Posted on 08/03/2009 2:12:53 PM PDT by Calpernia
There are now modified photos of the COLB that broke here yesterday. The changes are so slight, that no one is noticing them.
The original one posted in breaking news:
One of the modified ones:
The changes are so subtle, you can barely tell which one you are looking at.
This modified one is showing jokes like: The Font of the Certificate=Schmutz (A Schmutz is a chump, as in you are a chump) #5733=The number of the Certificate, is code for : "Problem with Windows REGISTRY", a sly reference to your claim that Obama does not appear on the Hawaii Live Birth Registry. 47O44=Easiest of all. BOH's age=47 0=O (if you look close you can tell that that is a Schmutz Font "Oh" not "Zero") EF Lavender is ORGANIC DISH SOAP
The original one does not say EF Lavender, it says KF Lavender. The original one shows the number is: 47,644.
WTF is going on?
Wouldn’t there be records — passport control, customs, her own passport if Obama has not destroyed it — that would show when Stanley Ann came and went from the United States? Could those records be pulled under FOIA?
Ah, I see. Both extracted in 1959, yes?
Moscow
Here is a real Aussie BC to compare to Bomfords.
+++++++++++++++
Were all the Aussie states’ records like this (I wonder.)
Ya got me. I have no idea yet.
If I knew the answer to that question, I probably would have solved this whole mystery already, and everyone could be off posting on other threads.
And, of course, I would win the door prize!
:0)
Based on the genealogy links for David Jeffrey Bomford, I’m pretty sure his birth cert is the real thing.
However, the initial stories about this Kenyan birth certificate say that other Kenyan birth certificates at the same time are on the same template. I’m not ready to say it’s a fake based on the two birth certs sharing the same template.
But, the two last names and some numbers being the same are pretty fishy.
BUT, a while ago everyone thought the numbers 47044 were pretty fishy because of the coincidence of them matching up the 0bama’s presidency number.
Obama, NWO? Keep us busy not paying attention to the quarantine camps they are setting up?
Don’t know if this is relevant, but I did a WHOIS of the bomford.net and there is an email address for the owner. Tried to email and this is what I got
“This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification
Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
web1manager@bomford.net
Technical details of permanent failure:
Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected by the recipient domain. We recommend contacting the other email provider for further information about the cause of this error.
The error that the other server returned was: 550 550 “Unknown User” (state 14).”
Anyone know what ‘that’ might mean?
What the ????
I’ve emailed WND to let them know about the new information.
I (we) was wrong. Bomford was born 1959, extracted 1964. The other one from Australia was born in the 1930’s and extracted in 1959.
WOAH.
Would Great Britain need to document its citizens no matter where they were born? Of course.
It would make sense that the forms were as identical as possible to cut down on processing time. What constitutes a "book" and a "page"? Someone in another state might have social security number identical to mine except for the first 3 numbers....does that mean that one or both of the social security numbers are a fake?
Just saying that further investigation should be done.
Dr. Fukino cooberated the only relevant piece of information on that online COLB; the only fact on the COLB that would establish that Obama was a citizen at birth- that he was born in Hawaii.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-07-27-obama-hawaii_N.htm
Why wouldn’t two British owned countries have forms that are the same or very similar?
Australia still was influenced by the British in 1986, Kenya declares independence in 1964.
If there were “stock” British forms would a new country, with very few financial resources, go through the process of developing a brand new form or would they take existing forms and change the information?
It isn’t like they had desktop publishing in 193.
I can tell you right now folds and really any sort of blemish are easily removed.
Or you can add marks & aging, whatever.
Basically if you have the skill and patience you can do just about whatever you want.
I’ve often had to scan documents and I’ve cleaned things up from something as simple as removing staple marks- even over text- to removing lines creases wrinkles folds tears you name it. Anybody who pushes pixels for a living will attest to that. Some of us have advanced software that can bring out details previously unseen.
Really?
Yeah. Weird is right.
:)
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.