Replies

Actually, DL has an intriguing theory on that. Said theory aside, who are these forgers of the highest quality that he can call up and demand spring into action to produce this masterpiece of a fugazzi? These charlatans have been bluffing, bullying and race-carding their way through this entire diabolical saga from the beginning and didn't count on Donald Trump "going 'birther'". They rushed this thing, because they never expected to be called on it in the national media by a well known, charismatic personality who's very hard to ignore.

I don't think they rushed it. I think this is the normal standard of quality for replacement birth certificates from The DOH in Hawaii.

*IF* it was created by the Department of Health in Hawaii as a replacement birth certificate per a Judge's order, it was only intended to pass a cursory inspection, not the detailed Anal-probe it received from we "birthers." :)

I have been thinking about how to better convey my theory to others who seem resistant to it, and I think I've figured out a way to make the idea more clear. Here it goes:

Significant event number 1: (1965)
There are six pieces of circumstantial evidence of which I am aware that Indicates Lolo Soetoro legally adopted Barack Obama in 1965. *IF* Barack Obama was legally adopted by Lolo Soetoro, then he WOULD have been issued a NEW BIRTH CERTIFICATE showing Lolo Soetoro as his Father on his birth certificate, and his original birth document would have been sealed by the Adoption court.

Once again, *IF* Barry was adopted by Lolo Soetoro, then he is GUARANTEED to have a "replacement birth certificate" i.e. a legal but "fake" document.

Once again, I will mention that I am aware of six pieces of circumstantial evidence which indicate Lolo Soetoro did indeed adopt Barack Obama.

Significant Event number 2: (1971)
From 1971 onward, Barack Obama lived with his Grandparents while his mother went back to Indonesia. During Christmas of 1971, both Barack Obama Sr. AND Stanley Ann Dunham happened to be in Hawaii at exactly the same time. Barack Sr. was said to have been there for some "family business". A review of Hawaiian Adoption law indicates that the Birth Father has absolute rights regarding a subsequent adoption of his child. His permission MUST be sought, and his acquiescence MUST be obtained.

From various bits and pieces of circumstantial evidence it is a virtual certainty that Barack Obama Sr was in Hawaii to grant his permission for the Adoption of Barack Obama II by his grandparents.

If either or both of the above two significant events occurred as suggested, then Barack Obama is guaranteed to have a "replacement birth certificate" and not an original. His current document is guaranteed to be a fabrication by the Department of Health in Hawaii per a Judge's order.

DL, based on your timelines, when do you hypothesize the COLB was constructed that Obama presented last April? If the HDOH made this (which I agree could be possible since they are so incompetent on a number of levels), did they construct it in 1971? Or maybe it was recently done?

And there appears to be a number of difficulties that don’t jibe with your theory (as others have already mentioned previously). Such as:

1. Why didn’t the HDOH just use a real seal instead of constructing a seal out of PDF layers since the seal and date stamp are contemporary (dated April 25, 2011)?

2. If the intent of the constructed, fake COLB is to fool the subject and other governing bodies, whey wouldn’t they be better at constructing the forgery? You would think that they had done this on numerous occasions since adoption is a pretty regular occurrence. Since it is a government entity, you would even think there would be some sort of form or guideline defined on how to generate a fake COLB instead of every single one just an arbitrary mish-mash.

3. Wouldn’t the manufactured COLB be kept on file in Obama’s records as an “original” instead of a manufactured PDF? Surely they don’t generate these things only on-demand?

4. And isn’t copying someone’s signature (such as the attending Physician) illegal no matter who does it? Even if it is intended to satisfy an adopted child? Unless, of course, you believe that the doctor on the COLB was actually his attending physician...

And there are many other questions that just don’t seeem to coordinate your theory. Seems you may be attempting to give the Hawaiian DOH some credibility where it doesn’t have merit?

But I think we can both agree that Hawaii must be somehow complicit with the generation of the document no matter how it was fabricated because they have failed to dismiss its legitimacy