[jamese777]

The birth announcements are irrelevant.

They would never be accepted in any court as evidence of anything.

---

Yes they would.
The birth announcements constitute corroborating evidence of the parents’ home address in Honolulu and thus in the United States that is listed on the original birth vital records. Since they appeared a week after Obama’s birth date, they also help to corroborate when he was born as well as where he was born.
An Obama defense attorney or a US Justice Department Attorney representing Obama would be a fool not to introduce into evidence those August 13 and 14th, 1961 birth announcements.

[Beckwith]

Your entire post is pure speculation — pure bullsh!t.

You haven’t a clue what is in Obama’s “original birth vital records.”

You guys are unbelievable.

[frog in a pot]

“The birth announcements constitute corroborating evidence of the parents’ home address in Honolulu and thus in the United States that is listed on the original birth vital records. Since they appeared a week after Obama’s birth date, they also help to corroborate when he was born as well as where he was born.”

Nonsense, the announcement would only corroborate other evidence relevant to the issue of whether a M/M Obama had some connection with the address provided in the announcement.

The issue, of course, is the place of birth of BHO Jr., not where his parents may or may not have resided at a particular time. The announcement has no corroborative value because there is no publicly available credible evidence to corroborate. The COLB in its purest, unaltered form would not constitute such credible evidence per the State of Hawaii.

You get the last word in our discussion.

[butterdezillion]

What if those announcements didn’t come from the state registrar at all? What if they came from the person?

And actually the place a person resides is irrelevant to where they were born. A person could reside in Hawaii and still give birth anywhere in the world.