Fake Obama Kenya birth certificate?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/18018714/Fake-Obama-Kenya-birth-certificate ^ | 08/02/2009

[Jim Robinson]

And then one of our moderators spotted this:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/18018714/Fake-Obama-Kenya-birth-certificate

It has several clues, but also there's this question:

Who is E. F. Lavender?

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=earth+friendly+lavender&aq=f&oq=&aqi

Earth Friendly Lavender detergent?

[nathanbedford]

This from this from Flags of the World, for what it's worth:

Wasn't the Protectorate in the coastal strip much more than the former Witu? Witu had formerly been a small German protectorate, exchanged in 1890, along with Zanzibar, for Helgoland and the Caprivi Strip. As I understand it the remaining Kenyan coastal strip, which was formerly under the control of the Sultan of Zanzibar, had already become a British protectorate before the exchange. Mombasa and other parts of this protectorate had never been part of Witu as far as I can see. Ned Smith, 26 Sep 2005 After 1920 the interior of the country was a colony, but the coastal strip and the formerly separate Protectorate of Witu, remained a protectorate. Witu was a relatively small area to the north of the coastal strip leased from the Sultan of Zanzibar by the Imperial British East Africa Company. Under the terms of the 1890 agreement with Germany, Witu was to remain separate from other British territories. This seems to have been observed until the Colonial Office took over from the Foreign Office in 1905, and was not formally abandoned until 1920. David Prothero, 27 Sep 2005 ( http://flagspot.net/flags/ke_witu.html ) I found this which explores the anomalous status of the coastal strip and is significant mostly for the assertion that:

Some people expected that since the coastal strip was never part of the British colony, it would have been granted self-independence —just like Zanzibar —once Kenya attained independence in 1963.

This was not to be. Then acting Prime Minister, Mzee Jomo Kenyatta, the British government and the Sultan of Zanzibar declined to grant the strip autonomy.

In a letter dated October 5, 1963, Kenyatta bound his government to some undertaking in recognition of the coastal strip.

“I have the honour to refer to the discussions held between our respective governments on the subject of the coastal strip and to place on record the following undertakings by the Government of Kenya,” reads the letter to the prime minister of Zanzibar.

His note further reads: “The free hold titles to land in Coast region that are already registered will at all times be recognised. Steps will be taken to ensure the continuation procedure for the registration of new free hold titles and the rights of free holders will at all times be preserved”.

The letter was used as a legal instrument binding the Government to respect the status quo of land prior to independence.

As revealed by a report prepared by Robertson dated November 23, 1961, some people were advocating for an independent Coastal State before independence: “I recommend that if any system of regional or county administration is set up in Kenya, the Coast Province of Kenya should be one of the counties.”

In 1964, Kenyatta used his office to send signals to the international community that Kenya might renege on some commitments made before independence. (Emphasis supplied)

(http://www.bushdrums.com/news/index.php?shownews=1205

....................................

Note:

While these blurbs tend to support a theory which says that the area around Mambazo was treated differently and might have acted independently of the rest of Kenya, even regarding itself to be a republic, I'm not sure that that is relevant to the question whether authenticity is undermined by the reference to "Republic of Kenya" in the purported Kenyan birth certificate. I say this because the reference to the Republic of Kenya appears to be to the whole of Kenya of which the Coastal Province is a division in 1964 rather than to the province itself. Moreover the reference relates to the date of the creation of the certificate, in 1964, rather than to the date of the entry in the original book, 1961.

Additionally, there are three appellations which appeared to be somewhat at variance:

First, at the head of the document it purports to be that of the "COAST PROVINCE" and immediately under that it says that it is of the "DISTRICT OF Mombasa". It is worth noting here that the phrase "DISTRICT OF" is obviously printed and the "mombasa" is obviously typed. So far, the reader is led to believe that the "COAST PROVINCE" has produced a form to be distributed to its DISTRICTS and "Mombasa" is one of those districts and, like the others, use the form and typed in its own district name.

Second, at the extreme lower left of the document appears the phrase: "OFFICE OF THE PRINCIPAL REGISTRAR, COAST PROVINCE, REPUBLIC OF KENYA". The script here looks to be the same as the script quoted above and I conclude that is part of the printed form. But I hasten to add I have absolutely no expertise in judging these matters. This tells me that the bureaucrats in this office, at least, regarded Kenya to be a republic in February 1964 with this document purported to have been created. Our problem is that there may have been expectations that the Coast Province was to be a republic or an independent entity of some sort, but this appellation seems to describe the whole Kenya and not just the Coastal Province.

Third, if one shifts his gaze to the right side of the bottom of the document you will see this affirmation:

I,... Joshua Simon CDUYA..., Deputy Registrar of Births, Deaths, and Marriages for the Coast Province of Kenya, do hereby certify that the above is a true copy of the entry recorded in the Birth Register of this Province, Book 44B, Page 5733. Given under my Hand and Seal of Office this 17th day of February, 1964

My surmise is the portion of the above phrase which appears in bold is also part of a printed form. Yet this printed portion describes Kenya not as a republic but as one would expect it to be described, to wit, simply as, "Kenya." If the printed portion of the lower left of the document had simply said "Kenya" and not "Republic of Kenya" we would not be chasing these rabbits, but we are.

