NEW YORK – The Kenyan birth document released by California attorney Orly Taitz is probably not authentic, according to WND’s investigative operatives in Africa, though officials in Nairobi do not rule out the possibility President Obama may indeed have been born in their country.

WND obtained several samples of Kenyan birth certificates in use around Aug. 4, 1961, the date of Obama’s birth, showing differences from the Taitz document.

WND reported Sunday on the document Taitz has been trying to authenticate.

She filed a motion in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California requesting the purported evidence of Obama’s birth – both the alleged birth certificate and foreign records not yet obtained – be preserved from destruction. She also asked for permission to legally request documents from Kenya and is seeking a subpoena for a deposition from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

“I filed the motion with the court asking for expedited discovery, which would allow me to start subpoenas and depositions even before Obama and the government responds,” Taitz told WND then. “I am asking the judge to give me the power to subpoena the documents from the Kenyan embassy and to require a deposition from Hillary Clinton so they will be forced to authenticate [the birth certificate].”

The document she revealed:

This document purports to be a Kenyan certification of birth for Barack Obama, allegedly born in Mombasa, Kenya, in 1961

But an authentic 1961-era Kenyan birth certificate obtained by WND shows distinct differences.

The verified 1961-era Kenyan birth certificate is described at the top
as a “Government of Kenya” document. It includes: Where Born; Name or names; Sex; Father’s occupation and rank; Father’s nationality; Name and maiden name for mother; Mother’s Occupation; Mother’s nationality; Signature, description and residence of information; Date of birth; Date of registration; Baptismal name if added or altered after registration of birth; Reference to register.

Want to turn up the pressure to learn the facts? Get your signs and postcards asking for the president’s birth certificate documentation here.

Kenyan government officials interviewed by WND sources in Kenya have pointed out a key difference in the Taitz document. In 1961, Mombasa was a part of Zanzibar, not the Coast Province of Kenya. The area was later ceded to Kenya.

Moreover, the African nation was the Dominion of Kenya until December 1964, after declaring independence in 1961. Kenya was not officially the Republic of Kenya until some 10 months after the Feb. 17, 1964, date on which the Taitz document purportedly was certified.

The Taitz document has sparked a firestorm of controversy over its authenticity.

According to a posting in the Washington Independent, a “source” said the document was nothing more than an alteration of a “certified copy of registration of birth” from an Australian “Bomford” document that also had been posted on the Internet.

“There are striking similarities between this document and the one Orly Taitz is passing off as a ‘Kenyan birth certificate’ for Barack Obama,” the report said. “The design is identical, down to the seal at the top and the classifications (‘Christian name,’ etc) used for identifying the baby.

“The ‘registrar’ on the Bomford document is G.F. Lavender. On the Taitz document, it’s E.F. Lavender,” the critics continued. “The ‘district registrar’ on the Bomford document is J.H. Miller. On the Taitz document, it’s M.H. Miller.”

“What’s more likely – that two Kenyan bureaucrats shared last names with two Australian bureaucrats, and that the numbers on both certificates were identical? Or that someone used this document, available online for anyone who wanted to look, to forge the Obama ‘certificate?'” the Independent report asked.

The Independent critique was among hundreds of challenges to the document raised as soon as it appeared.

But on Taitz’ website, a link provided replies to the point-by-point criticisms.

“Definitely there [are] grounds for more investigation and the courts need to act on this matter,” the analyst wrote.

Taitz told WND a day earlier she had already begun seeking out experts who could determine its validity.

See the movie Obama does not want you to see: Own the DVD that probes
this unprecedented presidential eligibility mystery!

Among the criticisms and the responses linked on the Taitz site:

  • Document is dated Feb. 14, 1964 and includes “Republic of Kenya,” even though that designation wasn’t official until months later. Response: It would be common for a state after recently declaring it’s independence to act independently rather than continue under the old rule.

  • The number 44-O-47 is coincidental as President Obama is the 44th president, and was 47 years old. Response: The number is 44,047, with a “zero,” not an “O.”
  • The name E.F. (Earth Friendly) Lavender is a soap. Response: Also the name of a plant. Lavender also is a SURNAME!
  • Coast General Hospital actually is Coast Provincial General Hospital. Response: People abbreviate. It’s not proof of anything.
  • Obama’s father, born in 1936, would have been 24 or 25, not 26. Response: Obama Sr.’s actual birthdate isn’t known.
  • Would a nation with a large number of Muslims say “Christian” name? Response: Wikipedia reports, “The term Christian name is often used as a general synonym for given name.”
  • Obama’s father’s village would be nearer Nairobi, not Mombasa. Response: Mombasa would have better facilities than Nairobi where Obama Sr. probably had few ties.

One critic commented, “Some may be asking what’s the difference … between his Hawaiian short form birth certificate and this new ‘smoking’ Kenyan short form?”

Taitz told WND she’s been discussing the document with several individuals who apparently “are willing to investigate.” She’s also awaiting word from the federal court in California on how her requests to preserve the evidence and verify its accuracy will be handled.

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama’s status as a “natural born citizen.” The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama’s American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama’s citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Complicating the situation is Obama’s decision to spend sums estimated in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to avoid releasing a state birth certificate that would put to rest all of the questions.

WND has reported that among the documentation not yet available for Obama includes kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, files from his years as an Illinois state senator, Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records and adoption records.


Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.