So for all you doubters, the pair was legally married (except for the possibility of bigamy). Those of you who complain that they hardly new each other, never had sex together, or whatever crazy ideas you have about Anne, Anna or whatever, need to reconcile your hypotheses with the fact that they were clearly married.
For those of you who are searching for crazy swapped baby stories and the like, get a life! The married, had a child (in Mombasa) and that child stayed with Stanley Ann through her period in Seattle and Hawaii, and possibly through a trip to Boston. (Note: for all the questions about “Anna”, the Seattle address is a perfect match for the UW transcript, and there is no doubt that this transcript uniquely belonged to Stanley Ann, including her grades from UH.)
By now, Sherlock Holmes would be quite ashamed of your Anna fantasies and switched baby theories.
You probably ought to get a little more control over the tone of your posts.
I think we have consistently been pretty careful to acknowledge the possibility that the real story may in fact me the one you have lifted from the published legend in Dreams. If the legal process ultimately produces a current authenticated print from Zero's foot and a print expert can identify that print to the print on the Mombasa birth certificate showing Stanley Ann as mother and Obama Sr. as father, that will confirm your view.
As we have said, there are a number of reasons to suspect that print will not match.
As to your direct point about using the index to confirm the basic story line of the Legend (Stanley Ann and Obama Sr. met in class; married; went to Kenya and had a child; all to the exclusion of the possibility of a second woman and child in Hawaii being the source of some parts of the legend) Fred's comment in #383 addresses the substance of at least one defect--which is the same defect identified by your unnamed researcher as an anomaly.
The date range has been removed from the Birth Index volume print. As Fred points out: ...The images above are offered as proof that the Birth Index volume is in fact quite different in an important way. It is the only one that lacks the date range. It seems improbable that this would be innocently “overlooked” only in this one book. To suggest so is ridiculous. That is why I published images from the other “types” of books that were printed at the same time the 1960-1964 Birth Index was printed, to show absolutely that the obama Index is the only book lacking the one common, expected, usual official information. The date range.
The suggested explanation is that an accurate depiction of the date range would demonstrate that the Obama child referenced was born earlier than August of 1961--enough earlier that he would had to have been conceived while Stanley Ann was still a student at Mercer Island High School.
That thesis of course is the basis for the suggestion that there was a second Ann Obama in Hawaii with a multi-racial child who was not a child of Stanley Ann and who at least does not fit the story in the Dreams Legend, modified to fit the Kenya birth.
I have never given much credit to any of the purported birth explanations and documents originating with the Hawaii Department of Public Records for the reason that the statutes provide for birth confirmation documents that are not controlled by an effective legal process. The end product is a number of examples in the earlier threads here of individuals who have Hawaii COLB's certifying birth in Hawaii who were not born in Hawaii at all.
I note also that the public releases from officials at the department are carefully crafted around the possible state of facts that the department in fact has never issued any form of certificate with respect to Obama's birth because although they have a complete valid file on the subject, the file discloses on the face of the originating document that he was born, not in Hawaii, but in Mombasa.
And whoever he is, and wherever he came from, he has personally created by his own statements to which there are a number of affidavits in court files, an evidentiary record of statements against interest confirming that he was in fact born in Kenya. That topic is going to need to be addressed separately from the issue at hand here.
The primary point of this thread is the proposition that the record of the current occupant of the White House who is acting as President of the United States is a fake. There are a number of issues about his underlying record that are created by factual inconsistencies with his personal description in Dreams and he and his supporters not only refuse to address those inconsistencies, they have in many cases produced fake documents to refute the inconsistencies.
So the open question is who he is and where he came from. A collateral question is whether or not he is eligible to hold the office of President under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution.
A HUGE GIGANTIC HUMONGOUS BUMP TO THE TOP FOR A FANTASTIC THREAD!
And David’s comments a such a MUST READ that words cannot express how much.
To this day, I don’t know why you and Fred Nerks attribute such significance to a passage (s?), from The Dreams of My Father. Based on my own research and reading (e.g., Jack Cashil), the book is clearly fictional in nature and should not be relied on as gospel truth.
Furthermore, since there is so much contradictory (and often doctored) information out there, you can’t rely on a simple quote nor a limited set of quotes to exclude another hypothesis. As far as I am concerned, there is no theory which can be entirely consistent with the alleged facts of BHO, jr’s life.
There are many ways to interpret the birth listings at the Hawaii DOH. My personal belief is that the report was recompiled at a later date to include BHO jr’s birth. As a computer professional specializing in developing databases such as these, I find no evidence to support your hypotheses.
You make several observations about the shortcomings of the Birth Records, and I agree with you about the deficiencies. However, there is no reason to doubt the marriage listings, so you can never avoid the conclusion that they knew each other intimately. It would also seem to suggest that this might well have been a bit of a shotgun wedding, since conception would appear to have occurred in November.
My personal belief, which is corroborated in spades from what we already know, is that these most of these records have been subject to tampering by parties affiliated with Obama. For example, I am quite convinced the newspaper announcements were forgeries (http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/05/28/extra-extra-announcing-obamas-birth/). However, there are many documents, including the divorce decree, that all use the August 4th date. I don’t see any direct evidence contradicting this assumption.
You can believe what you want about this Anna character. However, you can’t deny that Stanley and and Barack, sr were married, according to Hawaiian documents. You can’t also deny that Stanley Ann, with baby in tow, was in Seattle taking classes at the UW and living at the same address as indicated by her transcript file. However, it is quite possible that one “fat fingered” typing error could be the source of all confusion regarding her name. As you must certainly know, there are an exceedingly large number of quotes from friends, family and neighbors which confirm that she was in Seattle at this time period, and was carrying along a baby naked Barack that she claimed was the child of Barack sr. It would certainly seem that there were very few other male opportunities in Hawaii for Stanley Ann to have misecgenated with. Given the fact that she was legally married to Barack, sr, I would argue that there is only an infinitesimal chance that the parent was anyone other than Barack, sr.
As I indicated above, most of your line of reasoning seems to take “facts” as given, from a work which is fictional in nature and which was certainly not written by Barack. By judiciously and carefully examining source materials, I can find plenty of evidence that would support the Out of Africa hypothesis, though I have no idea why she would have chosen to go to Kenya. And, by using my exegesis, there is no reason at all for any other Anna character to exist or, more importantly, to have some role in the paternity of Barack, jr. I find a dearth of evidence supporting the Anna hypothesis, compared to many different sources that all confirm the basic outlines of Barack jr’s nativity and early upbringing.
If anyone chooses to exclude hypotheses based on any set of evidentiary fragments, you will discover that there a few, if any, hypotheses that can ever be accepted. The Anna hypothesis excludes a large tranche of forensic evidence that supports the Out of Africa hypothesis and/or Barack jr’s paternity and/or the Seattle sojourn of Stanley Ann accompanied by her cognatus son. In contrast, the Anna hypothesis is fundamentally poorly supported in evidence, testimony, and common sense.
That's exactly what I want to know! Nothing more, nothing less.