Posted on 03/12/2012 8:21:10 AM PDT by jmaroneps37
It is too bad for Obama that they did not have a forgery that good for his LFCOLB.
Actually I have. And the ink obviously caught just the tip of the toes and not so much the front tip of the foot.
I agree on the date stamp...
Best,
3
No one observation should be allowed to disqualify the entire document. How can you explain that the date/time of birth exactly matches Obama's Hawaiian Birth Certificate, yet this was produced years in advance of the release of the Hawaii BC?
Just pulled the birth date/time out of his hat? I don't think so!
it was the same on his short form colb released in 2008
Cert of birth no. 32018, of Coast Province General Hospital, Mombasa, British Protectorate, Kenya
Let’s see if this gets zotted. Everytime the baby footprints show up, a zot is usually close behind.
. . . . Check out article, then note several graphics throughout the thread on both pages.
Thanks, Fractal Trader. (I've saved both pages to file.)
Sorry - I made a mistake.
I agree on the 1980. There is no hypothetical OCR/Optimization that changes the document in human logical chunks that can be trotted out to in an attempt to support the “80.” Fogbow and other obama apologists just have to hope we forget.
The fact that they have gotten away this long with the OCR/optimization ruse is amazing.
Best,
3
“What do Beck and the rest of the CINOs want”
To remain in denial. To not die or have their families die from ‘heart attacks.’ To try to prevent riots.
Precisely...
_____________________________________________
A) It is not an observation. It is an error that negates the validity of the "document". Whoever created it didn't do his homework. It's a simple thing --- just like the mistake CBS made that took Maples down.
B)Since the "document" is false it wasn't produced years before the Hawaii BC
Please do not let this ruin a good parlor game though.
Really?
The spawn of Satan ain’t human...
If you haven’t seen it, ping to CPGH BC thread...
“Citizenship determined by baby foot print:
“...Results indicated that sufficient agreement was found between the infant and adult footprints to allow the U.S. State Department to accept the individual’s identification as a U.S. citizen and approve the application of a U.S. passport....”
https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/Abstract.aspx?id=241258
Ping to case where baby footprint was used to ID adult in citizenship case...
Me too. This certificate has never been proven to be a forgery.
This birth certificate has already been pretty thoroughly discussed here, so I'll just speak to the particular point that you make.
The British received ownership of the Coast Province from its former owner, a Muslim, under the condition that Muslims in the Province would be governed according the sharia law. One result was that Muslims there were permitted to have four wives.
So, we don't know what happened for sure. The divorce papers are extant, but no marriage certificate has ever turned up. We don't know if Obama Sr. and Stanley Ann Dunham were ever married.
They could not have been properly married in the US, because it would have been considered bigamous. They could have been married in Kenya, if Ann agreed to become a Muslim--which she had to do anyway to marry those two Muslims over the years.
So, either they were married in Kenya, or the marriage was bigamous. Or, as some have suggested, they were never married at all, and someone else may have been the father--Malcolm X, perhaps, or Barry's tutor. But that is conjecture.
For the sake of argument, assume this BC is authentic, and the one Obama released was a forgery. Obama would be expected to have a copy of the Kenyan BC, so he might well have supplied the actual date and time of his birth to the forger.
In the first week that the CPGH BC was revealed I decided to investigate the date format.
On Wiki I found a site that used old IBM format manuals as a data source for a listing of the formats used in every country, probably to aide in writing word-processing software or for correspondence by IBM employees.
At the time the Wiki site had a world map and color coding for which date format each country used.
One country stood out among the former British colonies and that was Kenya. It was one of only two countries in the color purple (hmmm...may be some irony there).
The code, purple, indicated that both month MM/DD/YYYY and DD/MM/YYYY formats were in apparent official use in the country. A text list of the countries on the site in addition to the map confirmed that Kenya used both formats.
When I disclosed this information on the youtube site of the person claiming to have obtained the CPGH BC, an Obot named Mystylpix or some such challenged me.
I went back to the Wiki date format page, suddenly, the text listing showing Kenya as a dual use country and the asterisk that had shown the IBM docs as a source were missing and only the DD/MM/YYYY was shown. It had been edited!
I examined the editing history for the Wiki page and sure enough, Obot Mystylpix had done the deed!
But...she/he was unable to edit the map on the page which still showed purple for Kenya.
I have just gone to the Wiki link for the first time since then:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date_format_by_country
It can be seen that although Kenya in the text listing is shown to use only a strange YY/MM/DD format, the map still has Kenya color-coded for using a dual format...it is green now (male person interpretation). But the second format is now DD/MM/YY, not the former MM/DD/YY shown as of two years ago...which matches the CPGH BC.
Obot termites!
ping...thanks for the ping!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.