The newspaper announcements were forged. There is evidence that the microfilms have been changed out at least once in each library listed as having those dates (except one which we didn’t check).
The images that appeared online could not have come from the Hawaii State Library as was claimed because the condition of those microfilm pages at the HSL doesn’t match that of the images. For instance, the HSL’s Advertiser microfilm is almost unreadable because of usage (and actually because of poor microfilming, which immediately says the microfilming was not professionally done as would be done for a library) - but the online image is nearly pristine. Conversely, the online Star-Bulletin image has a large “scratch” on it, but the HSL’s Star-Bulletin microfilm for that day was pristine. IOW, a very prominent scratch disappeared over time. That is true in other libraries too.
The paper copies that the librarian at the Univ of CA - Berkeley made from the microfilms show different marks on the full-page view than on the supposed close-ups of that page. That happened with the copies given to 2 different people independently.
And there’s other stuff too. So there is a bunch of forensic evidence that the announcements are forged. When I have the chance to concentrate on that I’m planning to do a major post on it. It takes a lot of analysis - more than most casual observers would probably follow.
Ladysforest has done a lot of research on this, invested a lot towards getting answers, done an excellent job of putting information together, and has posted about it in various posts at her blog, http://www.myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com .
Out of curiosity, do you think there are very many others who recognize the discrepancies and problems with Obama’s refusal to show his birth certificate but who are holding onto the forged birth announcements as the reason to justify believing the official story?
Right now I’m working as hard as I can on getting state eligibility bills on the table, since that is where we’re actually going to see results. With the recent events raising questions in a lot of minds, if getting the info out about the forged birth announcements would settle the issue for a lot of people, this might be a good time to do that also if I can pull it together. But I don’t want to let up on the eligibility bills at all either.
Any thoughts? Anybody?
Great post. Thank you, I’m sending to others!
Great post. Thank you, I’m sending to others!
Great post. Thank you, I’m sending to others!
Butter. Excellent post. Looking forward to your future post on the newspaper announcements analyses
I've run into at least one person who hangs his belief in BO's "natural born" status and Constitutional eligibility on that "birth announcement" (as well as the *.jpg posted on the Internet).
Ladysforest, you have done awesome work on the microfilm analysis.
For those that think that splice microfilm is a task that could not be done within a library. Just look at the device used to do it. It is small, it uses no ‘consumables’. Cut, insert, weld the film back together using a relatively small device.
http://www.microfilm.com/php/display.php?ItemID=261
- No Special Installation
Portable...just plug in...2amps, 50-60 Hz. Multi-voltage input transformer (100-240V) included as standard on all models.