Alabama Supreme Court: Serious Questions About Authenticity of Obama's Birth Certificates

BirtherReport.com ^ | Unattributed

[Seizethecarp]

Alabama Supreme Court Justice Notes Evidence Presented Raises Serious Questions to Authenticity of Both Obama's Birth Certificates.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio's and Mara Zebest's reports were included in the Petition submitted to the Alabama Supreme Court.

Alabama Supreme Court Justice Tom Parker noted in the Order to Strike Hugh McInnish's Petition for Writ of Mandamus:

"Mclnnish has attached certain documentation to his mandamus petition, which, if presented to the appropriate forum as part of a proper evidentiary presentation, would raise serious questions about the authenticity of both the "short form" and the "long form" birth certificates of President Barack Hussein Obama that have been made public."

[DiogenesLamp]

How is it “lawful” for a public official to “forge” a document?

I'm glad you asked me that. It once more gives me an opportunity to explain.

*I* am an adopted child. When I was adopted, the State issued me a new birth certificate. This birth certificate contains the names of Different Parents than what was on my original birth certificate. My Original birth certificate was placed under court ordered seal, and is now unobtainable without a court order to show it.

My current legal birth certificate is a "forged" document which was produced by the Department of Health in my state. It is a "legal forgery." The creation of "legally forged" birth certificates occurs every time a child is adopted. It is routine. Yes, the information on the document is false, but the Department of Health will verify it as an authentic birth certificate. They do this by law so as to protect the interest of a child who may not be aware that they are adopted.

Under what authority can a Judge or court order a public official to “forge” a document?

Under the adoption laws in place in every state. Here is what it says in Hawaiian law:

§338-20 Adoption.

(a) In case of the adoption of any person born in the State, the department of health, upon receipt of a properly certified copy of the adoption decree, or certified abstract thereof on a form approved by the department, shall prepare a supplementary certificate in the name of the adopted person, as fixed or changed by the decree, and seal and file the original certificate of birth with the certified copy attached thereto.

(b) The registrar of births shall show on the supplemental birth certificate the names of parents as stated in the adoption decree pursuant to section 578-14.

(c) Any certified copy of final decree of adoption, or abstract thereof, of persons born in the State, rendered by courts of other states and territories subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, or courts of a foreign country, shall be considered properly certified when attested by the clerk of the court in which it was rendered with the seal of the court annexed, if there be a seal, together with a certificate of the presiding judge, chancellor, or magistrate that the attestation is in due form.

(d) If no original certificate of birth shall be on file with the department, the department may require such evidence as it deems necessary to establish the facts of birth before preparing a supplementary certificate in the new name of the adopted person; provided that no such certificate shall be filed unless it shall be satisfactorily established that the adopted person was born in the State.

(e) The sealed documents may be opened by the department only by an order of a court of record or when requested in accordance with section 578-14.5 or 578-15. Upon receipt of a certified copy of a court order setting aside a decree of adoption, the department shall restore the original certificate to its original place in the files. [L 1949, c 327, §24; RL 1955, §57-23; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-20; am L 1978, c 50, §1; am L 1979, c 203, §2; am L 1980, c 153, §6 and c 232, §18; am L 1988, c 274, §2; am L 1990, c 338, §2]

Also, there's this.

Access to Original Birth Certificate Citation: Rev. Stat. §§ 578-14; 578-15; 338-20

If a new birth certificate is issued, the original birth certificate shall be sealed. The sealed document may be opened by the department only by an order of a court or when requested in accordance with § 578-15.

Court ordered "forging" is commonplace in every state. I think the evidence demonstrates that Barry was adopted not once, but twice! I think his "long form" was produced by the State of Hawaii as a replacement document for his original record.

[DiogenesLamp]

I agree, being adopted and thus having a modified b.c. is NOT a crime, but- Covering things up and stonewalling doesn’t help. Why didn’t 0 come out and say “hey, I was adopted, there’s gonna be a modified b.c. on file.”

I think the reason he doesn't dare do this is because his original record doesn't conclusively establish that he was actually born in Hawaii. I think his original record is a filing of "at home birth." If such a thing came to light it would explode the issue in this country.

Forging selective service docs IS a crime.

I make no claims about this. Debbie Schlussel suggested this is the case, and I have no criticism of her conclusions.

(Using somebody else’s social security number is ALSO a crime)

Again, this looks fishy, but I have no insight on it.

Need to look at all the pieces with this 0 fellow.

I do not doubt that he and his cronies will engage in forgery if it suits their needs and if they think they can get away with it.

