| Submit your comments on this article |
| Down Under |
| Aussie an unwitting part of Obama plot |
| 2009-08-06 |
| AN Australian man who unwittingly found himself embroiled in a conspiracy to oust US President Barack Obama has vowed to be more careful about what he posts on the internet. Adelaide public servant David Bomford was plucked from obscurity when US political campaigners released a copy of a birth certificate at the weekend that supposedly showed Mr Obama was born in Kenya. The campaigners, known as "birthers,'' point out that if Mr Obama was born in Africa, rather than Hawaii as US records show, he would not be eligible to be president, since only natural-born US citizens can hold the top office. However, the document they released turned out to be a fake based on a copy of Mr Bomford's birth certificate that he had posted on a friend's genealogy website. Bomford said it was hard to believe "a grey-haired old guy sitting in a corner in quiet old Adelaide'' had been swept up in a push to unseat the most powerful man in the world. "It is interesting someone from here being involved in a conspiracy - that is so funny,'' he told the ABC. Mr Bomford said he knew nothing about the "birthers" claims. He said the fake Kenyan birth certificate contained his personal details and was clearly based on his own South Australian document. "It's definitely a copy of my certificate. It's so laughable it's ridiculous,'' he said. Mr Bomford said he only expected relatives researching their family tree would be interested in the document when it was posted on the internet. "I was very, very surprised that anyone would even find it on the net,'' he said. "I'll be certainly contacting my friend who runs that web and asking him to remove it.'' |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #3 WND has posted a sample 1961 Kenyan birth certificate. The format is entirely different, so the "Kenyan" doc is a forgery, and it appears Taitz is hooked. |
| Posted by: KBK 2009-08-06 13:01 |
| #2 Well, like I said, this got more interesting/amusing. Here's the "Aussie" doc, now taken down. Here's the "Kenyan" doc. Which is the forgery? Both? If both, which came first? It's not credible that they both are genuine. If the Aussie one is a forgery, how did it get on the geneology website? (The copy I posted was taken directly from http://www.bomford.net/worcestershire/images/DavidJeffreyBomfordBirthCertDoc65.jpg.) A fascinating possibility is that the Aussie doc is genuine and the "Kenyan" doc was forged with deliberate references to the Aussie doc. The "Kenyan" doc was then fenced to gullible people, and when the moment was right, the Aussie doc was exposed, discrediting the gullible. It seems a little early to expose it, though. Has anyone pointed out that Kenyan docs of that period don't resemble the doc in question? |
| Posted by: KBK 2009-08-06 11:19 |
| #1 It's only a "plot" if they expected somebody to actually believe the obvious fake. Otherwise, it's a "joke"... |
| Posted by: mojo 2009-08-06 11:16 |
