Tuesday, August 4, 2009

On Hussein O.'s supposed Kenyan birth certificate

I was out of town (and way out of the loop) when this story broke, and I'm just now beginning to learn about it. I may or may not have more to say about it later. Chances are that I will have more to say about it. But anyway, I hope my readers will express their opinions on the subject under this post. Thanks.

20 comments:

chiu_chunling said...

It seems that Taitz is confident that this document can withstand scrutiny, and she seems to have be researching it for at least a week (vetting the information as well as submitting the document itself to an expert) before releasing it. The provenance seems to be related to Stanley's filing for a divorce from Obama Sr. which required her to produce a birth certificate for her child (while the COLB was probably already filed then, it wasn't acceptable for most purposes).

The complete provenance can't be known as long as the last custodian refuses to go public. I have to say that the fear that this person's life might be in danger is not unreasonable, and as long as the document can't be positively proven to be a fake, establishing the provenance is not really necessary. The key issue is to force Obama to prove his eligibility (as he ought to have done from the beginning).

My guess is that the actual paper and ink is sufficiently old (at least a decade) that it cannot have been created after Obama became a candidate, which would go a long way towards discrediting most of the current criticisms of the document. One can't really tell more from this resolution of image (well, some might say it's a stretch for me to claim to be able to tell even that much, but it is just a guess).

I am absolutely not ruling out the possibility that Stanley decided to establish fake documentation for her son. It's very possible that he has an Indonesian, Canadian, and maybe a few other Birth Certificates floating around. Stanley seems like that kind of person, from what is contained even in the official history. Barack seems to have inherited at least a little of that himself. Who knows but what it's something he had made himself for some reason, like getting into school as a foreign student.

But at any rate, right now it's more persuasive than the COLB posted online. Which may not be saying much.

The_Editrix said...

Since the infamous "Hitler diaries" I came to see that people will believe ANYTHING they WANT to believe. Obama is as much hailed as rejected, so, as somebody who never has been fooled by the "Hitler diaries", I don't put much faith in EITHER version YET. I find it entirely probable that the arrogance of this man is of such a preposterous magnitude, that he maybe really HAS a valid (and factual) American birth certificate and is sneering now at the helpless mouthing of all the many claimants of the opposite who, so it seems, can't do A THING.

I HOPE that the Kenyan birth certificate can be proven valid and that he is tarred and featherd and driven out of town, but my hopes aren't worth a dime. Or a Eurocent, for that.

chiu_chunling said...

I doubt this can be proved valid even if the last custodian comes forth. The certificate uses a standard British Colonial form with only minor modifications to reflect the particular country and locality. There have to be millions of those forms floating around, so even if this is definitively demonstrated to be such a form, it doesn't prove much.

The filled in text was apparently produced by a manual typewriter using an ink ribbon (you can see how the smaller letters and punctuation have higher density, as well as the minor spacing variations typical of manual operation, and what looks like a restrike or two), but those implements still exist and it's very difficult to tell exactly how long ink has actually been on a page except where a subsequent overlying feature (like a stain or fold) can be dated with confidence.

Because this certificate lacks any anti-alteration measures for the relevant information, the possibility exists that a valid form was taken, those fields carefully cleaned with modern solvents, then new type entered and carefully aged. I notice that none of the type is broken by any really bad creases, and that side of the certificate appears free of ingrained stains (nothing suspicious about that, it's normal to protect the information bearing section of a vital document, after all). This means it wouldn't require extraordinary skill, techniques alone would suffice.

The relaxation of the paper around the embossed seal indicates that the seal was applied years ago rather than recently, but that doesn't tell us much other than that it was issued as a certificate...it doesn't provide any real confidence that it wasn't subsequently altered.

One would have to examine the official birth register from which the record was originally copied. But there is no real certainty that it still exists, given the transitional state of the government at that period. The British may or may not have copies, or even the originals. And whoever does have them if they do still exist, it's already been demonstrated that making those records available is not high on their list of priorities.

Looking at this from a different angle, the birth certificate controversy was apparently a Clinton scheme that got loose in the wild. Barack really doesn't have a valid Hawaii birth certificate, and Clinton has been using that against him for some time. But the manipulations to prove that Clinton could use that stirred the pot enough that Clinton no longer has control over the information.

This document is probably not a result of anything Clinton did, so it probably isn't a fraud in the ordinary sense, even if it is not an accurate copy of the original birth register record.

Terry Morris said...

