Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: TigersEye

Could the explanation for the out-of-order sequence with Obama’s birth and the twins be the result of Obama’s birth information given to the officials later than the twins information? For example, let’s say Obama is indeed born on 8/4/61 OUTSIDE OF THE US. Then on 8/5/61 the Nordyke twins are born in Hawaii and their information is immediately given to the officials for BC documentation. Then, the next day or so, either Obama’s mama or his grandparents provide information on BO’s birth to officials, claiming he was born in Hawaii on 8/4/61. Thus, the date is recorded as 8/4/61 and he’s given the next available BC number, which is later than the twins since their info has already been entered. Does that make sense? Is that how it would work if the officials were notified of a birth days after it happened?


54 posted on 02/28/2010 11:59:22 AM PST by GLDNGUN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]


To: GLDNGUN
That is a possibility. This is also a possible reason too. There is, as yet, no official or otherwise validated reason. As with most questions that have been raised it is still in the realm of speculation.
58 posted on 02/28/2010 2:05:12 PM PST by TigersEye (It's the Marxism, stupid! ... And they call themselves Progressives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]

To: GLDNGUN

The date we have to be concerned with isn’t the date of birth. The dates that are giving the problems are the ones for “Date filed”. That’s the day the state registrar gave the numbers in ascending order.

Obama’s supposedly was given a number 3 days before the Nordykes’ were, and yet he was given a later number.


109 posted on 03/03/2010 6:50:38 PM PST by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson