[David]

I’m confused about the panic on this thread. All that really matters is the paper that Taitz has given to the court for authentication. The court won’t be trying to authenticate a digital file.

I said that up above. But it is not really correct. Because to some degree what we are doing is running a PR battle--to the extent we leave obvious fakes up on the face of documents which we are contending are substantive original evidence, we risk having an adverse impact on our public position.

The Opposing Force's real response to this certificate is to post several versions of fake birth certificate, all of which have the accurate birth data (date and place of birth; delivery doctor; etc.) but which have some other clear specific statement that the document is a fake on the face of the document. They do this to support their position that all of the Kenya birth documents are fake.

So to the extent practical, we need to post on top of the stuff they fake.

[LucyT]

Thanks again, David.

Pinging to #355.

[YellowRoseofTx]

Is there an explanation for Mr. Bomford’ birth in 1959 but the registration date of 1964? That is 5 years. Is that typical or unusual?