62 letter from father ignores Obama, mom

"'62 letter from father ignores Obama, mom
'My wife is in Nairobi and I would really appreciate any help you may give her'

A letter Barack Obama Sr. wrote in 1962 raises new questions about the veracity of the official Obama nativity story related by Barack Obama Jr. in his autobiography "Dreams from My Father."

A letter Barack Obama Sr. wrote in May 1962 from Hawaii to his political benefactor in Kenya, Tom Mboya, discusses his wife, but without mentioning Ann Dunham, his Hawaiian bride and the mother of the president.

Toward the end of the 1962 letter, Obama wrote, "You know my wife is in Nairobi there and I would really appreciate any help you may give her."

Clearly Obama Sr. is referring to his first wife, Kezia Aoko, whom he had married in 1954 at age 18 while she was pregnant with their first child. Obama left Kenya in 1959 to study in Hawaii.

He instructs Mboya that his wife Kezia was then staying with her brother, Wilson Odiawo, in Nairobi.

The heading of the letter to Mboya lists 1482 Alencastre Street in Honolulu as the address for Barack Obama Sr. at the time the letter was written, May 29, 1962.

This is a previously unknown address for Barack Obama Sr. At this time, however, Dunham was living with her son in the Capitol Hill area of Seattle at 516 13th Ave. East, Apt. 2.

It’s Examiner.com (it’s at the link in the article you posted. How did you miss that?).

There are two links in the section I posted the screenshot. One is a link to the Hawaii DOH website. The other, in your blue, indented text, is a link to "whosdatedwho.com". Nowhere in the source code for the page is there any link to examiner.com .

Oh wait, NOW there is. I refreshed the page, and suddenly now the 'whosdatedwho' link points to examiner.com. Amazing. It's like when I pointed out the other day that you hadn't named four experts on one of your pages, and then you edited the page to add 'Nail in the Coffin.' I figured that out the same way I can show you changed this:

Google cache!

See, the same cached page (cached on October 18) has a link to 'whosdatedwho' and is also missing the 'Nail in the Coffin' thing you added. I'm guessing you were in such a hurry to add SOMETHING to make four experts that you failed to check to see if two were the same person.

I thought that might have been a one-time thing, but I think I need to be more wary of your claims. Because obviously, you're willing to claim that your site says something it doesn't, and then change it to fit your story. And then have the unmitigated gall to act like *I* missed something, when you altered the page.

Seriously, did it not occur to you to at least change the page BEFORE claiming I missed it? Did you think I wouldn't notice? Because all you did here was just convince me how far you're willing to go to lie.

The question, now, is whether you're going to admit you changed the link after claiming I missed it, or whether you're just going to gloss over this demonstration of your dishonesty.

You get them to post a correction or retraction, and I’ll correct my comment or remove it.

Oh, THAT is your standard? You're willing to cite (in your own words) that it's a solid fact, based on the unsourced claim of some random old dude in Florida, but to change your mind you need the website to retract a year-old user-submitted fluff piece?

Look, I thought you were more fluent in the internet than this, but I have something to tell you: you can't believe everything you read online. Unsourced wild factual claims from uncredentialed old guys who have no direct knowledge of the stuff they're talking about? Not terribly credible.

So you’ve opted for ‘gloss over it’ I see. And, apparently, this time TheObamaFile just happened to evolve inbetween you lying and claiming that I missed a link on the page, and you adding said link to the page.

Funny thing, btw...if you Google ‘Maya + “Certification of Live Birth”’, the first result is a link to Snopes. The second is a link to that very examiner.com article.

It’s almost as if, in a moment of desperation for a source, ANY source, that said Maya had a COLB, you simply punched the info into Google, grabbed the first result that said so, and edited into your page, while hoping that you could make the change before I caught you.

In other words, you didn’t have a source on hand at all, did you? You had to go looking for one, grabbed a crappy one, and pretended like it was your source all along and that I’d missed it. Heck, you could’ve just said “Here’s my source,” but no, you had to go and lie about how I ‘missed’ something that wasn’t there, and then change the page to make it look like I did.

I’m sorry for saying you were foolish to believe some random old guy. Because at least that would have been A source, and you didn’t even have that much.

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.