Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The faked Kenyan birth certificate

page: 11
87
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 04:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


No, the law is clear and this certificate (fake or real) complies with it.
Your post is trying to twist it to make it sound like the Birth was registered after the 6 months (2 years), which it wasn’t.

The law is clear; it states “a registrar cannot register a birth or death more than 6 months after that event”

This certificate clearly shows the registration date, which was 1 day after the birth. The date you are talking about is not the registration date, but the date that the Certified Copy was issued, there is a BIG difference.

Mikey




posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by nunya13
I'm don't give a hoot about the whole "birth gate" thing. But only because if he's not American born, there's plenty of people who know this and will make sure nothing comes of it. They will have something to hold over his head if he doesn't do what they want. But that's only IF he's not American born. He very well could be.

But what I find funny about the supposed Kenyan certificate is the "birthers" jumped all over it as proof, but when Obama showed his supposed real birth certificate, it was so obviously a fake according to them.

Both were provided online. Both had a seal. Neither had a signature (am I wrong about that?). Neither were "long form". So how can people tell the difference?

The seal and signature are on the back of the real birth certificate. According to the folks in Hawaii that's perfectly normal.



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 05:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by epete22
So let me get something straight here. You people are glad its a fake because it seemed ludicrous?

Let me ask you something, are the people that support Obama a marxist? Do you consider yourself a marxist?

If not please review to the other thread.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

If that is really your ideological value that you're a marxist then ok. I guess thats your right to support the complete take over of our nation but as the agent said I guess you will believe it when the boot kicks in your door.

PS. Liberals, don't think you're going to be free from what the hell the government is about to unleash. You will be in the healthcare line with the rest of us while the government drains your bank account or 'puts you down' for being unworthy for society.


My jaw dropped when I read this. Obama a marxist! Jesus christ how warped do you have to be to even contemplate that. Still I suppose it is entirely in keeping with an obsession with a few in the US that anything to the left of a ultra right is a marxist!



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 08:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 





The registrar cannot do so after 6 months of the birth. This individual who declared it was an registrar himself as shown on the fake document. Some birthers (before it was found a fake) claimed it was following a divorce settlement, problem is, there was no evidence provided that it was the result of a divorce. So basically what you had was an unauthenticated fake document that had the signiture of a registrar over two years following Obamas birth, but no solid evidence of it being connected to any divorce or other matter at hand. What you have left then is just a confirmation of Obamas birth, which should not have been more than 6 months following the actual date of his birth.


Well by your argument which is actually nothing but not understanding what is on the certificate and what it means...then the Australian certificate is fake too...as that is signed 1964 I believe, when the chap was supposedly born 1959...sigh.
Actually I am pretty sure the Australian one is fake but not for the reason you cite.



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 09:07 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonork
I don’t know if this is true but supposedly Obama has spent near 1 million dollars in legal fees keeping his Hawaii Birth Certificate from being shown.

What is he hiding?

I wouldn’t spend 1 dollar of my money. I’m proud that I was born in the USA.


Well duh, maybe I'm missing something. After all the cries of birthers and other anti-Obama groups to see his "long form" birth certificate, why would he pay almost a million dollars to KEEP it from being shown?

I assumed all this while that the birthers were arguing that he has no "long form" birth certificate to show.

Now he supposedly has one that he wants to hide.

He's wrong no matter what he does.

If he was born in Hawaii he's an American citizen, no matter who his parents were or where they were born. Period. Even if it says he was illegitimate or the son of Martians that wouldn't put his right to be president in question.

Anyway, I'm getting tired of the subject.

All this ruckus is being thrown to keep Americans from thinking about the real issues that confront us -- like universal health care.

Maybe the right has nothing substantial to add to that discussion so they have to stoop to character assasination instead?






[edit on 5-8-2009 by Sestias]

[edit on 5-8-2009 by Sestias]

[edit on 5-8-2009 by Sestias]



posted on Aug, 5 2009 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Sestias
 


That's the thing Sestias...

It's either

1. He doesn't have a Hawaii BC because he wasnt born there... or
2. He definitely has one and it contains something he's trying to hide


Which adds up to

They just don't like the man....

... and they are the type to believe that when they don't like someone subjectively that there MUST be an objective reason why that is so...



posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 05:24 PM
link   
From WND themselves


www.wnd.com...



posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


Well there ya have it y'all...