Chiu,

If you'll take the time to make a simple phone call to the foreign embassy, and/or government of your choice, I'm sure the person you speak with (as long as you point out that you're a concerned American) will freely give you all of the information they have available concerning the current occupant of the White House, and his connections to their respective countries, good, bad, or indifferent, and damn the consequences. ;-)

The_Editrix said...

This is interesting, as is the video that goes with it:

"This might really interest you. As your video mentioned there are two (2) birth documents.

1The medical Birth Certificate filled out at hospital signed by doctor attesting to birth of infant, infant weight etc.
2. The legal document the Certificate of Live birth which is filled out at a Govt office. This document is a short form for legal purposes based off the medical record of the Birth Certificate.

So the question is...what was this secretary looking at when she typed out Obamas Certificateof Live Birth form in that Hawaii Govt office 47 years ago?? One clue is in the odd detail of the word "African" typed in to the space for "Race of Father".If that secretary was looking at a AMERICAN style Birth Certificate from the hospital the "Race of Father" information would in 1961 have said "Negro" not "African". After all "African" isnt a race.The State of Hawaii Govt secretary would have simply typed in "Negro" in the race slot. But she didnt. Why? Because she was looking at a Birth Certificate FROM KENYA. The poor Secretary didnt know what to do with that. She had to fill in the "Race of Father" blank but she didnt know if "Negro" was appropriate. After all Negro IS NOT A KENYAN TERM..KENYANS DO NOT USE THE WORD "NEGRO" its an AMERICAN usage. In fact sample Kenyan birth certificates I have looked at have no slot for "Race" at all. They dont think in those terms So the poor secretary simply typed in "African" and was done with it."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QdyLOUHz-A

So many possibilities, so little proof!

The_Editrix said...

Terry: Are you serious?

chiu_chunling said...

I think that the sample Obama-bot we had here for a while kept falling back on that argument. Because obviously the folks manning the phones at an embassy are trained to both access and reveal that kind of information about their citizens.

I gotta get me a low level job at an embassy.

The_Editrix said...

"I gotta get me a low level job at an embassy."

Be careful what you wish for, Chiu! My wallet was once stolen in London. All money, credit cards, proof of identity, gone. After a night in the car in the carpark of a big service station I drove to the city center and parked in a multi-storey car park relatively close to the German embassy because I didn't have the money for a tube-ticket left. I have forgotten what it cost in the end, but I could have bought my own multi-story car park somewhere in the German backwaters for it. The experience at the German embassy was something else. I had to go to the passport- and visa department first for a provisional passport to get me out of that effing country. Hell's antechamber describes it aptly. For the rest, I was sent to the embassy proper where things were as genteel as one would expect and I was helped quickly and effectively.

So again: Be very careful what you wish for. You might end up behind the counter window in the visa department of an embassy to deal all day long with people who say they've been robbed to get some drug money. Not quite the cushy job one expects within the Foreign Service.

Terry Morris said...

Nora,

Here is the url (I couldn't get it to embed) to the entry Chiu is referring to:

http://dwebsters.blogspot.com/2009/06/day-in-life-of-dyed-in-wool-true.html

Read the initial entry and you'll get a better picture of what I was alluding to earlier.

Call Me Mom said...

I was checking up on the liberals recently by skimming the headlines of truthout. (My mother in-law signed me up for their e-newsletter.) I saw the article at the link above about the fact that someone had the temerity to raise the birth certificate issue at a White House press conference.

After ridiculing the "birthers" and their ilk, the author compliments the WH Press Secretary on his non handling of the question. His answer, according to the article, was: "I almost hate to indulge in such an august setting as the White House briefing room," he said, "discussing the made-up fictional nonsense of whether the president was born in this country."

Now what I found interesting was the author's explanation for why Mr. Obama hasn't yet released the documents, to refute the claims of those paranoid fundamentalists.
"Fact, is, White House wise guys seem to think there is political profit to be reaped in encouraging - or at least putting the spotlight on - the anti-everything fundamentalists and public paranoids who are emerging at a time when the legitimate conservative movement and the Republican Party with it are weak.

When the water in the river is low, the rocks in the riverbed lie exposed. So it is with the party and the movement of that gave us Bill Buckley and Ronald Reagan and other worthies of the right. White House officials know that, and don't mind if the wild and utterly unsubstantiated speculation about Obama's provenance overwhelms the grassroots GOP senators and House members when they return home for the August recess.
"

They then go on to say that this is just a way of outing the birthers in Congress.

