Replies

It didn’t take a time machine for somebody at the Honolulu Advertiser office to create an Advertiser forgery and give a copy to the librarian at the Hawaii State Library (which she then faithfully kept in her drawer, ready to send out to anybody who asked for it, including Lori Starfelt and “infidel granny”).

Apparently it didn’t bother her that it was a forgery, that she was lying about where she got it, OR that the forgery she was given was pristine even though she accurately told others that the HSL microfilms are in such bad shape they are nearly unreadable.

Nor did it take a time machine for him/her to create a forgery for the Star-Bulletin and go on the Prius chat forum, claiming that he/she herself had made the copies from the HSL. He/she had learned from the previous mistakes, though, that the places where the forgery was C&P’ed needed to be covered up better, so he/she added some “scratch lines”.

It was just a little “oops” that the HSL’s Star-Bulletin microfilms as of Feb 2010 didn’t have any of those scratch lines. In fact, the Star-Bulletin microfilms at the HSL are pristine. Funny how prominent scratches just disappear like that.

And then, once that person had forged paper copies for both the Advertiser and the Star-Bulletin, it didn’t take a time travel machine to give copies of both to Michael Rivero of whatreallyhappened.com. He/she did think to remove one of the C&P lines from the left-hand margin but FORGOT to re-scan the document. The borders and paper edge waviness on the scans sent to Rivero are an exact match with the borders and paper edge waviness of the documents that supposedly surfaced from 3 other “independent” sources: from the HSL librarian, from “Koa” at Texas Darlin’ Blog, and from the poster at the Prius Chat Forum . Funny that all those copies are identical, huh?

So there was no time travel involved. Just motive and opportunity. Unfortunately for them, the evidence paints a pretty clear picture of what was done and how.

All the paper copies that were initially shown on the internet came from one person who had access to the archived microfilms for both the Star-Bulletin and Honolulu Advertiser, which were kept at the Advertiser office - both the pristine master copies, and scratched-up copies (since those microfilms at least until 2006 were available to be viewed by the public).

The first written evidence that the microfilms at the Advertiser office were withheld from the public was Starfelt’s statement that she asked to get a copy from the Advertiser office and was told that the microfilms were not available to the public. So we know that sometime between 2006 and 2008 when the Obama “announcements” surfaced, the Advertiser decided to restrict public access to their microfilms. Wonder when that happened and why...

So keep mocking, Lurking Libertarian. The facts are on my side.