Vital Records Indicate Obama Not Born In Hawaii Hospital (PART 3)

DIRTY LITTLE SECRET: Historical evidence provided by the National Center for Health Statistics and the U.S. Reference Library System now confirms the information appearing within the image of Obama’s alleged 1961 “Certificate of Live Birth” disregards his actual foreign birthplace while, instead, providing a statistically based “geographic allocation” which is a result of a widely misunderstood natality data reporting policy which began in 1950. Stalling for four years since Obama announced his candidacy in February of 2007, under mounting political pressures and legal challenges, the White House unveiled a lone scrap of counterfeit information in the form of a desolate internet image which, after a six month criminal investigation, now confirms that Obama’s presidency is the single greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people.
By Penbrook Johannson and Daniel Crosby

NEW YORK, NY – Barack Obama has misled millions into believing he is eligible to hold the office of the U.S. presidency by exploiting a little known secret about his Hawaiian-based natal records which were issued in conjunction with a commonly used, but publicly misunderstood, vital statistics reporting anomaly used to allocate birthplace according to residency by the State of Hawaii in 1961.
...
As early as 1934, this arbitrary, but necessary method was enacted by the U.S. Census Bureau and later written into law with the passage of the Model State Vital Statistics Act of 1942. It was then fully adopted by all state-level vital records agencies, including those within the then territory of Hawaii, in 1950 in order to improve the collaborative accuracy of data harvested by America’s decadal census and statistics reported annually by state vital records agencies.
...
The birthplace shown on a birth certificate is entered as the result of the mother’s place of residence, not the location of the occurrence of the birth.
...
As discussed previously in parts one and two of this report, the combination of Hawaii’s unique culture, isolated geographic characteristics, unfettered immigration policy and municipal development challenges in the 1960s prompted the use of vital records registration protocols by the State of Hawaii’s Department of Health which undermine the reliability of birth certificate information as a means of determining the natural-born citizenship of any individual.

However, it is now clear that Obama exploited the existence of a widely misunderstood natal data reporting method implemented by the federal government, 11 years before his birth certificate was issued, based on an arbitrary statistical application which classifies the actual place of birth by allocating it as occurring in the same location as the mother’s “place of residence”. This allocation is made regardless of the actual location of the birth because the data provided about the birth to the Census Bureau is used for calculating the impact of natality on resident population and, therefore, must be recorded by the registrar using the same criteria used to count those defined as residents by the Census.

The allocation of births to “place of residence” protocol was implemented sporadically beginning in 1935 to provide for statistical integrity between decadal Census data collection and more frequently collected natality rates taken from real-time birth registrations. Prior to the implementation of the policy, the accumulative affect of non-resident and foreign birth statistics on U.S. birth volumes caused a skewing of natality rates when compared to Census population rate data. These errors had to be corrected in order to use the data for accurately measuring resources in developing public health services, municipal infrastructure and women’s reproductive health research.

Between 1937 and 1949, the NCHS published the annual version of its statistical reporting manuals containing a section called “Vital Statistics of the U.S., Part II Geographic Classification By Place of Residence” which explains, among many other arbitrary rules, the reasoning and methods used to show natal statistics for foreign-born children of U.S. resident mothers.

The manuals repetitively explain that the tabulation of vital statistics taken from birth certificates, on a “place-of-residence” basis, requires that the information given on the certificate must be allowed “to be interpreted in such a way” as to afford statistical classifications of birth geography used to calculate natality rates which are comparable with statistical classifications of population geography used to account census data.

This means the Hawaiian registrar was/is directed to record the place of birth as being the same as the mother's place of residence, regardless of where it actually occurred. This explains why Obama’s alleged 1961 “Certificate of Live Birth” states that his birthplace was in Hawaii even though he was not likely born there. His birth affected the population of the community where his mother lived, not where she gave birth to him.

Since the Bureau of Census held authority over both the implementation of the census and the standards for collecting and reporting vital records until the 1960s, this policy was implemented using the census’ population enumeration protocols as the standard by which all vital statistics data was to be collected and processed. This is logical since the collection of census data on a decadal frequency is what drives long-term public health services and municipal funding in the U.S. Of course, therefore, population is directly affected by statistics taken from vital records documenting birth data, as well as mortality data.

The NCHS assumed authority over vital statistics management under the U.S. Department of Health, Welfare and Education when the National Vital Statistics Division and the Office of Public Health Survey were combined in 1960.

