What was the source of that little snip?
A poster on Texas Darlin's site found the announcement as a news article reporting the Vital Statistics for the period. Copies of additional parts of the page were also published purporting to show the article as being from the Honolulu Advertiser on August 13, 1961. I accept this at face value for the moment.
The poster says she contacted the paper; that the announcement would have been generated by information filed with the Department of Health. That in turn leads back to an inquiry as to what information was in fact filed.
As you may know, I have speculated for some time that we would find some form of affidavit, or affidavit of home birth, or other information alleging his birth in Hawaii, filed on August 8. If I had been creating it on the facts we know about, I would have put his footprint on it even if it was only an affidavit by mother or grandmother (because it would demonstrate that he was in fact in Honolulu on August 8).
All of that would leave open the question of how he got to Honolulu on August 8.
Further, the actual filing may not be that clear from our perspective--if I had been Obama's lawyer at the inception of this process and I had the affidavit with his footprint on it, I would have gone with that rather than the forgery.
The message in the forgery is that there is some factual disclosure in the actual filing that casts doubt on the position that he was actually born in Honolulu--otherwise they shouldn't have tried to use the forged document. On the other hand, these people are not very smart or very good--and they have made lots of mistakes; this is the kind of "throw it at the wall and see if it sitcks" tactic you might see from a novice lawyer. It may turn out they have a better position on the real filed data.
I think you are correct. It is likely that no one in 1961 had any idea what would transpire in 2008.
His mother probably was only interested in preventing BHOI from getting custody of BHOII and the whole charade was to show that BHOI had deserted them.
I think 'the message in the forgery' is that there never was an Hawaii CoLB at all. If he had one, regardless of names or information on it, he could have used his own and simply changed what he wanted to hide.
If we accept that the CoLB used belonged to someone else, wouldn't that indicate obama had nothing belonging to himself, at his disposal to tamper with?