Even the WND calls fake!


It would have to be though, because there is no logical reason why Obamas father or mother would have ever been giving birth in Mombasa Zanzibar

I mean really, look how far Obama Sr's hometown, where he was born, raised, and schooled until he left for Hawaii is from where Mombasa is...

Over 400 miles away...




posted on Aug, 6 2009 @ 10:33 PM
link   
The Hoax tag was just applied to the other thread.


Seems like this particular evolution is over...




posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


Well there ya have it y'all...

Even the WND calls fake!


It would have to be though, because there is no logical reason why Obamas father or mother would have ever been giving birth in Mombasa Zanzibar

I mean really, look how far Obama Sr's hometown, where he was born, raised, and schooled until he left for Hawaii is from where Mombasa is...

Over 400 miles away...





WND calling it fake does not make it so. Unless you believe WND is as infallible as the Pope


Of course, you never considered the possibility that Stanley Ann Dunham and Obama Sr might have been visiting his relatives or friends in Mombasa when she gave birth?

All the arguments against this certificate being genuine are as weak as wet toilet tissue. They are examples of the one-dimensional thinking and shallow analysis so often displayed by those who let their disbelief get in the way of their willingness to consider all possibilities.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by micpsi
WND calling it fake does not make it so.


And I suppose the Kenyan officians they and other media outlets contacted are lying as well? Did you take a look at an actual short form birth certificate from Kenya? It shares nothing of the Australian state short form birth certificates.

In addition to it looking identical to a real persons BC who he put on his family website 3 years ago, a real person with a real location, in addition to Kenyan officials dismissing the short form BC and Mombasa officials faving not found Obamas name on their records, the mere fact the Kenyan short form has the republic seal on it, 6 months before the Kenyan government released them, that should be sufficient proof.

And no dont go on with me about how Kenyan gained independence in 63', they only became a republic in December 64 officially and only began to release the coat of arms from the republic 6 months following the BC.

Yes I know it says republic in the Kenyan constitution of 63', thats only because it was an ammendment added to it following December of 64'.

The original Kenyan constitution of 63'. It says nothing of the republic yet, even though it was under discussion:
nativeborncitizen.files.wordpress.com...

Its a fake. The signs are all there right in front of you, but for your own piece of mind you refuse to admit you were fooled.


Of course, you never considered the possibility that Stanley Ann Dunham and Obama Sr might have been visiting his relatives or friends in Mombasa when she gave birth?


And you base this purely out of thin air? But yes, lets play around with this theory alittle.

The young student from Hawaii, Mr Ann Dunham, managed to afford a plan ticket which cost her $500 in 1961, 8 months pregnant, to which she decided to fly 8000 miles to kenya only to have Obama there then rush quickly to fly back to announce it, right? Real logic there. Do you agree with Corsi as well??

If thats the logic you choose to live by its your choice.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 




Yes I know it says republic in the Kenyan constitution of 63', thats only because it was an ammendment added to it following December of 64'.

The original Kenyan constitution of 63'. It says nothing of the republic yet, even though it was under discussion:

Why do you never back up your assertions with evidence? Showing a front cover of a 'constitution' booklet dated 10th December 1963 is meaningless. Independence was granted on the 12th. What were the first words inside the cover of that 'constitution' booklet of the 10th do you actually know?

The constitution of Kenya apparently states that it came into force on 12th December with the opening words 'The republic of Kenya'.


www.constitutionnet.org...



THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF KENYA, 1963
(as Amended to 2008)
CHAPTER I
The Republic of Kenya
1. Declaration of Republic.
Kenya is a sovereign Republic.


If you think that wording was only added in 1964 then prove it.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by oneclickaway
Showing a front cover of a 'constitution' booklet dated 10th December 1963 is meaningless. Independence was granted on the 12th.


And Ill repeat this to you again because birthers tend to shut out information they dont like. Kenya became independent in 1963 but only officially became a republic in 1964, December. This is what you continously ignore in your arguments. You base the assumption that Kenya became a republic the minute it declare independence, thats a lie.

mediamatters.org...

You can dislike media matters but the link to the news article states clearly that Kenyan officially became a republic in December of 64'. Such fringe websites as the free republic, along with you fellas, continously go on about the term "republic" being used prior to 64' in various Kenyan articles. While that may be true the position of the government was not officially a republic until 64'. The Kenyan republic stamps along with other official government seals were not released until following the announcement in December of 64'.

hansard.millbanksystems.com...