How do they explain the lack of a birth certificate?" There are just enough loose bureaucratic threads in the Obama nativity scene to give the Birthers something to talk about. Even though he possesses (and independent witnesses have seen) a valid birth certificate from the state of Hawaii (issued in 2007), the original document is either lost or unavailable, perhaps due to the conversion of such records to electronic form in 2001. Whatever the reason, it doesn't matter legally, since the existing document is valid and several local officials in Hawaii have vouched for its sufficiency."

So, even though the "birthers" are paranoid and the issue is "made-up fictional nonsense", the author cannot explain the lack of a birth certificate. I speculate that for the author to even include that statement about it being lost or whatever is an indication that the author is having doubts. Good.

And this quote from the article is just for you Mr. Morris: " The people at the heart of the Birther movement are part of a deep disruptive tradition in American politics"
Imagine that!

I don't often read truthout, beyond skimming the headlines to see what spin they're putting on current events, but this one caught my eye, so I thought I'd share.

Terry Morris said...

Ha, ha. Thank you, Mom, for sharing.

Being 'disruptive' is bad enough, but being a part of a "deep disruptive tradition"? Whoa!, I need to rethink my postion on Hussein's unquestionable illegitimacy, eh? Else, what?, I go to jail without passing "go"? Hmm. I'll take my chances.

Call Me Mom said...

No, no, no Terry,
You'll go to jail after being reported to the White House's snitch line for daring to disagree with the anointed one on:

government assisted suicide(euthanasia counseling for the elderly and handicapped),

murder(abortion),

unprecedented and unconstitutional governmental intrusion into the individual sphere of government(marriage and family counseling along with parenting lessons administered after the government evaluator has come into your home to determine if you're doing things "right"-required after giving birth) and

national id cards (healthcare cards that give the government access to our finances with no legal recourse if a mistake is made),

um, I meant healthcare.
I really should've included the section and subsections of the healthcare bill that outlines these things lest I be turned in,myself, for "spreading disinformation".

But that's off-topic-my apologies.

Terry Morris said...

Well, you know, as I've said before -- the prospect for secession looms ever nearer.

I may well be one of the 'early' casualties, but my state (where my entire devotion now lies) will eventually come to see the light. In this I'm supremely confident. And, well, you know ... there will be martyrs along the way. If I'm ultimately one of them, then I count my blessings. ...

Terry Morris said...

By the way, I'm one of the "real people with real souls" that Hussein O. & Co. apparently doesn't understand. You know, given his surrounding himself with those otherwise disposed for so many years now.

In spite of what some speculate, I do not think he can, in any appreciable way, understand real folks, with real families, with real interests, with real problems, and etc.

I've said all along that he's entered a realm that he has no understanding of. I stick by that assertion...

The_Editrix said...

Thanks Terry! I had missed the Obamabot thing completely. There are some amazing revelations.

How will it all end? Does nobody see how important that issue is?

chiu_chunling said...

People know exactly how important this is. That's why they try to avoid it.

If America were still an operating republic, the ineligibility of Obama would be shocking but have very little real importance other than to Obama himself. A statement of incapacity would be prepared and signed within a few hours, Obama would go on the lecture circuit, and Biden would be President. Simple as that.

But, America is no longer a republic. If Biden gets into office and doesn't immediately repudiate everything Obama has done...well, he's not going to do that. It is, in point of fact, far to late to even try.

Right now, America is only nominally a nation, let alone a republic. Once Americans fought to preserve their nation. Now they pretend their nation isn't in peril because they'd rather not fight.

Call Me Mom said...

"Now they pretend their nation isn't in peril because they'd rather not fight."

I don't think so. The folks I saw at our local town hall meeting looked ready to fight. Interesting times at the very least.

Terry Morris said...

I imagine that one reason people try to avoid the issue is because it is kind of complicated -- was Stanley Ann able to confer citizenship on Hussein O. at birth, did she move to Kenya before or after giving birth, does dual citizenship at birth negate natural born citizen status, was Hussein O. legally adopted by Lolo Soetoro, what is the source of the birth announcements in Hawaii newspapers at the time, the inadequacies of Hawaiian law governing issuance of birth records during the early '60s, and etc. People simply aren't used to exercising their brains like that. So they choose simply to ignore it.

Vince said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
chiu_chunling said...

Yes, well...I was making a bit of an overgeneralization by saying "people" (and "Americans"). I meant that the ranking political and media figures of America know and fear what could happen if "birthers" have their day in court. That these "cultural elites" have become so divorced from the general American people is a large part of the problem...but not all of it.

There's also the little problem of the...'importation of such persons as the State has seen fit to permit.' Read what you may into that, it's a problem.