Posted on 03/08/2014 6:07:03 AM PST by Flotsam_Jetsome
So when did Ann's and Obama Sr.'s "whatever happened happened fast" wedding happen? For no apparent reason, confusion abounds among Obama's biographers over the wedding date:
1. Dreams claims that Ann and Obama Sr. were in married "in 1960"; similarly, Mendell's 2007 book claims that the couple were married "sometime in late 1960" when they "slipped off alone to the island of Maui"; and both Obamaland (2008) by Ron Jacobs (with contributor David Maraniss) and a 2007 Washington Post article claim that the two were married "late in 1960."
2. A 2007 Chicago Tribune article vaguely claims that Ann and Obama Sr. were married "six months before" Barack's birth on Aug 4, 1961 -- or, in other words, sometime in early 1961.
3. An April 2008 Time article by Amanda Ripley, as does Maraniss's August 2008 article, gives a specific date of February 2, 1961 for the wedding, apparently based on Ann's and Obama Sr.'s 1964 divorce records – mysteriously appearing on the web. But since fake documents have been known to appear on the web, Obama's biographers, Ripley and Maraniss, might want to verify the 1964 divorce documents – especially since a Feb. 2, 1961 marriage date for "Ann and Obama Sr." wasn't reported in any Honolulu Advertiser or Honolulu Star-Bulletin marriage lists from February 1961. Take the February 8, 1961 Star-Bulletin, which listed eighteen marriages from Feb. 3, Feb. 4, and Feb. 6, and no Feb. 2 marriages, and the February 7, 1961 Advertiser, which listed eleven marriages from Feb. 2 to 4, including two Feb. 2 marriages.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I’ve done nothing to ‘smear’ Mark, I’m sure he has his own reasons for misindentifying the children in two photographs and then removing them from his website. Your inability to accept the fact doesn’t reflect on me in any way, it just makes you sound even more hysterical than usual.
A reasonable person might simply say, I don’t believe it. And leave it at that. It’s not compulsory that you see what we see.
The child Mark has identified as ‘David’ is actually zero.
That is never going to change.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3130965/posts?page=483#483
If this progression in the identities and chronology bothers you to the extent that you become hysterical, why don’t you just refrain from replying to any comments I place on the forum?
You’ve either got the wit to do the math or not. I’m not about to recant because the facts make you uncomfortable.
It’s not a game of twenty questions. Yes, I did write you freepmail (To and From deleted) in which I indicated your comments in the past were always worthwhile reading, but something had changed. Now you call me MRS Fred? What’s the point of that? Did someone tell you I was a woman? Just what gender does your screen name reflect?
Fred Nerks is a pen name. We aren’t required to certify a gender when joining FR which I did in 2003, as a result of finding one of my articles published by Israel National News on this site...
Which has recently 11 years later! created a stir because someone is circulating gossip that I’m a jew, something I would be proud to be, if I was.
I’m sorry to have addressed you. Won’t happen again.
My contributions to the File which Beckwith acknowledges were made a long time ago, so don't make it sound like I'm a current 'contributor' - that's somewhat misleading. What The Obama File is or isn't is hardly what you descibe. IT'S AN ARCHIVE. Beckwith makes it clear, he says:
I don't write this stuff. I cherry-pick it and archive it here. The overwhelming number of items in this archive are from mainstream media sources and what I believe are reliable, if partisan, blogs. I make every attempt to provide attribution and/or links to the original source.
The suggestion that our research should appear on The Obama File would probably be considered quite obnoxious by Beckwith, however, should he wish to publish the content of my comment # 483 he's more than welcome to do so.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3130965/posts?page=483#483
For your interest IF you are interested. I do have the original material if you would like to see it.
http://www.theobamafile.com/_shakystuff/Rumor.htm
Beckwith has a segment entitled SHAKYSTUFF/RUMOR in which you’ll find this entry:
An Alternate Birth Theory
Fred Nerks provides an alternate birth theory:
I might try to explain what I meant. I have grave doubts about that August birthdate. (And about who his parents were)
He shows up in Hawaii at the age of two or three...and no one really knows where he came from.
I see that birth date as being tailored to suit the myth of Stanley Ann being the mother. Anything much earlier than August 1961 makes it impossible for her to have any part in the birth.
But Anna — being a different woman altogether, discovered living in Seattle, had a child that was seven months of age when Mary Toutonghi baby-sat — until she was caught out on it and had to change her story.
Mary herself NEVER said she baby-sat for Stanley Ann Dunham. That was woven in by others.
Anna would have been the mother of a child named BHO2. Born in January.
Zero BECAME BHO2.
He also would have “inherited” the birthdate of Anna’s child. And HER name and MAIDEN name would have been on that birth certificate.