HC Deb 14 December 1964 vol 704 c36 36
§ Mr. Speaker Bill to make provision as to the operation of the law in relation to Kenya as a Republic within the Commonwealth, presented by Mr. Bottomley; supported by the Attorney-General and Mr. Cledwyn Hughes; read the First time; to be read a Second time Tomorrow and to be printed. [Bill 49.]


You continously state that the term "republic" is found in the constitution. Ofcourse its found in the constitution of Kenyan from 63, its an ammendment added from the official declaration of the republic in december of 64'.

Now, if you would like to completely ignore history to suit your personal conclusions its all fine and dandy, you can join the rest of em. By all means if you feel this is untrue get me official documentation of a birth certificate prior to December 64' to back it up.

If you want to see a real Kenyan short form birth certificate, go to WND themselves:
www.wnd.com...


If you think that wording was only added in 1964 then prove it.


Why should I prove anything further? The official status of the government and the nation only became a republic in December of 64', its plain fact that you willfully over look. You are yet to prove that the nation gained its status as a republic automatically the minute it became independent. You are yet to provide official government documentation that shows the term republic prior to December of 1964.

www.britannica.com...

forming a provisional government, and Kenya celebrated its independence on December 12, 1963, with Kenyatta as prime minister. A year later Kenya became a one-party republic when the main opposition party went into voluntary liquidation. At the same time, Kenyatta became the first president of Kenya under a new constitutional amendment. In this office he headed a strong central government, and successive constitutional amendments increased his authority, giving him, for instance, the power to arrest political opponents and detain them without trial if he considered them dangerous to public order


Kenyatta was the first president for the republic of Kenya from December 12th 1964 on wards. Every biography will mention this fact.

Heres some more proof for you. The official "Kenyan Republic stamps" was not released until December 12th of 1964 upon the declaration of the republic at the same time. But somehow this "short form kenyan birth certificate" managed to get an official republic seal 10 months prior to the official declaration, it makes no sense sorry.

www.allworldstamps.com...

Your still sitting here making excuses for what is obviously a forged document. You got yourself fooled, your not helping yourself any further by extending the excuses.



[edit on 9-8-2009 by Southern Guardian]



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 




Your still sitting here making excuses for what is obviously a forged document. You got yourself fooled, your not helping yourself any further by extending the excuses.


Am I...why would you assume that? Actually I am refuting disinformation. You make statements that you fail to back up with any evidence. I ask again...do you have any evidence...direct evidence not based on a stamp that has never been an issue, that the constitution was amended in 64? And do you have any evidence that the Kenyan government site is also wrong in stating that it was a republic in 63?
This is no longer about that certificate...this is about wrong information being asserted as truth...never a good idea.



posted on Aug, 9 2009 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by oneclickaway
You make statements that you fail to back up with any evidence.


That is quite strange. You demand evidence yet provide none and the post you are replying to offers 5 erudite sources/links for all claims made.

What am I missing?



[edit on 9-8-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 

the only problem with your argument is that Obama's half sister has the same short form bc and she was born in Indonesia. that one's real also.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by watcher2
 


No Obamas half sister doesnt. The claim that his half sister had one was pulled out of one rightwing fringe article with no sources or evidence to back it up.

Why do you readily take what somebody else says as true??



posted on Nov, 11 2009 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by EYEOFEAGLE
 



The truth has been set free and it is only a matter of time until he is removed from office and charged with treason, that is if any of this makes it to court before someone in support of Obama buys off who ever to make this hard core evidence go away.


It saddens me that your immature response got so many stars


So little thought given to your argument that you are willing to look past the facts in order to achieve what you believe to be truth.

The facts are laid out in this thread. And, in an unprecedented move (by standards of those like yourself, and those who believe int he same things you do) - the OP has given us facts to back up his claims.

Cold hard core facts too. Not raw emotion that stems from hatred.



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by malcr

The seal and signature are on the back of the real birth certificate. According to the folks in Hawaii that's perfectly normal.



Actually, the seal is on the front, and the signature is on the back (its an embossed seal). That's where they are on my copy of my Hawaii Certificate of Live Birth





new topics

top topics



 
87
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join