyan birth certificate itself, not knowing how or from whom Orly obtained the birth certificate (the chain of evidence). It may have been obtained quite surreptitiously from the only filed Kenyan birth certificate record copy requested -- likely generated from the 1964 divorce.
It's QUITE possible that all other copies of this Kenyan birth certificate may have been scrubbed from Kenyan archives, but this one may have survived in a lone Vital Statistics office somewhere in Kenya not known about until now.
BUMP. Did you send to WND?
Great research and documentation.
I will be very interested in seeing whether or not this form Orly’s gotten ahold of turns out to be legitimate or a very carefully generated fake.
But then either way you look at it, something big is happening.
If it’s real...well, I don’t have to go into why that’s big.
But if it’s fake...one has to ask, who benefits from such a detail oriented forgery? Certainly not Taitz or Keyes. All that would happen is they’d look like fools and their cause would suffer a major blow.
The one who’d benefit from a provable forgery would be Obama. And if he’d be the one to benefit...does it not follow that one of his agents put it out there to distract and detract from what Orly and Keyes are trying to do?
Wow, go away for a day and the doo doo hits the air circulation device.
Hey No Riley! Show US the one you saw!!!!
Did it look like this?
Thanks so very much. You are amazing!
Good job! The dots do line up. Now the only way to clear this up is to get the original records from both Kenya and Hawaii.
I am encouraged by your “connect the dot” thinking.
One way or another, the truth will set us free.
I KNEW THEY WOULD!!!! Good Work... and I assume that you are keeping Orly posted.... if you are not, please do... join her facebook, help her..
Have a question for Freepers. I googled the “E. F. Lavender” and one of the sites that popped up was Orly’s. Google has a warning that “this site may harm your computer”. Anyone know anything about that? or is this a ploy by Google to sway someone away from visiting the site?
The site is:orlytaitzesq.com
Man I hope we can nail this down and get more proof to lock it down hard. I would love for Lou Dobbs to have this on his show.
My guess is O’s gang knew this was coming. I am starting to wonder if O was a set up, trap or honey pot the GOP used on the Dems to sucker them into electing a Kenyan. Anything he signs will be void.
Thanks for your great work. Yes, this definitely deserves a separate thread.
I have a feeling that things are coming to a boil. Odd timing. Big news on a Sunday morning. More and more attention being paid to the birth certificate problem in mid summer, as congress goes into recess, the TV networks are filled with re-runs, and many are on vacation and ignoring the news.
It’s no coincidence, IMHO, that every damned newspaper and left-wing news magazine in the country has been running “birther” bashing stories. The orders to do that clearly went out from the White House.
And stories are floating around, impossible to evaluate, that Obama has already had a certified copy of his “original” Hawaiian birth certificate forged by his operatives, using an early printing press they have bought, and that it is almost ready to go.
By the way, perhaps there is no connection, but there is also some talk of another looming stock market and dollar collapse. No idea if it will happen, but I suspect that we are shortly going to find ourselves amidst “interesting times.”
I understand your point but by that logic The Bush campaign would have been behind Rathergate memos. Let’s see if this actual BC turns up and is examined forensically.At least they didn’t use Word in creating it.
Good visual as usual. :-)
There has been a lot of comment about people getting warning messages recently when they visit Orly’s site. I don’t myself. Possibly it results from installing the Google Toolbar on your browser. I use google to search, but have deep-sixed the toolbar. I don’t get any warnings. I’m not sure if that’s what’s causing it.
But it wouldn’t be surprising if they used google to warn people away from Orly. Nor would it be surprising if they sabotaged her website.
No not really. I mean, sure, if both situations are completely equivalent, you might have a point.
But the thing is, I don’t suspect Dan Rather or any of the fools behind Rathergate ever believed that the report would be questioned...or if they did, I doubt they felt it would go as far as it did. They expected it to be swallowed whole cloth and it was...until it was proven to be a fake.
If the Bush people leaked fake documents in order to sucker the left, then again, the Rather crew were morons for not fully vetting the material before reporting on it and putting the Rather stamp of authenticity on it.