The Vital Statistics Instruction Manual (VSIM) and Vital Statistics of the U.S. Report state:

Historical information referencing “resort states” provides a weighty indictment against Obama’s claim to Hawaiian birth origins. The resort states in the U.S. in 1961 were Florida, Nevada (Las Vegas) and Hawaii. An analysis of the changes in population outside of urban areas of these states confirms this report’s accurate assessment. Hawaii’s population outside of Honolulu increased by 97% between 1950 and 1960. This rate is the highest behind Florida’s, during this same time, whose population rate outside of Miami increased by 161% due to a flood of Cuban aliens fleeing Castro’s communist regime, and Las Vegas’ population which exploded between 1950 and 1960 as a result of that state’s legalization of gambling, prostitution and the development of Las Vegas’ Sunset Strip casinos.

Beginning in 1950, all natality data was exclusively reported based on “place of residence” of the mother. The manual for that year states:

“…births and deaths were assigned to the actual place of residence, no matter where they occurred.”

Based on the continued development of criteria between 1935 and 1961, the alleged year of Obama’s birth in Hawaii, the definition of residency in relation to birth statistics collection was refined to provide more accuracy in natality rates so as to demonstrate the impact of births on resident population, therefore, providing better Census and Vital Record data collaboration, without regard for the actual location of the occurrence of the birth.

These revisions included the standardization of the template form of the U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth”, in coordination with the Public Health Conference on Vital Records and Statistics in 1956, which would clearly provide referential uniformity for NCHS coding efforts when classifying geography of vital records origination. The revisions allowed coding and data collection from the “Location of Birth” and “Usual Residence of Mother” entry boxes from all certificates in the same manner, not just for those recording births occurring in the U.S., but also for births occurring to U.S. residents, anywhere.
...
The standard certificate used for births occurring in the U.S. must also be used for births occurring outside of the U.S. to resident mothers, but both circumstances had to provide the same formatting of information for data classification. Therefore, the location of the birth must state that the birth occurred in the U.S. in order for data from the certificate to be reported as a birth which impacts U.S. and state population figures. Simply stated, there is not a separate certificate for births occurring in the U.S. and births occurring outside of the U.S. to residents of the U.S., but both circumstances are recorded as births which, obviously, impact the population and municipal services of the U.S.

The problem with this misrepresentation of information is that the NCHS only defines a “resident” of the U.S., not a “citizen” of the U.S. The difference is obvious. Essentially, Obama has exploited this NCHS statistical protocols used to report natal statistics in order to declare himself a natural-born citizen by proxy of his mother’s U.S. residency, without being forced to be accountable for his own Constitutionally disqualified “citizenship” status as president. Since births are recorded in real time while populations are measured every ten years, the VSIM manual actually acknowledges that the necessity for such interpretation “introduces arbitrary and controversial factors into the procedure of allocation” by each state. As we now know, the factors applied by the State of Hawaii in granting Obama’s native birth registration has been nothing but arbitrary and controversial.
...
With regard to Obama’s birthplace, the only documented reference appears on a digitally fabricated image, proven to be a forgery, posted to the internet and ignorantly endorsed and accepted without inquiry by many. However, we now know that Obama’s actual birthplace information was recorded in four separate sources, not just a birth certificate, by four different agencies in 1961.

His birthplace was recorded by the foreign health agency with jurisdiction over the facility where he emerged from his mother’s womb. It was then recorded by the local registrar’s office upon registration in Hawaii before being reallocated to his mother’s place of residence. It was then recorded by the State of Hawaii’s main office prior to being tabulated and coded for reporting to the NCHS. And, it was transcribed for record exchange with the foreign health agency and recorded by the National Center for Health Statistics for storage to data file tape currently residing at the National Archives and Records Administration, from which Obama restricted its release with Executive Order 13489.

THE END OF THE ROAD: FOREIGN BIRTH TRANSCRIPT EXCHANGE AND DATA TAPE FILE RECORD

The instructions for allocating births to “place of residence” were published in the Vital Statistics Instruction Manual, Part 1: “Coding and Punching Geographic and Personal Particulars of Births, Deaths and Stillbirths Occurring During 1961.” An internal office copy of this document resides in the NCHS main office in Hyattsville, Maryland, and was made available for in-house review for this report, but was not provided for public disbursement. However, it was provided to all state Health agencies by the vital records coding regulatory office of the National Center for Health Statistics Office of Vital Statistics in 1961.

1. Natality data should be compiled so as to correspond with enumerated populations (Census data) on which rates are based. Each birth should be assigned to the area which was the “usual place of residence” of the mother.

2. Mothers who, at the time of the birth, had been living more than one year in a community are considered residents of that community even though some other place may be stated on the certificate.

