Posted on 01/26/2011 5:57:29 AM PST by Reaganite Republican
 |
| Tim Adams |
More reactionary diatribes at Reaganite Republican
With regard to your comments I understand that if there is a long form birth certificate, then a short form BC is just an abreviated form of that,however, it is my understanding that a short form birth certificate can be issued in Hawaii for individuals that do not have a long form birth certificate and those individuals may or may not have actually been born in Hawaii. His sister’s short form Hawaiian birth certificate was also posted online and she was born in Indonesia.
I don’t have time to go research the Hawaiian laws again now, but I did read them on their own website before Obama was elected and concluded to my own satisfaction that he could have been born elsewhere and still have been able to obtain a short form certificate. If you have time to post links to the laws I would be happy to go review it again.
There are at least two different copies of a short form Hawaiian birth certificate that I have seen online. I could be mistaken that the one on his website and the daily Kos were different. It could have been another site that showed the different one, however, both copies were purported to be real during the run up to the election. Perhaps another freeper has links to the two different ones.
With regard to the newspaper, I would question how anyone at the newspaper would be able to attest that the paper only posted announcements from the Health Bureau information since that was some 50 years ago. Even in banking it would be difficult to attest to a policy the bank had 50 years ago, let alone a newspaper. It was common practice for grandparents to request birth announcements.
No expert to the best of my knowledge has ever seen the original for testing purposes, however, there are some experts who have stated that the online copies appear to be forgeries. Until the original long form birth certificate has been examined by several different experts and found to be authentic I am withoulding an opinion as to where Obama was born.
I will look up the court case you mentioned, when I have more time. I have looked through legal decisions on this mater quite extensively, however, and to date I have not found one case that specifically provides a definition for the term “natural born citizen”.
With regard to my memory and my honesty they are both in tact. I went to school with an individual who had a father that was a U.S. citizen born in the USA, and a mother that was foreign born and was not a citizen at the time of the birth. The mother became a U.S. Citizen before the second child was born. This family became the example used in my classes year after year to explain to the students what the term “natural born citizen” meant. We were taught that the first child was inelligible to be president when they grew up because only one parent was a citizen at the time of their birth. The second child would be eligible because both parents were citizens at the time of the second child’s birth. I was among the top students in my classes and I am still friends with the family that was used as the example, so don’t try telling me that no one used that definition in the 1960’s or that I have a bad memory about this.
Perhaps we can agree to disagree at this point in time as you obviously have opinions that are just as strong as mine.
There are many people even today who beleive this is the only interpretation of the “natural born citizen clause”. Quite frankly I beleive it is the only interpretation which makes any sense since our founding fathers would clearly not have allowed for anyone who might also be a British subject to become president. You are, however, entitled to your opinion until such time as the supreme court provides us with a less ambiguous definition.
Abercrombie is a lying, deceitful, dishonest idiot.
Governors can’t release someone elses birth certificate anyway. That’s an abuse of power.
10th grade civics and the knowledge of whether the person in question was born in the USA.
FYI, this supposed "friend" is backtracking, as I suspected he would:
Not if the short form birth certificate says the individual was born in Hawaii, as Obama's does.
Under a 1982 law, someone born out of state can get a short form BC, but it will list their true birthlace.
His sister’s short form Hawaiian birth certificate was also posted online and she was born in Indonesia.
That's a birther myth that is simply not true. Like many of these things, it was simply made up out of thin air.
So, obviously you’re not qualified either.
Birthers who don't believe he was born in Hawaii believe he was born in Kenya.
If not Hawaii, where do you think he was born?
You're not referring to that nonsense from Polarik, are you?
nd the state of Hawaii has never confirmed that it came from them.
The state of Hawaii confirmed that the birthplace listed on it is correct.
I am curious as to what school you attended when you took your 10th grade civics class or at least what city and state it was in as Civics classes aren’t taught in every city and state across the country. Was it a public school or a private one? How old are you? (a ball park age would be fine, just so we can understand your thinking on this matter).
Okay. How's this: I don't vote in Chicago elections because I'm not registered to vote in Chicago. I am not registered to vote there because I don't live there.
I never made any such claim, you did. PROVE IT!
The state of Hawaii has never confirmed that it came from them! The BC posted has been shown to be a fraud by multiple experts and you know it.
I just found this in my notes regarding the statute that allows for the registration of a child born outside of Hawaii. I don’t remember where I copied this information from, but I beleive this was the statute that I read in detail and from which I concluded that a short form birth certificate was insufficient evidence.
“Hawaii Revised Statute 338-178 allows registration of birth in Hawaii for a child that was born outside of Hawaii to parents who, for a year preceding the child’s birth, claimed Hawaii as their place of residence. Statute 338 is in substance and 178 are minor revisions.The Certificate of Hawaiian Birth program was established in 1911, during the territorial era, to register a person born in Hawaii who was one year old or older and whose birth had NOT been previously registered in Hawaii.
Since Hawaii issues “Certificates of Live Birth” to children not born in Hawaii and “Birth Certificates” to children who are born in Hawaii, the only way to know where Hussein Obama was actually born is to view Hussein Obama’s original birth certificate from 1961 that shows the name of the hospital and the name and signature of the doctor that delivered him.”
With regard to Maya’s certificate, I do not recall ever seeing the actual certificate online myself, just reading several references that it had been posted online. There was at least one example I did see posted online of an individual who was not born in Hawaii and had a Hawaiian birth certificate, however.
The law that went into effect in 1982 is irrelevant since Obama was born in 1961 before this law was in effect. His birth could have been registered by the grandparents with the Health department in 1961 and we don’t know what proof if any they would have shown to the health officials.
I took civics at an secular private high school in southern California. Before that, I took it at a Catholic junior high school. Like everyone else, I learned that a natural born citizen is anyone who is born a citizen. That means anyone born in the USA, unless the child of diplomats or invaders or some other class not subject to US jurisdiction, is a natural born citizen. Likewise, anyone born of citizen parents abroad is also a natural born citizen.
Every single civics textbook used in the USA over the last 100 years that addressed the subject defines it the same way.
This wasn't controversial until the birthers started making the two-citizen parent argument after Obama's election. Don't you find it strange that no one was making it before?
How old are you?
34. You?
Your conclusion is incorrect.
Hawaii Revised Statute 338-178 allows registration of birth in Hawaii for a child that was born outside of Hawaii to parents who, for a year preceding the child’s birth, claimed Hawaii as their place of residence.
Yes, that's the statute passed in 1982 that I was talking about. It was not on the books in 1961 when Obama's birth was registered, and hence, as you say below, not relevant.
The Certificate of Hawaiian Birth program was established in 1911, during the territorial era, to register a person born in Hawaii who was one year old or older and whose birth had NOT been previously registered in Hawaii.
Also not applicable to Obama, since he was only four days old when his birth was registered.
With regard to Maya’s certificate, I do not recall ever seeing the actual certificate online myself
That's because she doesn't have one. The rumor that she does was just made up by someone.
There was at least one example I did see posted online of an individual who was not born in Hawaii and had a Hawaiian birth certificate, however.
Are you talking about Sun Yat Sen? Used fraud to illegally obtain one of those Certificates of Hawaiian Birth mentioned above, something which we know Obama does not have, his birth having been registered when he was four days old.
The law that went into effect in 1982 is irrelevant since Obama was born in 1961 before this law was in effect.
Correct. That would be Hawaii Revised Statute 338-178. Proir to that law, there was no provision under which foreing-born children could have their births registered in Hawaii.
His birth could have been registered by the grandparents with the Health department in 1961 and we don’t know what proof if any they would have shown to the health officials.
So you are alleging that his grandparents comitted fraud. Do you have any evidence? Do you even have a plausible motive?
Well according to El Sordo those legal fees don’t mean they all went to the BC defense.....
Haven’t heard that one before...
(Seems like the latest in lame defenses IMO)
WHY???
I’m 53 years young!
I find it hard to beleive that you have read through every civics textbook used in the last 100 years. Not all schools even had civics classes and I am sure many schools had old textbooks or none at all used for these classes. I learned about the Constitution in my US History classes and social studies classes. I attended a Catholic grade school for 7 years where I first discussed the Constitution, Bill of Right’s etc., a public middle school for one year, a public high school, and went to school at three different colleges part time at night to earn my degrees while I worked full time during the day. My entire education was in the state of Oregon, which was actually a far more conservative state then, than it is now. It was in these settings that I was taught that a “natural born citizen” was a child born in the U.S. to two parents who were U.S. Citizens.
We often did not use text books with regard to learning about the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, etc. We used transcriptions of the actual documents, and sometimes government pamphlets and copies of other historical documents. We didn’t have textbooks for many of our classes such as reading, writing, U.S. History and even math, since the teachers didn’t need textbooks to teach us those subjects, they simply knew the material. Homework assignments were usually typed up by the teachers and mimeographed off for us to take home and complete. In my earlier grades we had an atlas style book to use for social studies and even that was quite out of date, so we spent a lot of time at the county library doing research projects on a specific country and then made presentations ourselves to our classmates. We also had 50 students in each of my classes from first through seventh grade and we all learned quite well. The public schools had fewer students for most of my classes, however, there were still far more per class then than there is in most classes today.
Even in high school our text books were quite old and the teachers hardly used them except for math classes. It wasn’t until I got to college that I had textbooks that were fairly current and even then many of them were reprints of older text books.
We were taught not to beleive everything in a textbook because it might not be accurate or unbiased but to research things for ourselves and to use original sources whenever possible. When a person reads the “natural born citizen clause” after reading other texts like the Federalist papers, correspondence between our founders and other early historical documents it only makes sense that to be a “Natural born citizen” one would need to be born in the United States and be the child of two U.S. citizens.
At 34 and growing up in California I would suggest to you that you still have a lot to learn about life in more conservative parts of the country. I do not profess to know everything even at my age and I have almost 20 years on you. Learning is a continual process throughout a person’s life and few people ever stop learning.
NO, new speaker Boehner would be next President!!!
It would not surprise me if John Roberts is already sitting on that b.c.!!!
Good question. Let's have a look at the long form and find out, instead of relying on assumptions and incredulity?
If not, I hope the trend in Arizona continues to other states.
Be careful, this person comes to the surface like a prairie dog and is a part time hired Holder brigade to report back, aka FINO!!!
You can partly find your answers on his profile page, a long time Holder reporter aka FINO!!!
The above admission by obama may have, in fact, happened.
The problem is that Dr. Keyes -- according to his campaign manager (also a freeper) -- cannot remember the incident.
By the way, I've waited 2 years for this issue to go mainstream.
Yeah, we're ALL "birthers" now!
It's now up to the American people to decide for themselves if they trust an "in your face" liar and impostor to remain in power, as the face of America, both domestically and around the world.
I am confident that -- given the facts -- the American people will make the right choice.
Why is Obama suppressing information that practically ALL American citizens are made to PROVE as a matter of course? -- their identity!
Let the truth be reveiled, not conceeled!
Hay, I think I just came up with a slogen. :)
STE=Q
What, like in that movie "The Counterfeiters"?
Parsing - always parsing.
It occurs to me that considering the history of fancy-footwork displayed by the Hawaii Department of Health, their phrase “original vital records” could be in reference to something as mundane as Barry’s kindergarten enrollment vaccination record, or a physician’s record of a reportable illness such as measles or mumps.
Nothing any of these people says can be taken at face value.
I think high school yearbook pictures are pretty mandatory, but college yearbook pictures may be optional. A picture in a college yearbook might prove someone graduated from such-and-such a class at XYZ University, but the absence of a photo doesn't disprove their matriculation. You might want to check with a degree verification service.
Oops!
Freeper “Eternalvigilance” is Dr. Keyes campaign manager.
STE=Q
I might be a bit younger than you, but I remember having been taught the same thing.
I wasn’t his campaign manager.
But, as someone who has asked Dr. Keyes himself about it, who followed all the debates in detail, and who was present at a couple of them, I can tell you without any doubt: it simply never happened. It’s an internet rumor with absolutely no basis whatsoever. It’s a myth.
2) You could recreate documents that experts will swear were created not only on the same typewriter but by the same hand at the keys (based on impression depths) twenty years ago so getting beyond that level of detail is probably doable these days as well.
