Someone outside of the DOH created the Bomford certificate on Obama’s behalf to pre-emptively discredit the Lucas certificate. I think this person or someone working with him is probably responsible for the forgeries Obama has presented on his websites. This idea that adoption certificates are “fake” certificates is a silly characterization. Yes, health department create amended certificates and new certificates, but calling them fake is a misnomer. The DOH has done as much as possible to distance themselves on this issue. There’s also a lot of general incompetence between Janice Okubo, Chiyome Fukino and Loretta Fuddy; I just don’t think it’s very feasible they got involved any more deeply than to possibly provide access to certain tools or resources ... kind of a “look the other way” and “we didn’t know about this” type of plausible deniability.
I don't put any faith in any document purported to have come from Kenya. I have little doubt that for money you can obtain a document from that place (possibly even from the correct governmental officials themselves) that will say anything you want it to say.
This idea that adoption certificates are “fake” certificates is a silly characterization. Yes, health department create amended certificates and new certificates, but calling them fake is a misnomer.
People keep using the word "Forged" and they seemingly cannot comprehend the notion that State officials in every state "forge" birth certificates with information on them that isn't true. "Fake" may not be the best way to characterize it, but I cannot think of a better word to convey the concept of what I am talking about.
Surely you understand that replacement birth certificates contain some false information on them?
The DOH has done as much as possible to distance themselves on this issue. There’s also a lot of general incompetence between Janice Okubo, Chiyome Fukino and Loretta Fuddy; I just don’t think it’s very feasible they got involved any more deeply than to possibly provide access to certain tools or resources ... kind of a “look the other way” and “we didn’t know about this” type of plausible deniability.
That I believe as well, but does it not seem reasonable to believe that if Hawaii is not crying foul about the information presented on Obama's document, then it must have some sort of legal acceptance on the part of Hawaii's DOH? Hawaii DOH has the database and the tools (which they use routinely every time they process an adoption.) to do the job, and the caliber of workmanship of Obama's document looks to me to be consistent with the competence of a typical bureaucrat.
It makes no sense to postulate a group of people who are so clever that they can pre-empt other's efforts, but so dumb as to make obvious blunders in the creation of a fake birth certificate. Obama team operatives could have hired the best, and the work could have been flawless. That it has so many flaws is evidence that it wasn't done by professionals, but is perfectly within the competency level of bureaucrats.