Posted on 08/02/2009 4:56:30 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
And then one of our moderators spotted this:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/18018714/Fake-Obama-Kenya-birth-certificate
It has several clues, but also there's this question:
Who is E. F. Lavender?
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=earth+friendly+lavender&aq=f&oq=&aqi
Earth Friendly Lavender detergent?
Feburary 17th was and still is the 48th day of the year unless Janurary lost a day.
31 + 17 = 48
Just simple math. ;-)
Because he turns 48 on Tuesday?
So much for bringing people together!
ANYBODY can open a free account at scribd.com and upload anything with any name.
It seems to me that a DU or Kos poster got under your skin with this prank.
Orly Taitz marked the image appearing on her site:
>>> E. F. Lavender is the name given for the Registrar. The name of the person who signed the document is Joshua Simon Oduya.
Well, maybe Oduya was signing on Lavender’s behalf.
Still verifiable either way.
Certainly a lot more authentic looking than the COLB
Well, no. I expect an American local paper to be less punctilious about the name of a country than that country's official legal documents.
Just saying, they would have had the forms created long beforehand. It was a planned transition, as far as I can tell. The conversion of the birth certificates from Brit/Kenyan to Republic of Kenya would have started long before the first day of the Republic as they didn't have computers at the time.
They wouldn't have wanted to start off their Republic by having no Kenyans. So, the date makes sense. All of those birth certificates for preexisting Kenyans probably have a date like that on it. Not that that validates this particular document.
I could be wrong about all that but it seems logical to me.
OH lord, that was done by a Freeper when the story first broke to help makes the document clearer. It was admitted and apologized for at the full thread for the topic.
It a 1964 copy of the 1961 document, allegedly.
You say:
“How is debunking the misinformation in your prior post “defensive”?”
I say:
Because you have an attitude problem. You sound very annoyed that someone is slapping you down and doing so superbly.
You say:
“You explicitly said other birth certificates of the time have the same header and seal. I simply pointed out that the WND article never said this. You misrepresented the content of the article.”
I say:
WND article states they are similar. As I said earlier, it might be possible for WND to be SO STUPID and SO BLIND as to not notice that that the name of the NATION is different on the documents. However, that is quite unlikely.
You need to go to debate school. You are committing what is called the ‘Burden of Proof Fallacy’. You say that WND must explicitly state that the Republic of Kenya is in the other birth certificate documents. This is silly because at the time it was written, such demand did not exist. In the same way, WND does not explicitly show that Lavender exists as a person, so by that same logic one would say he does not exist. That is not logic, that is a fallacy.
The burden of proof is to just show that no one used ‘Republic of Kenya’ in official documents or anywhere else at that time. If you saw the newspaper article in this thread, it clearly shows that people were referring to Kenya as ‘Republic of Kenya’.
You say:
“Is being corrected threatening or upsetting to you in some way? If you don’t like being corrected, don’t misrepresent articles and don’t make stuff up no matter how much you want it to be true.”
I say:
You don’t do corrections. You just offer fallacies.
It is like saying WND has to prove that Obama exists and is a real person because the article did not explicitly show that Obama exists.
You say:
“I’ll keep correcting people who spread clearly false misinformation, such as claims that the 1963 constitution called Kenya the “republic of Kenya”. Why is correcting misinformation a bad thing again? How does letting false ideas proceed unchallenged benefit the community?”
I say:
No one is claiming that the 1963 constitution calls Kenya the ‘Republic of Kenya’. What is being claimed is that official documents at the time did print ‘Republic of Kenya’.
This is something that can EASILY be disproved. Yet, no one has done so. In fact, there is evidence that ‘Republic of Kenya’ was being used at that time as even in that newspaper photo Red Steel posted in this thread.
You say:
“Oh you think you caught dr. evil now hm? So this is how your ego works. If someone corrects a mistatement you have made, instead of graciously conceeding the point, you attack the person who corrected you personally and smear them as troll.”
I say:
I never called you a troll or a viral messenger. Please learn to read, thank you.
I said if you keep harping on the same point, over and over, in thread after thread, that would be an indication that you had an agenda and would likely be a viral messenger.
Note how you are switching to ad hominem, attacking ME. I never attacked YOU. I do declare I am attacking viral messengers and will do my best to spot them.
As I said before, disagreeing with someone doesn’t make them a viral messenger. However, posting the same point in thread after thread, over and over again, certainly indicates an agenda and likely is a viral messenger.
In your response, you just ADMITTED you did this (posting the same thing over and over). I don’t look at your post history. I really don’t care.
And you wonder why I said you were being defensive? He he he...
Start here tomorrow.
You know what would solve this with a high degree of certainty is a small pool of comparison documents from the same period. It would give a very high-confidence probability indicator, and would not require a large sample pool to do so. WND claims it has such comparisons. Did they photograph/scan them? Where are they? Sans that, we need someone else to share a similar document from the same year. There are doubtless tens of thousands of such documents from 1964 floating around. All we need are a couple, copies even.
|
Mount Athos said:
“Were you impressed by the famous “Nevada Palladium Times” naming the “Republic of Kenya” in November 1963, even before kenya gained independence — a time when they were a british crown colony and the Queen of England was their head of state?
“The Kenyan government proclaimed itself to the world as a new Republic in December 1964, that it wasn’t one before. But that means nothing against a Nevada Palladium Times article. The fact that the major papers of the day didn’t refer to kenya this way before dec 1964 means nothing too eh.”
I say:
Now you sound like a Viral Messenger. You got documented proof that in 1963, people referred to Kenya as ‘Republic of Kenya’. And you can’t accept documented proof.
The official ‘proclamation’ of the Kenyan government is irrelevant if they were already saying they were ‘Republic of Kenya’ and signing their documents that way.
We say that America’s birthday is on 1776, not on the ratification of the Constitution of the ‘American Republic’.
Poor Mount Athos and his house of cards falling down!
I didn’t even turn on my computer until early this evening. I’ve been reading as fast as I can and still haven’t read everything.
This is more intense than any other long live stuff I’ve experienced on FR.
I loathe the Steaming Pile with every (natural) fibre of my being. This is like the nectar of the gods if real.
we’re on the same page then. I said the same thing you did in earlier posts asking for WND to produce images of pre-dec 12th 1964 docs with header & seal.
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.