3) you seem to think that there would be unlimited right of inquiry into the document itself. If it passes a few obvious tests there would be no further testing, that's for sure.
I understand what you're saying about a trail of evidence and so forth, the problem is that a forgery that passes the most obvious tests is probably going to be accepted as valid thereby halting further study of said document. How everyone is going to rifle through sufficient files and ledgers to determine validity is something of a mystery to me given the fact that to date no one can even get a copy of any of the things Barry wants to keep hidden. Once he “gives in” and produces a BC that passes the initial obvious tests, there won't be any more digging. IOW, the tests that just might discern a forgery from the original would never be done if the document passes the most common battery of tests.
I honestly don't see the point anyway. Barry can have a full BC in his pocket and he still doesn't meet the Constitutional requirements so the whole issue of the BC is moot IMHO, although the issue of his being eligible isn't. This needs to be framed around the facts which are that due to the facts of his birth situation, it doesn't matter where he personally was born. That's the issue being dodged and the whole document search thing is a wasted of effort either way it goes.
Why don't you learn how to read before you make another post here, Braniac?
-------------------------------------------------------
To: Retired Intelligence Officer
LOL. The poor quality of birther reading comprehension skills never ceases to amaze me. Rush is saying they got an imposter into the EQUIVALENT of the White House in AFGANISTATN.
22 posted on Tuesday, November 23, 2010 6:53:11 PM by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2632107/posts?page=22#22
Your conclusion, curiosity, “...That leaves only one possibility...Obama must have a standard BC and the index entry is for a standard BC.” -— omits an “other” possibility, which - considering what facts are known - carries the most certainty: his birth record/certificate(s) are sealed.
Background:
We know that Barry was adopted by Lolo Soetoro. Aside from his half-sister Maya stating so publically, we know from the Stanley Ann/Lolo 1980 divorce documents that “the parties” were the parents of one child under 18 [Maya] and one child over 18 but still dependent on the parties for his education [Barry]. The divorce was filed/granted in Hawaii. That Barry was adopted by Lolo Soetoro is not in the realm of speculation; it is fact.
None of we bloggers/commentors know with certainty that Barack Obama of Kenya sired Barack Obama II. There is considerable doubt, starting with the boy’s name being designated with the honorary “the Second” (II), rather than the sire-to-son “Junior” - specifically, the boy was named “for” Barack Obama of Kenya, rather then “after” him, indicating that Obama was the right race, at the needed time, and willing. Whether it was BO of Kenya, Frank Marshall Davis, the milkman, or “unknown”, IF our little Barry was truly born in a Honolulu hospital there was a long form, official with raised seal, signed by attending physician certificate of birth - and it was filed in the normal manner at the Department of Health. Where it remained - UNTIL BARRY WAS ADOPTED BY LOLO SOETORO.
I know the following from personal experience:
In an adoption procedure such as Lolo of Barry, a petition is filed, hearings are held, privately, before a family court judge and court recorder, adoption is approved, and Court Orders are written which spell out the remaining requisite procedures:
A brand new, pristine long form certificate of birth is filled out with all of the data from the original birth certificate. It is filled out exactly as the original with two exceptions: on the pristine document the name of the baby’s father is “Lolo Soetoro”, and his race is [whatever Lolo’s race was].
Enter now the LAW: the signing and filing of the Court Orders does three things in the Law: (1) Lolo Soetoro is the actual - not “step” - ACTUAL father of the boy Barry, who is now Barry Soetoro; (2) as proscribed by the government of Indonesia, the father Lolo’s Indonesian citizenship is conferred onto Barry; (3) whatever man was named on the original birth certificate as father, in the eyes of the law in relation to the child, does not exist - and never did exist. In the eyes of the law, Lolo Soetoro conceived Barry. Chiseled. In. Stone.
The next step - because above all, the child is to be protected from any person or occurrance which could cause him distress, or could in any way breach his and his parents’ privacy - all records relating to the adoption are sealed, under Court Order. “All” records means ANY and ALL papers, records, memos, files, filings, recordings, transcripts of proceedings, etc, and most importantly - the ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE. In the eyes of the law, that certificate does not, and never did, exist. The Certificate of Birth - the “long form” - which identifies Lolo Soetoro as Barry’s father IS the ORIGINAL birth certificate. It is the ONLY one on file at the HDOH. Forever.