3. Mothers of births which occurred in nonresident institutions such as hospitals, T.B. sanatoriums, convalescent homes, jails, etc., are reallocated to the usual place of residence if they were confined in the institution for less than one year.

4. Mothers in resident institutions, where length of stay is usually extended, such as mental institutions, orphanages, retirement homes, homes for the blind, disabled and deaf, etc. are reallocated to their prior place of residence.

5. Births to mothers whose usual place of residence is a foreign country or a United States possession outside of the United States are not reallocated to the usual place of residence.

6. Infants born at locations other than the place of residence of the mother are reallocated to the place of residence of the mother.

Essentially, this protocol instructed the Hawaiian Registrars Office to oversee the content of Obama’s birth certificate in such a way that his natal statistics would be tabulated as a result of an allocation of his birth to Ann Dunham’s “place of residence” in the U.S., regardless of the actual location of the occurrence of the birth. Simply, in the interest of data uniformity between the census bureau and the NCHS, Obama’s birth certificate was required to show his birth place as being the same as the mother’s residence because his birth impacted the population and municipal services of Hawaii, not those of the foreign government and population where his birth actually occurred.

The allocation of Obama’s birth to “place of residence” in 1961 was deeply subjected to the Hawaiian municipal agency’s need for conveying natal statistics and census data which would demonstrate the most need for funding and resources needed to expand its public health services, meet infrastructure demands of the population and provide natal-health care for future birth rates. The only way provided by the federal government to do this was by allocation to place of residence using the standard birth report form known as a U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth”.
...
The 1961 Vital Statistics of the U.S. Report, Volume 1: Natality states, “The principal value of vital statistics data is obtained through the presentation of such data, which are computed by relating the vital events of a class (Hawaiian geography) to population of a similarly defined class (Hawaiian residents). Vital statistics and population statistics must, therefore, be classified according to similarly defined systems and tabulated in comparable groups.”

Logically, births and deaths effect population. Therefore, the NCHS employs methods for accounting natal statistics in the U.S. which serve the interests of public health services and municipal agencies which operate on resources provided directly as result of census and vital statistics data. This situation was especially attributable to the new state of Hawaii’s government, just after the 1960 Census in which it was included for the first time.

The 1961 Vital Statistics Instruction manual states: "For State totals, only those persons who cross State lines need be considered in a reallocation by “place of residence”, since any movement within the State is irrelevant."

In conclusion, with regard to the birth of Barack Obama, the principal value of his individual natal data is obtained by presenting that data in relationship to the community and geography of which he becomes a member as a result of his birth, not migration. It is meaningless for a community to present foreign births on a birth certificate in a manner which prevents the impact of that birth data from being considered in the resident population of the community which is affects.

The allocation of birth place to “place of residence” is a highly significant declaration in determining the manner in which Obama’s foreign birth was recorded, collected, tabulated and reported by the State of Hawaii and how that birth information led him to falsely claim that he is a natural born citizen. Combining the allocation of “place of residence” for birthplace with Hawaii’s unique geographic characteristics, along with its unique indigenous cultural history, we now understand how the State of Hawaii Department of Health issued a birth certificate for Obama’s foreign birth which shows Hawaii as the place of birth by proxy."

I’ve never seen any evidence that he divorced his Kenyan wife or that she died prior to BHO, Sr.’s alleged marriage to SAD. Absent such evidence, the law would recognize he was still married to the Kenyan woman. If you have evidence that BHO, Sr.’s Kenyan marriage terminated prior to his alleged marriage to SAD, trot it out.

By your very comment you admit BHO, Sr. had a Kenyan wife. Again, unless you — or anyone — has evidence that marriage terminated, BHO, Sr.’s alleged marriage to SAD was invalid.

The last time I looked Canada is in North America.

We have no patent on the term “American” like we do on the “United States of America”.

Only a lawyer would think like I stated, but he is a lawyer. Those are legal weasel words. Just like BJC’s definition of the meaning of the word “is”.

Precisely FN.

Very little about Obama, or Barry, or Soebarkah...or whatever his name might be, is factually known.

As far as an alleged "marriage" goes...the only legal document we have to go off of at this point are divorce papers from the Circuit Court of the First Judicial Circuit State of Hawaii, which states that:

Stanley Ann D. Obama and Barack H. Obama "were lawfully married in Wailuku, Maui, State of Hawaii, on February 2, 1961, by a person duly authorized to perform marriage cerimonies and ever since that date have been and are now husband and wife."

“were lawfully married in Wailuku, Maui, State of Hawaii, on February 2, 1961, by a person duly authorized to perform marriage cer[e]monies...”

My limited understanding is that to make a marriage lawful, the “duly authorized person” must sign and date the marriage license, and file it within a set number of days with the clerk of the county court in which the marriage occurred. The clerk books the original, making the marriage “lawful” and “of record,” and prevents forging documents after the fact (to steal an inheritance for instance).

Lots of questions:

Searches for the records were reportedly unsuccessful. Why? No marriage records kept in Maui in 1961? Records kept but large sections now missing? Or, just this record missing?

Would it be possible to record the license in some other county, even if the marriage ceremony supposedly took place on Maui? (Seems bogus, but anything seems to go in HI).
Is it known if anyone has checked for such a public record in Oahu?

...Stanley Ann D. Obama and Barack H. Obama "were lawfully married in Wailuku, Maui, State of Hawaii, on February 2, 1961, by a person duly authorized to perform marriage cerimonies and ever since that date have been and are now husband and wife."

Right. So she supplied that detail to the lawyer, he noted it, the statement ends up on the document lodged for a divorce, she signs it and there you go...it's WORTHLESS, without a copy of the official marriage certificate. However, we have to consider that INS document from the kenyan's file, where he crossed out the name of 'wife' and replaced it with ANN S DUNHAM in August 1961, and left 'CHILDREN' BLANK ON A DATE AFTER ZERO WAS BORN. ANN S OBAMA was the name in the Polk Directory. She might very well have been the Filipino-looking girl shown with the kenyan in the dock welcome and at the Nachmannof social gathering. Probably the 'wife from whom he was separated living in the Philippines' if you recall that memo from the INS docs. He might have been married to someone with the name Ann S Obama but it wasn't Stanley Ann Dunham. Even the latest sham birth doc carries that on, you can see where ANN was the first name on one layer, and the (Stanley) was added in another. The first letter of the surname also showed in the layer with ANN. It was a 'D' - but if that name had been Dunham, they could have just left it there. Instead, they added UNHAM to the 'D'.

"Obama senior was already married, so a marriage in Kenya would have been valid, where Muslims were allowed four wives, but would have been considered bigamous if performed in the US. In any case, we have no marriage certificate or evidence of marriage."

There was a comment in a 2006 article written by Roland Bankole Marke in Worldpress.org stating "...His father, who rose to become senior economist in the Treasury department died in 1982 in a car crash. He left three wives, six sons and a daughter...". So, they were counting Kezia, Stanley Ann, and Ruth. In this article, Stanley Ann is called "Shirley Ann". In the early days there was a lot of confusion as to what B.O.'s mother's name was. You'll find articles cached as Shirley Ann, Stanley Ann, Anne, and Anna. The spelling of his maternal grandmother would change to from Madeline to Madelyn and so on.

So it looks as though Virginia’s number was stolen shortly after her birth, right around when the child known now as BHO arrived in the US...but did he arrive in HI at that time? Or were people in HI arranging the papers before he even was brought there?

(Regarding our discussion on a recent thread):

If the child now known as BHO didn’t entered the USin the first week of Aug. 1961, and then shortly arrived in HI...then where was the photo of the two boys (one darker and one lighter) taken, must have been in HI.

UNLESS - the form you copied above with Madelyn spelled wrong - that one we’ve seen before, that now seems to fit into place - was filled out WITHOUT Zero even being in the state of HI yet?

Oops, correcting one sentence:

If the child now known as BHO entered the US in the first week of Aug. 1961....

‘Nother question. Where was the dark boy born, any ideas? What kind of BC did HE start off with?

Think about it...the way the names are spaced on that line, it seems there were three names there originally, it could have been something like ANN DOLORES ‘ANYNAME’ for example.

The (Stanley) has been added, the middle name becomes Dunham by the removal of all but the ‘D’ and the surname is replaced by OBAMA. Which, just btw, suggests the kenyan wasn’t married to the mother, who-ever she was.

going by the fact that all the incoming overseas flights that landed in Hawaii between August 1 and August 9, suggests there's an arrival we are not supposed to know about, doesn't it? (Regarding our discussion on a recent thread):

I think it becomes apparent that one was born in Hawaii, the other was an import. And yes, it seems that for the two little boys to have been together, Hawaii would be the most obvious. It begins to look as if the dark boy's mother was the woman who returned to the Philippines. Her child was the one Mary babysat in January 1961...as she said, when her own daughter, who was born in July 1959, was 18 months old.

UNLESS - the form you copied above with Madelyn spelled wrong - that one we’ve seen before, that now seems to fit into place - was filled out WITHOUT Zero even being in the state of HI yet?

That's possible. But the removal of the incoming flight information from overseas suggests otherwise...

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.