Which served him well — until “Dreams” was written and Stanley Ann was woven into the story...
In 1982, when the Goeldner family visited the Dunhams in Hawaii, the Dunhams told Virginia Goeldner that they were looking after the boy because HIS MOTHER DIED IN 1970.
That’s why it crossed my mind — this could be the reason the entire kindergarten-Noelani period was left out of “Dreams” — and why we will never see any records from that period.
His registration would give the lie to the BIRTHDATE — and the name of the mother...because the BC they were using, belonged to the child of Anna.
You’ll notice that in no way does The Obama File endorse the theory simply by publishing it.
FURTHERMORE THIS LITTLE GEM:
little tidbit Frank Marshall Davis wrote in his biography was the teaser, “...a Kenyan student split, leaving behind TWO pregnant blondes
Might just provide a clue to why there was an ANN and an ANNA, and why they had to both be woven into Stanley Ann Dunham to create the myth of a mother for zero.
Hmmm... I do see an obama resemblance there...to michelle, not barry.
You smear Mark when you claim it can’t identify his own brother. That is cruel and callous. He knows more about the identify of the child in the photo he posted than you do. He said the child was David, his brother. So you call him a liar. That is just not right.
Btw, Mark can be contacted online. You could ask him yourself why he “misidentified” his own brother. But if he didn’t, and that really is a photo of David, then the question would be vile and boorish, and way out of line. Nor do I believe anyone will actually ask him. The possibility of the truth—that it really is David—coming out is untenable to some. So on no account will Mark be given a chance to speak for himself.
And btw, you could also ask Mark firsthand why he deleted the photo. Wouldn’t it be better to let him explain it personally, than to put words in his mouth? You’ve tried so often to guess my motives, and you’ve been off a 180 degrees every single time. In a similar manner, you used to say Mark had deleted the pic because no one would believe it was his brother [though there is no evidence that this is the case]. Is it not possible you’re mistaken about Mark’s motives too? Why not let him explain himself? Wouldn’t that be best?
‘when you claim it can’t identify his own brother’
it = he
You ask him. It’s beginning to sound as if you are a whole lot closer to the clan than I’ve given you credit for. He’s just a man not a little god. Now give it a rest. It sounds like you’re in love.
I will let my above post speak for itself. It is rational, calm and uninsulting. I don’t have to resort to insults, false accusations or other obfuscations. I lay out the case & let it speak for itself.
One of the blondes was Ruth. Anna 0bama likely wasn’t blonde unless she dyed her hair. Pretty hard to get Oriental black hair blonde, though.
That's a studio photograph of Ruth holding Mark which appeared in a recent biography. The child is obviously the product of a white mother and coloured father.
The above is an outdoor image identified by Mark in a video as being of his father, himself as the dark child, and his mother Ruth holding the mythical 'David'
Which is followed by the identification of the two little boys as 'David' and Mark.
Now put your thinking caps on. I've clearly shown that the little boy identified as 'David' is actually zero.
Mark was born in the year after Ruth arrived in Kenya, that makes his birth year 1965.
The two boys sitting there together are very close in age, probably born in the same year.
Yet the dark child Mark claims is he, is at least five years old in 1966. Which means he was born in the same year as zero was born, in 1961.
It's just not possible. If it's a mistake, we are entitled to ask for a correction. If it's not a mistake, if 'David' wasn't zero's twin, then there never was a 'David' - because that photograph shows someone else's dark child and zero sitting somewhere together - probably in Boston, where Stanley Ann Dunham told Susan Blake she was going that very same day of her visit, and where the kenyan student told his associates at Harvard he was visiting HIS SON - which created the impression amongst the faculty that the kenyan 'had another wife in Boston' according to the INS file.
The children, Mark who may not have known any better at the time, identified as himself and his brother 'David' are in all probability the child Mary babysat in January 1961 and the child whose identity isn't known because he has a fake birth certificate.
Name, date of birth, place of birth, names of parents UNKNOWN.
And that's exactly what I'm trying to do, but I can't help it if you don't like it.
If you read the page of the book I linked to where that comment appears, you'll find it related to Hawaii. The kenyan didn't meet Ruth until some months before he left Boston in August 1964.
Ann S Obama in the Polk in Honolulu at the same time as ANNA OBAMA appears in the Polk in Seattle might be a clue.
Funny, that Mark posted a photo of two boys, neither of which was Mark, since the dark boy on Mark’s website is obviously a different boy. In the family photo of Ruth, Obama Sr and two boys; Mark is the younger boy being carried by Ruth, and the standing darker boy is clearly the same boy in the photo Mark posted on his site.
Got it - I should have read the link first.
Where does Mark say he was five years old in 1966?
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.