Skip to comments.Pre-Debunking the next Birther news- the "lost" Kenyan Birth Certificate (Liberal forum)
Posted on 08/03/2009 10:00:56 AM PDT by TennesseeGirl
Submitted by reform4 on Mon, 2009/08/03 - 11:48am.
Be prepared, the news will be awash over the next two weeks with Taitz screaming about the Kenyan birth certificate she found.
A full debunking is listed here: (Link...)
High points: - The document lists Mombasa as party of Kenya. Mombasa did not become part of Kenya until 1963. It used to be part of Zanzibar. -Why would a predominantly Muslim nation actually say "Christian name" (as opposed to name) on the birth certificate? - The forger incorrectly calculated Obama's fathers age. - The hospital was in an area called the "Central Nyanza District," not Nyanza Province. The regions were changed to provinces in 1970. -The document is dated 5 August 1964 -- a Saturday. From what I can find, Kenyan guvmint offices close early on Friday and are closed on Saturdays. Oooops - This piece of paper certainly looks nice and new to be 45 years old -- unless the Kenyans were using acid-free paper back in 1964 - The hospital is called Coast Provincial General Hospital (sometimes said to be Coast Province General Hospital), not Coast General Hospital. - Finally, Officials of Coast Province General Hospital reported: We do not have computerized records going back to the 1960s and can only sort through our archives by hand, Dr. Christopher Mwanga, an administrator at the Mombasa hospital tells GLOBE. We have searched for all the names of babies born on Aug. 4, 1961, and have not found the name of Barack Hussein Obama.
Be prepared to call into WNOX when this becomes a local talk show topic again.
I have seen these talking points brought up and taken down piecemeal on various threads. Can anyone put together the points and their rebuttals.
“The Democrat’s strategy. “
More like a KGB disinformation campaign. Stir up mud, cloud the waters.
As has been eloquently stated on several long threads, the only way to check the validity of this B/C is to compare it against valid B/Cs of the time.
We simply can’t say that they wouldn’t have done this or they wouldn’t have done that. They might well have worked on Saturdays - ‘in a heavily Muslim province’. They might well have called their province one thing or another on letterheads. We don’t know - the past is full of little surprises.
So - does the B/C match others of the period, and does it retail back to a registry entry? Those are the questions.
Yep, book and page number, and see if there’s an original on file
Good lord, these people are stupid. Kenya is 80% Christian, 10% Muslim, 10% other. That's today. In 1961, when it was under British (Christian) rule, it was even less.
And "Christian name" was a very common way of saying "first name" at that time.
I can't believe we allow these idiots to vote.
They are also under the impression it’s the original document, they don’t even know the difference, like with the Hawaii COLB
Listing Mombasa as a birth place in Kenya does seem to negate the authenticity of the birth certificate. But, for the record, Kenya is NOT a predominantly Muslim nation. Kenya is 82% Christian, (10% traditional East African and nearly all of its English-speaking population would have identified as Christian in 1962. “Christian name” is what they probably would have put.
Don't debate them on this. They are probably right, it is probably a forgery. We just want the disclosure of Obama's birth certificate. Don't theorize on what the facts are. That is how they will make you into a kook.
I can’t help but think that Mrs. Taitz would better serve the world by going back to full-time dentistry. Plenty of people need pain relief there. She’s just causing anguish in politics.
The document is dated 5 August 1964 -- a Saturday. From what I can find, Kenyan guvmint offices close early on Friday and are closed on Saturdays. Oooops [...]
Yes, oooops. The document is dated the 17 February 1964, which was a Monday!
Well that will look a tad suspicious, kind of like the non-existent fire that supposedly destroyed the original in Hawaii, and then didn’t, depending on who you ask
As a matter of policy I would assume that anything purporting to be from African is fraudulent and wait to be proven wrong.
1964-08-05 is a Wednesday.
Even better catch!
5 August 1964 was a Wednesday.
I’ve been reading a lot of these “debunkers.” Everything they’ve come up with so far amounts to: “The forger of this document did things that don’t agree with my suppositions about Kenya, geography, chemistry, the English language, etc.”
It's dated Feb 17, 1964