What to make of these descriptions? Is this a forgery because it describes Kenya as a republic when technically Kenya was not yet a republic? Are we being too fastidious in our expectations for this third world country in the throes of a transition from one kind of government to another with a semi-dictator in power who is changing the rules of the game as demonstrated by the letters quoted above? Is the designation "Republic of Kenya" mearly the description of a bureaucrat who prepared a form for the printers without thinking through the significance of the appellation, "Republic of"? Or is it the unmasking of a forgery?

I simply put this out there for abler minds than mine to make of it what they will.I hope some better researchers than I am will soon uncover contemporaneous documents which settle this issue.

[FReepapalooza]

You mean like this post from DU?

ColbertWatcher (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-02-09 07:17 PM
Original message
Calling all DUers with Photoshop! Your country needs you!

Regarding the “Kenyan birth certificate” (found here), a fellow DUer made an excellent suggestion:
cliffordu Sun Aug-02-09 03:43 PM
20. We need to create THOUSANDS of them and ship them all over the f*cking place.

bury the f*ckers in precise fakes, all just a little different from each other.

I wanna see heads explode. I wanna see people drooling from the breakdowns.

Won’t you please help? Also, for anyone else (who doesn’t have Photoshop) we will need a name for this operation.

[sonic109]

Easy with the name calling my friend , behave yourself.

[Perdogg]

Independence: from AD 1963

Jomo Kenyatta is still in detention in 1960, but his colleagues elect him president of their newly formed political party KANU (Kenya African National Union). He is released by the British in 1961. In London in 1962 he leads Kenya’s delegation in the negotiations for independence. The new nation is to include the coastal strip which until this time has been leased from the sultan of Zanzibar.

In elections in May 1963 KANU wins the majority of the seats. Independence is achieved in December 1963, with Kenyatta as prime minister. A year later, under a new constitution, Kenya becomes a republic (soon to be a one-party republic, when opposition leaders agree to end party faction and cooperate with KANU). In 1964 Kenyatta is elected president.

pif

To many in the white community it seems a terrifying prospect that almost unfettered power is now in the hands of a politician widely held responsible for Kikuyu violence in the Mau Mau period (not to mention his having spent two years at Moscow University during the 1930s).

But Kenyatta confounds his critics. He rules even-handedly in relation to the African, Asian and European communities. He carefully involves ministers from tribes other than the Kikuyu in his administration. And he develops a successful free-market economy open to foreign investment. When he dies, in 1978, Kenya ranks high among African countries both in terms of political stability and economic growth.

Read more: http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ad21#ixzz0N7lI7qCp

Read more: http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ad21#ixzz0N7lI7qCp

[Uncle Chip]

Sixth, EF Lavender is a laundry detergent. An EF Lavender was also signing documents in Australia before laundry detergent had been invented. Was that Aussie document forged as well?

Exactly --

It seems to me that too many have just accepted that forged Obama certification on the Factcheck website as valid despite all the evidence to the contrary, and therefore when a valid document appears, they are unable to recognize it or objectively and logically analyze it for authenticity, or withhold judgment until all the facts of its authentication are in. Too many have been drinking the koolaid.

[Uncle Chip]

So then what did the Kenyans call themselves in the meantime between 12/63 and 12/64???

[Perdogg]

They called themselves kenyans yet the “Republic” was not declared until 12-12-1964.You can have a Kenyan state after 12-12-1963.

We declared independence in July of 1776, but we were not a nation in our current form until after September of 1787.

[sonic109]

Then why bother at all?

[sonic109]

And when this one proves to be a fake how long will it be before WND stumbles upon another”real “ one?

[LouieFisk]

To: rolling_stone
You mean like this post from DU?

“We need to create THOUSANDS of them and ship them all over the f*cking place.”

---

Yeah, I’d think twice before grabbing as “evidence” every suspicious “document” that somebody just ran up internet flagpole for saluting.

[Uncle Chip]

They called themselves kenyans yet the “Republic” was not declared until 12-12-1964.You can have a Kenyan state after 12-12-1963.

Where does it say that the Kenyans referred to themselves as a "state" anywhere at anytime???

Do you have evidence that the words "Republic of Kenya" did not begin to appear on official government documents at the beginning of 1964????

[sonic109]

Yeah, I’d think twice before grabbing as “evidence” every suspicious “document” that somebody just ran up internet flagpole for saluting.

I agree my friend.

[Arrowhead1952]

Welcome to FR. Looks like a lot of n00bies signing up on the BC threads.

[markomalley]

Because I have relatives and friends who actually DO have representation. So I contact them and encourage them.

The only thing I can do (and, in fact, try as often as possible) is to educate the local nationals here in the People’s Democratic Republic of MD on the virtues of conservatism and the lunacy of liberalism. Maybe some success, but maybe not.

In the meantime, though, there will be at least one family of conservatives living here: I won’t be pushed out until I am ready to leave for my own reasons.

[Perdogg]

I have no evidence, but if I did your emotional response would be to discount it.

[LouieFisk]

Arrowhead, on this: "To: AndrewPPP; WhiskeyX; darkwing104; Darkshear; MeekOneGOP; Admin Moderator

Welcome to FR. Looks like a lot of n00bies signing up on the BC threads."

Dunno about the other handles, but I'm not sure how the Admin Moderator could be considered a newbie.

[Marine_Uncle]

Rather interesting picture.

[Uncle Chip]

He should stick to computer analyses of pixels —

[Arrowhead1952]

darkwing104, Darkshear and MeekOneGOP are part of the FR “welcoming committee”, and the Admin Moderator was pinged to be looking out to ZOT said n00bies.

[B Knotts]

Nah...not a trap. This won’t get enough publicity to constitute a trap.