[Fred Nerks]

Interesting comment. That's the kind of observation which throws a light on something no one, inc myself, has noticed before. If the Kenyan was born in 1936 as it says on his tombstone, in 1971 he would have been 35 years of age.

Stanley Armour Dunham on the other hand, born in 1918, would have been 53 at the time of the visit. Can't be positive, but he doesn't look it. However, if the image dates from 1962 when the Kenyan was leaving for Harvard, Stanley Armour would have been 44 and that's more like it. But the Kenyan would have been only 26 years old in 1962 and in that group image he certainly looks considerably older, his facial features are a match for the airport image from 1970-71 Christmas.

The Japanese woman in the black dress has been tentatively identified as a Hawaii university student who graduated in 1959, and the woman with the giraffe neck was a guest at the Nachmanoff social gathering in the early sixties, she graduated from a US mainland school in 1961.

So something is out of whack with that entire image. It was first posted by a PI whose name I barely recall as Cordevila??? and he provided no source. There's a region on the image between the Kenyan and Stanley Armour that has quite obviously been tampered with. I'm sure you can see it.

So that leaves us with the question: WHO does the body belong to we are supposed to believe was Mr Obama from Kenya? And who is the girl?

Below, an image of the Kenyan at the Nachmanoffs in the early 60's.

We think the numerous lei have been added to hide something...that person could be 'anybody'...anyway, thanks for your input, I'll pass it on.

[freepersup]

I’m just a rank amateur when it comes to the serious side of such investigative research, so I try to contribute what I can (which is rare) from that perspective (fresh eyes/thoughts) sometimes finding a nut, like, I suppose, the proverbial blind pig. Undaunted, I’m still in the hunt for a prized truffle or two.

Is the blackened out area between Dunham and Obama, at about shoulder level, the photographic mischief that you speak of? Is there something else that I’m missing, aside from the possibility of the layering up of the leis, that is fraudulent about the photo?

The hand giving Obama the “rabbit ears” is obviously a right hand. What’s not as clear, is- whether the hand belongs to someone that was blackened out, covered up by the leis, or belongs to the short person with the glasses further in the back.

I remind myself of the photo “taken” of the three amigos sitting on the park bench, where grandpa has a giant sized hand on grandma’s shoulder. Clearly a fake. So if one image is a fake, all are circumspect.

Then again, was a fake... that’s so obvious, made intentionally, to drive researchers mad with some kind of feint strategy?