It raised quite a stir when Barack Obama’s half-brother, Malik Obama, tweeted on Friday an image purporting to be the former president’s birth certificate – and supposedly revealing a Kenyan birth.
However, as WND demonstrated back in 2009, the alleged Kenyan birth certificate Malik Obama tweeted is the same fraudulent document that had been offered for sale by eBay seller Lucas Smith and which the seller had displayed on YouTube.
But, as WND’s investigation revealed at the time, it is not a valid document.
Screen shot of whole document from Lucas Smith’s video
As WND reported in 2009, administrators at Coast Provincial Hospital in Mombasa, the hospital named as President Obama’s supposed birth hospital in the document, refused to authenticate the record when contacted by WND sources in Kenya.
The document displayed the following defects:
- Kenyan news sources have called into question the use of “Coast Province” or “Coast Provincial” as a correct reference to the official name of the Mombasa general public hospital in 1961, citing Professor Dan Branch of the University of Warwick who noted that the term “Coast Province” was not used in the early 1960s when Kenyan provinces were typically referred to as “regions.”
- Until 1964, Kenya was the Dominion of Kenya, not the Republic of Kenya, and Mombasa was part of Zanzibar until Dec. 12, 1963, not a coastal province of Kenya.
- Dr. James O.W. Ang’awa, the physician who was named in the document as the attending physician at Obama’s birth, was a physician who worked in Kenya during the 1960s; however, he worked at Kenyatta National Hospital in Nairobi. Dr. James O.W. Ang’awa never worked at any hospital in Mombasa.
- The dates on the document are formatted in U.S. style, listing in order the month, day and year; this is not the British format which typically follows the order of day, month and year.
- The footprint on the document appears nearly perfect in definition; real infant footprints typically show signs of smudging because of foot movement.
- The footprint on the document is densely black, revealing few natural lines on the sole of the foot; footprints used for document identification are typically inked much lighter to allow for natural lines to be clearly apparent.
- Footprints taken for document identification are typically taken for both feet, just as fingerprints taken for identification are typically taken for both hands.
- The document does not look remotely like the 1961-era birth certificates used in Kenya; infant footprints were not displayed on Kenyan birth certificates in the 1961-era.
WND sources in Kenya described the Smith document as a clever forgery in that Helton Muganga was, in 2009, an administrator at Coast Provincial General Hospital.
But when WND sources in Kenya contacted Coast Provincial General Hospital, no administrator would verify the authenticity of the document.