[Girlene]

We are left with ONLY TWO POSSIBILITIES:
1) Barack Obama’s birth records show him being born in Hawaii.

2) There has been a MASSIVE CONSPIRACY that includes explicit public forgeries and lies by the Obama campaign, multiple journalists, and the State of Hawaii records office, including the above Ms Fukino.

It’s one or the other, no in between.

I disagree. It does not have to be a MASSIVE CONSPRIACY. It can easily be a fraud perpretated at the time the Certificate of Live Birth was filed with Vital Statistics by whomever filled out the paperwork.

There is quite a bit of reason (IMO, of course) to disbelieve the records since the address listed in both two alleged birth announcements are likely false.

Dr. Fukino is not affirming that any of the information is accurate on the BC that she viewed. She is merely affirming that the information that is on it says he was born in Hawaii. Assuming the announcements shown on the internet are truly from 1961 publications, then the original BC likely had fraudulent information listed. If one piece (the address) of the information is fraudulent, how many more pieces of that original BC are?

[WOSG]

“1) Barack Obama’s birth records show him being born in Hawaii.

2) There has been a MASSIVE CONSPIRACY that includes explicit public forgeries and lies by the Obama campaign, multiple journalists, and the State of Hawaii records office, including the above Ms Fukino.

It’s one or the other, no in between.”

“I disagree. It does not have to be a MASSIVE CONSPRIACY. It can easily be a fraud perpretated at the time the Certificate of Live Birth was filed with Vital Statistics by whomever filled out the paperwork.”

IF SO, THAT TAKES US TO #1:
- “Barack Obama’s birth records show him being born in Hawaii.”

So my point still stands.

“Dr. Fukino is not affirming that any of the information is accurate on the BC that she viewed. She is merely affirming that the information that is on it says he was born in Hawaii.”
- AGAIN, THAT TAKES US BACK TO #1. Other information on the BC is not relevent to the statement in #1.