Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: SatinDoll

Yeah. The key premises are flawed. The HDOH didn’t sort out the BC’s according to geographic codes; that was done by the CDC after the HDOH processed the BC’s normally. And the BC’s were normally already in geographic clumps because they were collected by local registrars and sent in as a group each week (or month, for outlying islands).

Analysis of the birth announcements shows that the order of the announcements - or even whether an announcement appears at all - is not consistent between newspapers, since some individual (and blocs of) births were announced weeks later in one paper than in the other. In addition, some announcements appear in only one or no paper - such as the Nordyke birth which appears in the Advertiser but not the Star-Bulletin, or the Sunahara birth which appears in neither.

When you analyze what’s actually in the birth announcements and compare it to the number of births reported by the CDC, it suggests that these lists were NOT put out by the HDOH at all. My guess is that the hospital asked the parents which, if any, newspapers they would like the birth announced in and that the newspapers also allowed individuals to self-report births.

I contacted Marsha McFadden, the Advertiser gal that WND said they spoke with (who told them they ddn’t allow self-reporting back then) to ask what her source was for that, and she didn’t respond. I also exchanged e-mails with Will Hoover who claimed to have spoken to somebody who went to the HDOH office to pick up the announcement lists in the early 1960’s, but the details he gave were not consistent with what Lori Starfelt claimed the HDOH had told her. So I suspect that we are being given a runaround by people who have MUCH to cover.

Especially since it very much appears to me that somebody at the Advertiser office, together with a specific individual for Wikileaks, actually fabricated at least the paper and internet-image announcement copies, if not also the microfilm copies that are in libraries now (which are not the original 1961 library microfilms and are too poor-quality to have been produced by the microfilming company who would have copied them if they had been legitimate copies from the 1961 originals).

I’ve got a post written up about this article but I’ve held off on posting it on my blog for strategic reasons.


62 posted on 03/01/2012 6:11:24 AM PST by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]


To: butterdezillion

I always liked the line from “National Treasure”.

“Somebody has to go to jail.”

If what is released today does not lead to jail or the threat of jail for someone in Hawaii or Fact Check ‘reporters’ or someone then this will be another missed opportunity.

It is clear the payoffs have been made, the threats are in place and without threat of jail no one is going to break ranks.

Today feels like the Alamo of the stand against corruption.


71 posted on 03/01/2012 7:58:05 AM PST by bluecat6 ( "A non-denial denial. They doubt our heritage, but they don't say the story is not accurate.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]

To: butterdezillion

Thank you.


73 posted on 03/01/2012 8:39:30 AM PST by SatinDoll (No Foreign Naionals as our President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson