Thanks to an email, presumably from a birther, telling me that the authentic Kenyan birth certificate of President Barack Obama has been found. The certificate is the old Bomford hoax, but what was interesting was what WorldNetDaily said about it in their article titled Is this really smoking gun of Obama’s Kenyan birth? (August 2, 2009). They wrote:
WND was able to obtain other birth certificates from Kenya for purposes of comparison, and the form of the documents appear to be identical.
I did a double take when I saw that. Why? Because WorldNetDaily said 4 days later (August 6, 2009) in the article Obama birth doc update: Kenya sources weigh in:
…an authentic 1961-era Kenyan birth certificate obtained by WND shows distinct differences.
I appreciate the “correction” in the later article, but it hardly credible that the first statement was believed to be true when it was written. It can’t be both “identical” and “show distinct differences.”
WND also said in the first article:
Last week, a counterfeit document purporting to be Obama’s Kenyan birth certificate made the rounds of the Internet, but was quickly determined to be fraudulent. The new document released by Taitz bears none of the obvious traits of a hoax.
I think the fact that the document fee was in shillings and pence when Kenya never used pence, is an obvious trait of a hoax to me. Maybe the Obots are just smarter than WND.
This seems to me to be a change in editorial policy than a change in information. I surmise that WND supported the hoax certificate until they realized it was going to fall for obvious errors and then reversed their version of the truth.