To: Protect the Bill of Rights
What is curious about this COLB is the 1964 date of registration. Your comment regarding the timing in relation to filing for divorce makes some sense.
I do find it odd that a fake COLB would use a registration date as such.
FWIW ....
To: maggief
So now who will the Obots say has the burden of proof?
1,563 posted on
08/02/2009 9:09:17 AM PDT by
FTJM
To: maggief
Hmmmm. Unable to view the document on that webpage.
1,601 posted on
08/02/2009 9:19:15 AM PDT by
SoldierDad
(Proud Dad of a U.S. Army Infantry Soldier presently instructing at Ft. Benning.)
To: maggief
What is curious about this COLB is the 1964 date of registration. Your comment regarding the timing in relation to filing for divorce makes some sense. I do find it odd that a fake COLB would use a registration date as such. Read it again. This copy states the birth was registered Aug. 5, 1961 (the day after Hussein was born) and was filed into the record books Aug. 9th.
Ann filed for divorce in Jan. '64 and it was finalized Mar. '64. It makes sense Ann or Sr. or the court needed to verify Hussein as their kid so obtained this copy in Feb. '64.
1,607 posted on
08/02/2009 9:20:16 AM PDT by
bgill
(The evidence simply does not support the official position of the Obama administration)
To: maggief
“What is curious about this COLB is the 1964 date of registration.”
Well, they had to start with a template for this forgery, and the template was someone else’s 1964 birth certification.
2,865 posted on
08/02/2009 1:58:27 PM PDT by
WOSG
(OPERATION RESTORE AMERICAN FREEDOM - NOVEMBER, 2010 - DO YOUR PART!)
To: maggief
BP2's excellent explanation, and a useful timeline are back at
Post 2222 of this thread.
2,891 posted on
08/02/2009 2:04:03 PM PDT by
RightField
(A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson