Posted on 05/05/2011 5:22:36 PM PDT by Smokeyblue
There is no way a cover letter would work to certify anything, unless the chain of provenance was unbroken. IOW, if the HDOH sent directly to a judge a cover letter saying that what was in the envelope was certified, then the cover letter could have meaning. That’s how it works with academic transcripts and such. But unless a person documents exactly what comes out of that envelope, a certifying cover letter would only be a signed blank check. I can’t see any court in the country accepting anything that way. That’s why certified records have to have a seal.
You are really desperately stretching if you would throw away the need for authenticating marks on documents. We may as well wear a sign on our foreheads saying, “Kick me”. Anybody could make any claim, with no way of knowing what really came from the authorities.
Of course, when the authorities break laws and rules at will and with impunity, the whole society has a sign that says, “Kick me”. And that’s exactly what’s happening.
Since that number can be applied at any time to any form where that area is blank it MEANS NOTHING outside of the workflow.
Some Freepers came up with a need for the number on the form so that proper statistical measurement could be made ~ they were selecting only the odd, or even, forms on different days.
What blew that idea out of the water was the statistical measurement was claimed to be made on only HALF of the forms.
That's easy ~ take a stack ~ put one on the left, one on the right, repeat. Flip a coin to select the left stack or the right stack. Hand it to the data clerk.
That's as good as it gets boys and girls.
But why half? That was not addressed. I think that's where the story fell apart and interest waned.
They can use their BLACKBERRIES and be perfectly happy.
Is presenting a photocopy or scan of a physical notarized paper legal document in a court of law a legally valid procedure or not?
Now, among other things this person does is establish a document control system. He's in total and complete control. If he says it's a document, then it's a document. If he says it's not a document, then it's not. He says what is secret, what is privileged, what is crypto cosmic, whatever.
If Obama has a document he wants a court to accept as legitimate, that's what the court will do. After all, where else would they turn?
There are claims that the unveiling of this fake long-form convinced some of the military powers-that-be that they have a treasonous fraud as their supposed CINC and that they have to neuter and/or bring him down. The story is that the military told Obama this is what they were going to do, Obama said no, and they did it anyway. With the job done, Obama stepped in to take the credit for it.
Hard to tell which stories are accurate, but Obama’s manner on the whole thing - and especially the image of him slumped in a corner while they monitored the operation - suggests it could be true. He doesn’t seem one bit happy about the whole thing.
And the White House being in charge of telling everybody what happened has been an unmitigated disaster, as you say. Somebody pointed out that the normal protocol for something like this is to have the military folks put together a press conference and deal with informing the public. For some reason Obama didn’t want that to happen, even though his crew is losing any credibility they had because of the ever-shifting stories.
If the military has figured out that the guy is a usurper who needs to be brought down, they - the people who most need to know that fact and the people most willing to actually do what is needed to protect the country - may be on our side. Lord, PLEASE let it be so. Especially if Obama tries to create a disaster to institute martial law, that will be critical.
Right now we have no lawfully-functioning government, courts, media, or law enforcement. We DESPERATELY need the military to protect us against a dangerous puppet of Soros who has his hands on EXTREMELY dangerous controls right now.
You are so full of crap I don’t know how you can even walk.
Janice Okubo, the communications director for the Hawaii Department of Health, has said that the BC# was given by the state registrar’s office on the “date filed”.
The current HDOH Administrative Rules say the same (placing a state number on the file is used interchangeably with the HDOH “accepting” the BC).
The 1961 CDC Natality Report says the same - that the state file number was given by the state registrar’s office in sequential order. That fact was used to justify the accuracy of the 50% sampling method they used, since the local registrars would submit their BC’s all at once and the BC’s would be numbered sequentially, meaning that the BC#’s from that geographic area would be half-even and half-odd. The accuracy of the 50% sampling depends on those numbers being given sequentially rather than randomly. The numbers did NOT fall to chance and were NOT subject to manipulation by the HDOH because they were numbered sequentially according to when they were received at the HDOH office.
The Nordyke certificates illustrate the ascending sequential numbering at the state HDOH.
I can’t make any sense out of what you’re saying, but I can assure you that neither I nor any Freeper I’ve seen have “come up with a need” for anything. This is what the sources we have show. Period. If you want to argue it out with Janice Okubo, the DOH Administrative Rules, and the CDC from 1961, be my guest. Knock yourself out. But this is where this comes from and if the “debate” died down it was probably because the facts have been established to the best of our ability given the sources that are available.
Wow. You’re actually claiming that the President is above the law. He decides his own cases.
Can you even hear what you’re saying? Have you no idea how this sounds to everybody else? You’re claiming the President gets to decide his own cases.
Only somebody closely associated with Obama would come up with something this unconstitutional and act as if it was the way things are supposed to be. What you are describing/defending is LAWLESSNESS. The rule of men rather than the rule of law. Chicago mafia taking over the whole country.
That is how Obama sees the world, it is how he has tried to rule the nation, and it is how any fool can see that he is absolutely an un-American, unconstitutional enemy of this nation.
I know this is slightly off topic. I can’t find a clear copy of the Nordyke twins BC. What I do see is that Obama’s mother signed the document on 8-7-61 and the next signature was 8-8-61. It was stamped on 8-8-61. The number of the Certificate is higher than that of both twins. The mother would not have signed a blank document. It would already have a number.
The twins mother signed her two docs on 8-7-61 but they were not processed until 8-11-61. This does not make any sense.
How many registars are there. My town is larger than Honolulu in 1961. There is one person as Registar. Anyone in the office could have filled out the documents but the Registar must actually sign and apply the seal. This is still done in 2011 when I obtained a copy for my sons DL application. I had to return to pick up the BC because only the Registrar can sign and seal same. I have seen three different signatures on posted BC’s. How can the revolving Registrar system work? How many are authorized to seal and sign off? That is the bigger question.
Even if they are certified copies the seal should be there in all circumstances. Anyone have a clear link to Nordyke twins BC?
I’ve counted five after-birthers on this thread so far. Is that about right?
Louisiana
Pass the ‘birther’ bill for sane reasons
Supporters of a proposed law requiring proof of natural citizenship of presidential candidates in Louisiana say they’ll press on, even though President Barack Obama has now released his long-form birth certificate. The bill, cosponsored by state Rep. Alan Seabaugh and state Sen. A.G. Crowe, clearly was a bone to toss toward the latest fashionable conspiracy theory, that Obama was born in Africa and is therefore ineligible to be president.
If we accept that idea as the only justification for the bill, it should be round-canned once and for all time. Because there was no real reason to doubt Obama was born in Hawaii, there is no real harm for such a bill to address. Are we also going to outlaw the names “Wellington” and “Nelson” because some mental patient thinks he’s Napoleon?
But lawmakers could make the best of it by taking the chance to make a real improvement in candidate qualification, from justice of the peace all the way up to president. They should find a way to strengthen the rules requiring proof of residency and other eligibility requirements at the time of qualification. The system we have now leaves much to be desired.
I count five too.
I think you are simply expressing the degree of your ignorance. Not worth responding to you.
Apparently you haven't, or you'd notice that JUST TO THE LEFT of what you think is a BC number there's another number called FILE NUMBER.
When was that number put there? Why do each of the BCs we ever seen have one?
Do you have any idea what part that number plays in the grand scheme of things or are you merely advancing on the theory that the BIGGEST NUMBER must necessarily be a BC number?
Since we've never gotten an answer on that question on any of the threads I suggest that since it's so important to your line of reasoning that YOU GO FIND OUT WHAT IT'S FOR.
Ask Orly.
Nothing birthers are doing will keep Obama off the ballot in 2012. However, it is helping to trivialize the entire conservative agenda.
Is presenting a photocopy or scan of a physical notarized paper legal document in a court of law a legally valid procedure or not?
Where's it say that?
The twins mother signed her two docs on 8-7-61 but they were not processed until 8-11-61. This does not make any sense.
How do you know that the numbering was not the final step in the process, performed on a week's worth of certificates by a single filing clerk using a single Bates number stamper? How do you know said clerk made sure the certificates were in chronological order before stamping them? And, if the clerk did sort them, how do you know she/he didn't screw up once in a while?
There is one person as Registar. Anyone in the office could have filled out the documents but the Registar must actually sign and apply the seal. This is still done in 2011 when I obtained a copy for my sons DL application. I had to return to pick up the BC because only the Registrar can sign and seal same. I have seen three different signatures on posted BC’s. How can the revolving Registrar system work? How many are authorized to seal and sign off? That is the bigger question.
The process of obtaining a certified copy or abstract of an original birth certificate is distinct from the process of filing the original birth certificate.
Even if they are certified copies the seal should be there in all circumstances.
The seal's only purpose to inhibit making forged copies of certified birth certificates. It's obsolete. They should just put the certificate image on their HTTPS website behind a secret URL given to the subject or his relative or authorized representative. Then the subject could give that URL to any agency requiring a birth certificate, and they could verify it by viewing an image known for sure to originate at the Hawaii Department of Health. In Obama's case, he could just post the link on whitehouse.gov.
Anyone have a clear link to Nordyke twins BC?
You can see the Nordyke BCs here. And, yes, there does appear to be seal, applied to each of the photostats when they were made, 45 years ago yesterday.
Birthers seem incapable of wrapping their brains around this.
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.