Unless someone ELSE petitions the court and adopts Barry - in which case yet another “original” birth certificate would be generated.
Regarding the various staff at the Hawaii Dept. of Health, who have made tortured, prevaricating attempts to do Barry’s bidding — any statements or remarks they have made about having personally seen, touched, patted, or swooned over a document as being Obie’s “original birth certificate” has to be in reference to the only one on file - naming Lolo as father. It appears they are dancing for the media and following instructions which could have come only from Barry. The birth records are not public information; FOIA does not apply. The DOH staff are not at liberty to peruse those files; they can only look, handle if required by the job - which means if the “owner” files a request for a certified copy. There was a report during the ‘08 campaign that Barry had petitioned the Hawaiian court for his on-file birth certificate and related records of copies requested over the years, etc, to be sealed. It would be out of the ordinary - but the Chicago way means such requests are likely to be approved.
As for the sealed adoption records - anyone poking around there, and that means ANYone - would be committing a criminal act. Last I knew, such files were still actually sealed with a huge blob of wax.
All things considered, best guess is that Barry refuses to produce his long form birth certificate - and is willing to spend $$million$ to keep it hidden because that one document shows the truth which would reveal layers upon layers of his lies about his life, activities, and travels. Instead of peeling an onion from the outside>in, Barry’s birth certificate Waterloo begins at the center of the onion - right there at the tear-making core - with the fact of his being adopted by Lolo and thus being a citizen of Indonesia.
Indonesia doesn’t permit dual citizenship, so the Indonesian citizen son of Indonesian Lolo had to have an Indonesian citizen passport. Why his mother had to file for an amendment to remove Barry from travelling on her passport. As a US citizen he could be on hers, but his US citizenship was forsaken for the marriage to Lolo. No problem for a woman who didn’t love her native country anyway - or for the son she dutifully trained to reflect her distaste for America. No problem for him, that is, until he decided to go into politics. Suddenly that Indonesian citizenship and it’s trickle-down useage in his life became a thorn. He wanted to fundamentally change our precious country, and to do so required masses and masses of lies and cover-ups. No problem - just haul out the Chicago way, and the tactics of Chicago’s favorite son, Alinsky. Not working, however - bloggers, Freepers! - and Barry’s thorn of deceit has turned into a festering boil that’s rapidly reaching the point where it will be lanced.
If he “enjoys the controversy”, he enjoys it in the same mindset as a 9-year old enjoys teasing a cat.
Interesting that you consider the president - and apparently yourself as well - as looking upon more than half of the nation’s citizens as “opponents”. Though, actually, that would be an improvement, as his previous reference to the multitudes who disagree with him was as being his enemies.
Pinging a few names that pop into my poor little brain.
I think GGMac is hitting closer to the bullseye than just about anything I’ve seen so far.
Dam breech is getting closer and closer IMO.
Oh, GGMac - if the original BC has a birthplace other than Honolulu, that would also be a knockout punch. And per our other exchange, the birth place would not be different on the new adoptive birth certificate. Do you think that is an issue from whatever you know/conjecture?
Bump.
Seconded. We're so close we can smell it.
Smells like piss soaked hind legs to me.
Courtesy ping to General Patton.
Hi GG. Welcome to FR! I have read over all of your posts, and you offer an acute and very logical set of arguments! What you say I think not only has merit, strikes me a’s fitting most if not all the known pieces of the OholyO puzzle we know.
VERY well done!
May I ask, how is it that you know so much about adoptions in the state of Hawaii? Clearly you have deeper knowledge that just a reading of statutes.
A further question, if Barry chose to, could he Juliet the adoption? If he did so, it is my understanding that his records would revert to their original status, with one difference, citizenship. Now would that status be that of NBC or naturalized, or citizen? Barry’s records might still be sealed, but is there any public records disclosed or diagnosable likenthise for birth index records?
Thanks for some seriously interesting ideas. I am liking your theory even better that my own. It fits the known facts better! Excellent work!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
