Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Babagounj" data-source="post: 721536" data-attributes="member: 12952">A newspaper birth announcement from local Honolulu newspapers was&nbsp; simply a confirmation that the Honolulu health department &quot;registered&quot; a&nbsp; birth as occurring there based on what someone told them.Given&nbsp; Hawaii&#039;s very lax birth registration laws in 1961, without independent&nbsp; contemporaneous evidence and non-family member witnesses, the&nbsp; registration of a birth as having occurred in Hawaii does not 100% prove&nbsp; the birth actually occurred there.<a href="http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/04/newspaper-birth-announcement-ads-in.html" target="_blank">The&nbsp; placement of the identical birth announcements in the Star-Bulletin and&nbsp; Honolulu Advertiser does not prove that Obama was born in Hawaii</a>.The only thing the ads do is confirm that someone at the time told the&nbsp; newspapers that Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama had a son, who was born on&nbsp; August 4, 1961.Simply telling a third party that someone was born in a&nbsp; certain place and at a certain time is not conclusive evidence that the&nbsp; birth in fact occurred there at that time.Corroborating evidence is&nbsp; needed to support such a statement.For in-hospital births such as is&nbsp; alleged for Obama, such evidence would be naming the hospital in which&nbsp; the child was born and the doctor who delivered the child.The birth ads&nbsp; that appear in the two newspaper are identical in content, with the&nbsp; same format and the same chronological order.The ads do not contain the&nbsp; name of the baby, for it does not give the name of the &quot;son.&quot;The ads&nbsp; were not placed by the family but rather were generated by the Hawaii&nbsp; Health Department which would explain the format of the ads and why the&nbsp; same exact information appears in two separate newspapers.Finally,&nbsp; common sense tells us that if someone defrauded the Hawaii Health&nbsp; Department regarding whether Obama was born in Hawaii, the ads would be&nbsp; based on fraudulent information and would prove absolutely nothing.The&nbsp; August 13, 1961 ad in the Honolulu Sunday Advertiser announcing the&nbsp; Obama birth along with the August 16, 1961 ad in the Honolulu Advertiser&nbsp; announcing the Nordyke twins birth.Note the heading of both of the ads says &quot;Health Bureau Statistics&quot;&nbsp; which confirms that the information was provided to the newspaper by the&nbsp; Hawaii Health Department and not any family member;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Babagounj, post: 721536, member: 12952"] A newspaper birth announcement from local Honolulu newspapers was simply a confirmation that the Honolulu health department "registered" a birth as occurring there based on what someone told them. Given Hawaii's very lax birth registration laws in 1961, without independent contemporaneous evidence and non-family member witnesses, the registration of a birth as having occurred in Hawaii does not 100% prove the birth actually occurred there. [URL='http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/04/newspaper-birth-announcement-ads-in.html']The placement of the identical birth announcements in the Star-Bulletin and Honolulu Advertiser does not prove that Obama was born in Hawaii[/URL]. The only thing the ads do is confirm that someone at the time told the newspapers that Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama had a son, who was born on August 4, 1961. Simply telling a third party that someone was born in a certain place and at a certain time is not conclusive evidence that the birth in fact occurred there at that time. Corroborating evidence is needed to support such a statement. For in-hospital births such as is alleged for Obama, such evidence would be naming the hospital in which the child was born and the doctor who delivered the child. The birth ads that appear in the two newspaper are identical in content, with the same format and the same chronological order. The ads do not contain the name of the baby, for it does not give the name of the "son." The ads were not placed by the family but rather were generated by the Hawaii Health Department which would explain the format of the ads and why the same exact information appears in two separate newspapers. Finally, common sense tells us that if someone defrauded the Hawaii Health Department regarding whether Obama was born in Hawaii, the ads would be based on fraudulent information and would prove absolutely nothing. The August 13, 1961 ad in the Honolulu Sunday Advertiser announcing the Obama birth along with the August 16, 1961 ad in the Honolulu Advertiser announcing the Nordyke twins birth. Note the heading of both of the ads says "Health Bureau Statistics" which confirms that the information was provided to the newspaper by the Hawaii Health Department and not any family member; [/QUOTE]

Verification