Even if you dispute the granny Sarah acct, you still have that missing week to explain. Why would anyone excise that week and that week only—i.e.: the wk in ‘61 of Obama’s supposed Hawaiian birth—unless it mattered? There must be *some* arrival from a foreign country that occurred in that time frame which seriously undercuts Obama’s nativity tale; otherwise, why expunge the data?
When this was first announced I eagerly sought for the audio of her saying this. After hearing it, I was greatly disappointed. The Questioner did not ask an open ended question, (as you ought to do with any witness so as not to "lead" them) and then he made the question very misleading, especially given the fact that it was being translated back and forth into another language.
I no longer recall the question exactly, but It seems to me it went something like this: "Do you recall when Barack Obama was born... Here in your village?"
This is a question that could be interpreted more than one way, especially after being translated. It's credibility is further eroded by the fact that once the question was repeated more clearly, and once other people had an opportunity to better explain the question to her did she recant and say otherwise.
The long and short of it is, she may have said and meant such a thing, or she may have not. I know it has been repeated endlessly that she DID say such a thing, and it was understood completely by both sides that this is what she said, and that it was accurate, but as far as I can tell, this piece of evidence is very dubious.
(2) the missing week of foreign arrivals to HI in the National Archives.
This is very interesting, and it seems too incredible to be a coincidence, but it is not positive evidence in and of itself. Missing documents do not prove he was born in Kenya. If they were taken, they would have been taken had he been born in Canada or anywhere else.
The problem I have with the birth in Kenya is trying to understand why they would want to go to Kenya, and how they could have afforded to get there? Barack Sr. couldn't afford the trip, Madelyn Dunham could hardly have wanted to pay for it, Barack Sr's father hated the idea of him being involved with a white girl, and current wife Keiza would have been waiting there too.
Again, why on earth would they want to go, and how on earth could they afford to do it?
I find it very unlikely, but if more evidence comes up to demonstrate that this indeed is what happened, I will certainly reconsider my thinking on this.
Even if you dispute the granny Sarah acct, you still have that missing week to explain. Why would anyone excise that week and that week only—i.e.: the wk in ‘61 of Obama’s supposed Hawaiian birth—unless it mattered? There must be *some* arrival from a foreign country that occurred in that time frame which seriously undercuts Obama’s nativity tale; otherwise, why expunge the data?
It is peculiar, but I don't know if we should read too much into it. There may be other reasons for someone to remove that information, or it could just be the coincidental result of someone's incompetence. In any case, it is a good reason to put more scrutiny on this. It invites suspicion, but it doesn't prove anything conclusively.
I'm waiting for better evidence.