[Eagle Forgotten]

Thanks for your thoughtful post identifying important issues.

I have one question — the answer may be somewhere in the mountain of posts on this subject, so forgive me if this has already been answered. You write: “Kenya coincidentally used the same data format as adopted by all Australian states....” To include this in your list, you must presumably have reliable information about Australian forms. What’s the source of that? I didn’t know that any Australian forms had been made public except the Bomford certificate, which some Freepers contend is the forgery.

I agree with you that the discovery of an indisputably valid Australian certificate that has the same form as Taitz’s document would be fatal to Taitz’s position.

[OCMike]

Has anyone actually seen another “Republic of Kenya” birth certificate issued before December 1964?

Simple question. Sure would add a lot of credibility to the Taitz Kenyan COLB.

[Zoe Brain]

I'm Australian. Actually, I have dual Aus/UK nationality, and a UK BC.

I live in Australia.

The different states of Australia are like the different states of the USA. Each has their own special way of doing things. But since about 1941, IIRC, all the states agreed to have the same data on each of their BCs, though of course the forms vary.

here's a Victorian BC:

There's one from NSW here that's a bit big.

Here's one from Queensland:

All have, at minimum, and in order, Child data, Mother data and Father data, some have marriage data but others don't as kids will be born out of wedlock on occasion, previous children of relationship data, informant data, and registrar data.Now different states use different forms, and have changed them as printing and lately computer technology has improved. For example, the Victorian one, while it records a birth in 1956, is just a printout from the data in the registry made in 2008, and so was done on a laser printer. The originally issued one would have looked different, but had the same data on.