Personally, I don’t go in for these sorts of labels, in lieu of evidence and debate. They obscure the issue. I once read an article on the end times and all there were were “pretribbers” and “posttribbers”, whoever they were, slagging each other off. I’d gone there to try to get some raw data.
My position is that there is something very wrong with both the man and the way he is acting. Obviously I don’t know and couldn’t know if the certificate is tampered with or not although this comment is interesting:
1. Check the dates on the bottom, Aug-8 and 1961 are from two different typewriters, and where is the official stamp? Every birth certificate has the state’s official raised seal!
Now, I’d like to offer a second:
2. If you look at the mother’s signature, it fits completely within the space allocated. If you look at the doctor’s and the registrar’s, they go over the line. When you sign in a box, does it ever go outside the box? The mother’s fits within. The end bracket around Stanley stops at the line.
Just thought I’d mention it.
Barking Spider says look at the copy [zoomed] below right. He comments:
There are all sorts of things wrong with it! Did you also notice that the capital “R”s are missing from words like “BA(R)ACK” when the overlaid element has been moved? It’s on the document underneath and you can still see it there in the “Kapiolani” of Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital – it’s also a different colour to the overlaid lettering. Some of the capital “K”s in words like “Kansas” are also on the document underneath – they display an imperfection from the original typewriter where the letter doesn’t print completely, (the top part is very faint/not there), and this is totally unlike the “K” in “BA(R)ACK” which is on the overlay and printed in full. The “S” from “(S)TANLEY” is also on the bottom layer – the whole thing is so badly forged it wouldn’t fool anyone!
I can’t add much more. Why were two parts overlaid, one on top of the other? Was one damaged and they had to fill in the missing parts and that though innocent, it would look bad? If so, how come people have been able so easily to spot all these errors?
Were the errors deliberately included to start another wild goose chase before the elections? Was it bloodymindedness on the part of Obama’s minders?
Or is there something wrong?