And you can cockadoodledoo all day and night long, nothing changes the fact that the child shown on the left is zero. Nothing. You can call him Tom Dick or Harry or David, that doesn't change who he is. The composite shows the same child FOUR TIMES.
Per Fred Nerks:
“These are the images that Mark showed on his webpage.”
Yes, pictures of Mark and his younger brother, David, circa 1970. Yet Fred Nerks’ Mal-Val narrative has these boys ID’d as Barry (son of Malcolm X) being the younger on the left and Roman Obama (son of BHO Sr. and supposed Filipina wife Anna S.) on the right.
Exactly where and when were these studio pictures supposedly taken and how and why did Mark Ndesandjo get them and claim they were taken in Africa of himself and his brother David? Was it in Hawaii, according to Fred Nerks? Obviously, Mark is right and this is corroborated by lots of circumstantial evidence. It is equally obvious that it is Conspiracy Theory to believe that Mark is complicit in a conspiracy to create a fake brother, David, for him to disguise the implantation of baby Roman Obama into the Kenyan family...all as knock-on protection of the secret identity of Barry as the true son of Malcolm X and Valerie Sarruf...who somehow enlisted BHO Sr. and party girl Ruth Baker into the plot.
It’s all very entertaining as long as you don’t get suckered into believing it is the truth...something that would be very amusing to certain Obots, I would guess.
Per Fred Nerks:
“The composite of zero clearly shows who the boy on the left IS.”
This misidentification of David Obama, the boy in the upper right, as “zero” (Fred Nerks name for the current president and the boy in the other three photos) is either dishonest or delusional.
Per Fred Nerks:
“And the darker, older child is shown with his father and Ruth in Kenya in a photograph taken after Mark was born in 1965.”
Fred Nerks’ Mal-Val narrative ID’s these pictures of the real Mark, the “darker” child, as being Roman Obama (currently of Ghana). The exact same toddler (actually David) that was sitting next to him that Fred Nerks ID’d as “zero” in the studio picture is now ID’d as baby Mark in 1965 in Kenya in his mother Ruth’s arms.
The Fred Nerks Mal-Val timeline with his ID’s CAN’T be made to work. Thus, while many narratives for Barry can still be considered possible with varying degree of probability, the Mal-Val Fred Nerks narrative with Barry aka “zero” as the son of Malcolm X and Roman Obama as “the original BHO II” (Roman whose name was taken from him and given to Malcolm X’s son)...is impossible timeline.
Fred Nerks’ “Darker” Roman (actually Mark) looks to be age 5 in the studio shot in 1963-64. Fred Nerks’ “zero” (actually David looks age 2.
Fred Nerks’ “darker” Roman in the family shot supposedly with Fred Nerks’ baby Mark(actually David) also looks 4 or 5 years which Fred Nerks labels 1965, but since the baby is supposedly Mark and looks age 2 the picture would be dated circa 1967.
As you can see it doesn’t make sense that Fred Nerks’ “darker” Roman looks to be about the same age in these picture Fred Nerks says/implies were from 1963 and 1967. Does not compute!
The corroborated, legally verifiable truth is that the Barry baby pictures were likely taken in about 1963-65 in the US (HI and possibly WA) and the pictures of Barry’s half-brothers, “darker” Mark and Barry-look-alike David, were taken in Kenya obviously with their real mother and father circa 1970. Mark was about age 5 and David age 2 to three.
And you can cockadoodledoo all day and night long, nothing changes the fact that the child shown on the left is zero. Nothing. You can call him Tom Dick or Harry or David, that doesn't change who he is. The composite shows the same child FOUR TIMES.