Posted on 08/04/2009 4:36:57 PM PDT by plenipotentiary
47O44. I think I can see where the number comes from now. Its the 47th Copy Birth Certificate issued that year/month/day, by O for Oduya, the Deputy Registrar, and 44 refers to the Register/book it's recorded in.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Still presents quite a coincidence though, eh?
been debunked
I know.
I just find it amusing to see folks trying to work around that.
Theorizing how the 47,O44 just might be something other than a little joke by the creator of the document, that is.
It wouldn’t be written with a comma. 47-O-44 maybe or 47O44, but not 47,O44.
Then post a link!
Bookmark
“been debunked”
How do you know? Go back to DU where you belong.
I don’t know if his is American born or not. I have not seen any proof either way. And, I would like to know the truth.
You’re a bit behind the story. The Australian Bomford one is the forgery, made from data from Bomfords BC copied into a form pre-prepared and posted on Democratic Underground with the object of producing red herrings.
I suppose I can only ask, well why not?
The fun of Easter eggs is that they are hidden and you gotta root around for them.
47,O44 hides the egg better than either 47-O-44 or 47O44.
Pay attention, it’s NOT written 47,044
Grannies don’t lie do they?
Joe Farrah doesn’t even think it’s real.
Ooops, yes it is 47,O44. Appologies. More coffee.
Fine, then post links. Even better, post an excerpt and a link.
Do they have the fingerprints Bill Burkett or the smell of a Kinkos shop? Maybe Dan Rather can comment on this.
(sarcasm)
We have a right to know what it is.
I really can’t relate to Obama’s internet buddies in the way they try to create chaos surrounding the inevitable unravelling of Obama’s fraud. Shut up with your stupid little distractions. It’s disgracing you.
Why follow anyone or anything supporting Cloward and Piven?
Why support anyone or anything having to do with Alinsky, who professed a love for Lucifer?
Just give me a reason—consult Axelrod if you must, or even Soros. (I don’t think they have the brains to put it into language.)
You’re still saving that forgery? ... LOL
Farah didn’t give a reason, not that I’m aware of.
No. Just making available for others to see since it was being discussed so much on the thread.
Quick do a radiocarbon test of the paper. See if it’s 45 years old.
See where the pre printed word Deputy, of footer Deputy Registrar wrongly overlays the Signature?
Deputy was overlaid by Photoshop etc..
I thought I had seen something that said the original had 47,644 and that had been altered on another digital copy that showed up?
It hasn’t been debunked.
Most of us are still waiting for forensic tests. The Aussie BC is rather suspect itself.
I would like to know several things:
Where was Caligula born?
Was he adopted by Soetoro?
Did he accept fund as a foreign college student?
I have seen nothing to answer those questions. They are important because IT HAS TO DO WITH THE CONSTITUTION WHICH IS THE GOVERNING DOCUMENT OF THE COUNTRY.
Good idea!
The whole thing is a number. You can see the O in Obama is thicker than the O in the 47,044.
Do the radiocarbon test of the paper of the birth certificate. Here’s one that was tested and found to be a fake document from 1950 http://www.benhammott.com/radiocarbon_message1_test.html
“How do you know? Go back to DU where you belong.”
Yes, lots of trolls on here.
There was just a great interview between Savage and Berg.
Keep in mind that Savage thought that the birthers should give up, but Berg made very compelling arguments.
The issue involves so much more then where Obozo was born.
As Berg points out, the issue is now exploding exponentially
and can no longer be ignored.
Predicts that it COULD result in Obozo having to resign by December.
I will not, however, hold my breath on that one.
We are, however, in very dangerous times, as we do not know just who Obozo’s puppet masters might be, and who is pulling the strings.
Radio carbon dating isn't that precise. You might be able to nail down the century.
Do the radiocarbon test of the paper of the birth certificate. Here’s one that was tested and found to be a fake document from 1950 http://www.benhammott.com/radiocarbon_message1_test.html
When I was a kid, one of our typewriters did not have a zero (and was manufactured that way by a major brand — I cannot remember which one). To type a zero you had to use the capital “O”. If there were typewriters like that in Detroit in the 1950-60s, I assume there were typewriters like that in Africa, too.
I meant to type "When I was a kid, one of our typewriters in our house did not have a zero...."
one of the typewriters in our house
I have no idea whether it's a forgery or not, but if it is, it's a lot better job than that joke Dan Rather tried to put out there.
Yeah, one that machine you had to type a small “L” for the number one. It was an older model, and used only when the newer ones were taken or broken or something.
from Berg’s lips to God’s ear...
Found such a creature at eBay. I won't go so far as to say that the one in our house was the same brand & style, but it was very similar.
http://cgi.ebay.com/Antique-Olympia-Portable-Typewriter-Glossy-Black_W0QQitemZ270436006599QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item3ef73dfac7&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14
2ndDivisionVet, pissant, STARWISE, kellynla, mojito, Calpernia, Red Steel, RobinMasters, BP2, ncfool, markomalley, xzins, FTJM, ckilmer, Polarik, cycle of discernment, rxsid, EveningStar, null and void, Jet Jaguar, narses -- please ping your birth certificate lists
(N.B. pinging freepers who have posted a few birth certificate threads in the last few days)
That is the fraudulent version.
(1) The No. in the middle of the page was 47,644 on the Taitz-WND image, but now is 47,O44 (using the capital letter "O") or perhaps 47,044 (using the numeral "0").
(2) On the "Signature of Registrar" line, the name was K. F. Lavender on the Taitz-WND image, but is is E. F. Lavender on yours.
The same (though not as bad) applies to the "0" key as opposed to the "O" key.
So seeing an "l" used in place of a "1" didn't surprise me a bit.
Yep. There were a ton of them out there. Also, the manual typewriters all used a fabric ribbon, which made the key strikes softer. Electrics usually had a plastic tape, more like carbon paper. They made the sharper letters. By the time of the electrics, almost all typewriters had zeros and ones, but with the manuals, they frequently left them out. I found one manufactured in 1972 that still didn’t have a one.
Can you provide a url where Taitz or her helpers say that their website was hacked?
Because I've seen those two comparison photos and I read "E. F." in both of them and think that the number looks the same in both.
So I believe they are the same photo, but one is clearer than the other -- with the change being done by the site webmaster.
And those are pretty silly changes for a hacker to make, imho.
But if Taitz says her site was hacked and the picture changed, then, of course I would believe her.
The typewriter whose image you posted appears to date perhaps from as far back as the late nineteenth century. Notice that the “Z” key and the “Y” key are interchanged from their later standard keyboard positions. I recall using the letter “l” for the numeral “1” on a portable Royal manufactured about 1950, but never had to use the letter “O” as a substitute for the numeral “0”. I can’t even recall the name “Olympia.” The only American typewriter companies (brands) I can remember from the strictly manual days (not including the later plug-in manual electric models) were Royal, Smith-Corona, and Underwood.
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.