[GregNH]

This is all good stuff and I don't have a problem understanding it but.....A2 says you need to be a natural born citizen. Why not say, "hey listen, I was born in a manger hospital in HI under the name of..... and then I was adopted by....." I mean your running for POTUS for God's sake can't you come clean?

[melancholy]

Great! We’ll hear the truth for a change.

Arpaio is a thorn in the 0b0z0-H0lder axis side. The idiots went after the wrong guy. Eventually when they’re arrested, he’ll don H0lder an orange jumpsuit and 0b0z0 a rainbow one sans underwear so he can enjoy himself in the Man Country Club Southwest!

[DiogenesLamp]

This is all good stuff and I don't have a problem understanding it but.....A2 says you need to be a natural born citizen. Why not say, "hey listen, I was born in a manger hospital in HI under the name of..... and then I was adopted by....." I mean your running for POTUS for God's sake can't you come clean?

I don't think he was born in a hospital in Hawaii. I think he was born in Vancouver or White Rock Canada. I think his grandmother filed an affidavit of "at home birth" and that he doesn't have a normal original birth certificate.

I think his original birth record says he was born to Stanley Ann and Barack Obama I. I just don't think it lists a normal hospital birth.

I think it is a record which was filed by his Grandmother, not by a Hospital. He even admits in his book that it apparently wasn't good enough to prove Barack was his father.

[melancholy]

I mean your running for POTUS for God's sake can't you come clean?

But...but 0b0z0 is too filthy to clean. You gotta use a regal water bath for His Narcissi Highness. It even dissolves gold.

Regal water, aqua regia, is a mixture of concentrated hydrochloric acid, HCl, and concentrated nitric acid, HNO3, in a 3:1 ratio. It will dissolve his filthy Marxism and maybe he'll have a chance to become a better “thing.”

[GregNH]

When you look at the new INS information and then his statement "I found the article among my birth certificate and vaccination papers" Don't you have to be vaccinated upon entering the country?

[WildHighlander57]

Greg,

VACCINATION! !

Where was this quote from 0 again? One of his books? (Can’t recall)

Vaccination..... yup......

” I have you now...... -D. Vader”

[WildHighlander57]

But I have vaccination papers and I was born here.

Not adopted though.

But then again, don’t modified b.c.’s on account of adoption ALSO need raised seals??

[DiogenesLamp]

When you look at the new INS information and then his statement "I found the article among my birth certificate and vaccination papers" Don't you have to be vaccinated upon entering the country?

Yes, but you also have to be vaccinated to go to school. I'm not sure if vaccinations for entering the country applies to infants.

[stephenjohnbanker]

” His Narcissi Highness “

LOL....good one!

[Candor7]

PING to post 21.

I agree that what you have posited may be true, BUT the nature of the documents made public is that they have been digitally manipulated as evidenced by identical pixilation on various portions of the documents, something that no State Government would do, because their respective birth registries are not engaged in propaganda, or in the utterance of false documents in order to commit fraud against Article II of the Constitition.

Why not show us the original reissued adoptive documents?
Its really so simple.

In any case the public docuuments as they are now, indeed are forgeries as Arapio has reported,, but hardly what you might call reissued adoptive state documents.

The current forgeries are nothing more than propaganda documents,characteristic of a nationalist socialist regime, acting according to its own “law”, not that of the people.

Have a read:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html

http://www.faithfreedom.org/obama.html

[DiogenesLamp]

I agree that what you have posited may be true, BUT the nature of the documents made public is that they have been digitally manipulated as evidenced by identical pixilation on various portions of the documents, something that no State Government would do, because their respective birth registries are not engaged in propaganda, or in the utterance of false documents in order to commit fraud against Article II of the Constitition.

You are correct that no state government would do such a things for the reasons you stated above, but you are overlooking the most likely reason for doing such a thing. Because it is easy and convenient. Nowadays, copy and paste is pretty much the way you would manipulate any redundant text or image file.

Why not show us the original reissued adoptive documents? Its really so simple.

It is ILLEGAL for government officials to disclose adoption information, and it is INCONVENIENT for Barack Obama to do so.

In any case the public docuuments as they are now, indeed are forgeries as Arapio has reported,, but hardly what you might call reissued adoptive state documents.

They aren't "reissued" they are created from bits and pieces of other documents. Barack's lawyers could have petitioned the court to unseal his original birth document, but it was more useful to him to simply have a replacement one issued that supports his narrative. We aren't seeing his ORIGINAL birth document, we are seeing a REPLACEMENT with some of the same information which is on his original birth document.

Again, I repeat that his original birth record is probably going to be an affidavit of "at home birth". It WILL NOT look like a birth certificate, and therefore will call into question whether or not he was really born in Hawaii.

The current forgeries are nothing more than propaganda documents,characteristic of a nationalist socialist regime, acting according to its own “law”, not that of the people.

Yes they are, but they may have also been created legally by the State of Hawaii.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html

Kyle-Anne Shiver writes good articles.

[GregNH]

What I remember is that we got our shots in school. Not sure how it worked for infants entering the country, that’s why i put it out there.

[Smokeyblue]

I understand what you are trying to get at with the adoption scenario but this “legal” forgery idea really doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

You are trying to make the argument that the state can issue a type of abstract document that would replicate the information on the original birth certificate. Possibly they can but I highly doubt that their laws, statues, protocols would allow them to create a digital image that was NEVER in paper form and to create this digital document they had to cut and paste information from other documents.

If is was NEVER an original paper document it had to have been made up of digitally scanned parts of other documents. Some parts created, some added, some imported. A Frankenstein abstract.

For example:

Are you saying the state has a right to take Verna Lee or the doctor’s signature off somebody else’s birth certificate and use it for an abstract document for Obama? That’s fraud. You can’t take someone’s signature off a different document and place it on an abstract even if they signed the original birth certificate (which I highly doubt).

[Fred Nerks]

the form starts off with Stanley)Ann D.....and to that is added (.......unham Obama

So it takes two layers to achieve the name of the 'mother'?

VIDEO

Looks to me like the mother's maiden name was Ann D something - it certainly wasn't Stanley Ann Dunham.

[Candor7]

Nowadays, copy and paste is pretty much the way you would manipulate any redundant text or image file. >>>>>>>>>>>>>

In most states “copy and paste” with a government issued document is a felony, whether one is a government worker or not.

In Hawaii a finding of guilt would likely result in a sentence of 2-5 years and / or community service.

Why should the provenance of a president’s birth record include a crime? No Civil Servant worth his little salt would do such a thing unless it were for propaganda reasons, and there was a motive or payment for it.Its easy and convenient for me to committ robbery instead of working, yet I do not do it. I wonder why.

Adoptive birth certificates are indeed reissued in place of the original non adoptive document, under the seal of each respective state, and the original is withdrawn from the record and placed under seal as you say in most cases BUT not so Hawaii in relation to the COLB in question.

Hawaii would have no reason to “forge” is adoptive COLB documents , because each one is issued and printed from information on the Long Form of a birth record signed by the physician present at birth, for example:

“Hawaii does not issue copies of the Certificate of Live Birth, aka, the traditional, long-form birth certificate. What Hawaii issues in its place is the Certification of Live Birth, aka COLB, that is a short transcript of a person’s complete birth record on file — it is only to be given to the person whose name appears under CHILD’S NAME, or to a member of that person’s family, or someone authorized by the person to obtain it.”

http://www.fourwinds10.net/siterun_data/government/obama_government/news.php?q=1227843027

But Obama’s Hawaii COLB was forged as proven repeatedly by forensic experts, just as Arapio has concluded.

Obama’s Hawaii Long Form either does not exist, or it is sealed, or it went off into a dark haole all woogley.It depends on who you talk to on any given day in Hawaii.

Arapio has asked to see the Long Form.Hawaii refused. Now the process has begun so that Arapio will get to see it.

We all await with abated breath, Buahahahahaha!

[Candor7]

And some conclude this forgery was done by the Hawaii Dept of Vital Statistics as an adoptive issuance?

Straws are being grasped.

[wintertime]

My hopes have been raised so often and then dashed by judges who, at first, seemed sympathetic toward finding the truth, only to go wobbly in the end. Geeze! Even Judge Carter, a so-calle Marine, who took an oath to defend the Constitution, folded like lawn chair.

Hopefully, this will get some traction. I am not holding my breath.

[Smokeyblue]

And if Hawaii did cut and paste this Frankenstein abstract it still doesn’t make it “legal” just because Hawaii issued it. They don’t have the power to break their own laws. It’s still “illegal.” It’s just that they’ve broken their laws to provide him with some document.

All you are saying is that they would be getting away with breaking their own laws. That doesn’t make something legal.

Obama is a usurper if he is not a natural born citizen. I don’t care how many days he’s squatted in the oval office. I don’t care how many rides he’s had on Air Force One. He’s still “illegally” occupying the office. He is not a “legal” usurper because the electoral college voted for him.

Congress and the electoral college don’t have the power to make him eligible. They could have certified Mickey Mouse and called it legal but it’s still not legal no matter how many laws they break trying to tell us it is legal. They don’t have that power.