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 1960’s 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.
As I point out in my posting on the subject, WorldNetDaily claims to have a legitimate specimen on hand with which to compare:
"WND was able to obtain other birth certificates from Kenya for purposes of comparison, and the form of the documents appear to be identical."
However, as I made note:
"Unfortunately, WND did not immediately provide a copy of the specimen used for comparison purposes."
If I were WND, I'd have scanned the legitimate registration and posted it along with the photo of the one in question. That way, everyone could have a better frame of reference with which to form a better conclusion.
-Phil
:(
(Just kiddin')
5th of August 1961 is listed as date of registration...a monday
Which is a Monday.
my error a saturday...
I agree. Let’s all just shut up and let The Leader make all the decisions. Thank you, TomOnTheRun, since May 29, 2009.
Nah you’re right. Both catches equally good :0)
I’m just worried about people like me who assumed the DU-guy could read a calendar :0(
No, that date actually is a Saturday. Perhaps there's a typo in the original post?
Yes, the day the certified copy was dated. Not the day the birth was registered, not the the day someone, who knows who, was born, and not the day the Republic of Kenya came into existence. but I don’t think we should help them out any more, let’s just laugh our ***** off
“FREE THE LONG FORM!”
If someone was going to go through the trouble of creating a fake document like this (one that looks very authentic visually) why would they load it down with false info?
If you want to sell a fake for a reasonable amount of money you would expect the buyer to do some validation.
If you were gonna create a thousand or more of them and sell em for $100. a pop....or some very low price,it wouldnt matter, the sucker would take a chance,pay the money and move on.
But not a supposedly one of a kind (or thereabouts) object
Even if it turns out to be a Saturday, they don’t know when gov offices in Kenya were open. the British routinely worked half a day on Saturday. I remember the DMV in California being open on Saturday for a while, and the PO is open half a day now.
That makes too much sense.....
.....Those opposed to this BC being real want to squelch investigation by saying if is obviously forged and that should end investigation.
.....Those who are desperately in favor of this BC being real want to believe it no matter what.
As you said, the past is full of surprises. I do a lot of genealogical studies. I can say that information on official forms in the past has been very inconsistent, and even wrong. Forms that were supposed to be used were not used. Forms that should not be used were used. Sometimes information on official records is clearly wrong despite being the official record.
The best way to see if this BC is even possibly legitimate is to compare it to others known to be real of the time. Cut out the noise people and let's be logical about this. It may very well end up being fake, but until I see convincing evidence either way, I am on the fence.
I think it’s really strange that Hillary is going to Africa.
What for?
Hildebeast safari?
Dumb enough to think Obama is a good president.
They’re liberals, don’t expect common sense.
Well one thing for sure is that she will have one agenda we will hear about and the other......(crickets chirping).
In other words, the document is in fact , at least on this point, internally consistent since it was issued well after Kenya became a republic with the Coastal Province as part of the country. If Hussein was born in Mombasa on August 4, 1961 the original BC would have been issued under British colonial rules. This later certified copy would have been issued in the Coastal Province of the Republic of Kenya.
It may be debunked in some other way but the Tanzania vs. Kenya point holds no water.
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.