[Fred Nerks]

I'm just throwing it out there. If the OBAMA vs OBAMA divorce was between ANN OBAMA & BARACK OBAMA that's a good reason for the marriage licence to have been removed from the file. And any birth certificate supplied as ID for the child would have shown the name of the mother.

Just how much 'adjustment' would have been required to those divorce docs to make it seem the parties to the divorce were the kenyan and Stanley Ann Dunham?

If there's been hanky-panky with the documents, which are like everything else we've seen, scans shown on the www...the date really isn't all that material. ANN OBAMA could have been the one to start the proceedings in January 1964. She could simply have been the girl he wrote home about to whom he said he was married, and later, that he had a son. The girl the clan remembered in 2004 as being named ANNA TOOT, which was quite likely a phonetic recollection of 'tutu' which I have read in a number of instances is used in polynesian culture as older sister, or auntie.

I'm bringing it up just as a possibility. Just what documents do you trust?

[little jeremiah]

Hmm, interesting. The people who got the child as a baby and were controlling his life could have done any number of criminal document messing around, we know they did a lot of it. So the divorce papers could also be more “adjusted” than I had thought. The missing page - marriage certificate? Birth certificate? or both? - could be very revealing.