Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Perdogg
I think people should be skeptical.

Indeed.

FWIW, I have scoured these pages trying to find some concrete evidence that this is a fake. Every time someone comes up with some fakery theory, I've done some research and found that the document still holds up.

If this is a fake, it is a really good one. The only way to tell, however, is to find another BC issued about the same time in the same province, or find the book and page number, or find that no such book or page number existed.

724 posted on 08/03/2009 7:12:27 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 719 | View Replies ]


To: P-Marlowe
If this is a fake, it is a really good one. The only way to tell, however, is to find another BC issued about the same time in the same province, or find the book and page number, or find that no such book or page number existed.
+++++++++++++++

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105764
“WND was able to obtain other birth certificates from Kenya for purposes of comparison, and the form of the documents appear to be identical.”

We'll see how well WND did their research. People on Media Matters and Daily Kos are all a twitter because of the ‘Republic of Kenya’ thing - but the Wash Post story from then about Kenya - says it was the newest ‘republic of the British empire’ in 12/1964 - this doesn't tell us how they perceived themselves, nor how their documentation may have read.

Still skeptical, but intrigued.

Of course the other weirdness, is the number, but numbers can be made to mean weird things coincidentally (just as Farrakhan, or any numerologist), and that in and of itself is just a circumstantial deal.

726 posted on 08/03/2009 7:18:00 AM PDT by SeattleBruce (God, Family, Church, Country & the Tea Party! Take America Back! (Objective media? Try BIGOTS.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 724 | View Replies ]

To: P-Marlowe

You’re right. This document has withstood every attack against it.

The only thing that will prove things one way or the other is to look at other documents from the same place at the same time.


738 posted on 08/03/2009 7:40:59 AM PDT by perfect_rovian_storm (The worst is behind us. Unfortunately it is really well endowed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 724 | View Replies ]

To: P-Marlowe

Post 724

“find that no such book or page number existed”

That’s the best way to discredit the document, PROVE that the location of record, and the names of those responsible for generating both documents, is false. If they refuse to do this it only high tens the suspicion.

With what is know of the document at this time it can’t be discredited as a fake but it is a long way from being accepted as authentic, it is kind of..... sitting in limbo.

Some people KNOW if the document is real and, if it is, probably know who had possession of it. Problem is, they may not know whose hands it is in now.

Let’s just say, if I were living in Grandma’s house I would be taking serious security precautions or would be taking a long secret vacation.


745 posted on 08/03/2009 7:54:37 AM PDT by Peter Horry (Never were abilities so much below mediocrity so well rewarded - John Randolph)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 724 | View Replies ]

To: P-Marlowe; Marine_Uncle; Fred Nerks
If this is a fake, it is a really good one. The only way to tell, however, is to find another BC issued about the same time in the same province, or find the book and page number, or find that no such book or page number existed.

We may know within a fairly short time whether we have a good document....

830 posted on 08/03/2009 9:20:07 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 724 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson