Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Alabama Supreme Court: Serious Questions About Authenticity of Obama's Birth Certificates
BirtherReport.com ^ | Unattributed

Posted on 03/29/2012 8:49:07 PM PDT by 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."


TOPICS: Conspiracy; Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: alabama; arpaio; birthcertificate; birther; certifigate; naturalborncitizen; obama; sheriffjoearpaio
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-91 next last
Alabama Supreme Court judge makes daring statement in a denial of a writ of mandamus (a proper ruling, IMO). The judge didn't have to make any side comments about evidence in the filing, but he stuck his neck out, given the opportunity. The Fogbowers won't like this one bit!

Here is the link to the judge's ruling:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/87140552/McInnish-v-Chapman-Order-Striking-Petition-for-Writ-of-Mandamus-Alabama-Supreme-Court-Obama-Ballot-Challenge-3-27-2012

1 posted on 03/29/2012 8:49:15 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LucyT; melancholy; null and void; Red Steel; Danae; Kenny Bunk
ping to Alabama Supreme Court judge giving big hint that Arpaio’s evidence looked good to him!
2 posted on 03/29/2012 8:51:19 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Is there any good left in this world to overtake the evil that is so prevalent everywhere right now? Surely Obama will come down from his perch soon. His secret deals with Iran should be enough to impeach. Where are our leaders? He’s getting away with everything. Meantime his wife and daughters on another tax payer vacation.


3 posted on 03/29/2012 8:57:45 PM PDT by dandiegirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
"if presented to the appropriate forum as part of a proper evidentiary presentation, "

Any ideas what is the "appropriate forum" the judge is talking about?

4 posted on 03/29/2012 9:05:19 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
Arpaio is angling for a criminal indictment and trial of the person or persons who forged the LFBC and SSS registration. That is the sort of “appropriate forum” I believe the judge is referring to.
5 posted on 03/29/2012 9:08:09 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Forgery is a crime in all States and such a criminal act falls under the jurisdiction of Sheriff Arpaio. He is on the right track.


6 posted on 03/29/2012 9:27:45 PM PDT by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

The appropriate forum is to show a physical, certified copy in a court of law. Any certified public record is considered “self-authenticating” under the Federal Rules of Evidence, with the idea being that both parties can examine the document and ensure that it contains the required certification elements ... or does not show obvious signs of forgery. As we know, the Kenyan coward, despite claiming to have TWO hard copies of a certified long form refused to show EITHER in the ballot hearing in Georgia ... in fact, he’s not shown them in ANY court of law. Finally, this sounds like a judge who gets it.


7 posted on 03/29/2012 11:09:45 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: edge919; Red Steel

Sounds like a promising development. Hope something comes of it.


8 posted on 03/29/2012 11:17:02 PM PDT by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

sfl


9 posted on 03/29/2012 11:17:14 PM PDT by know-the-law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thecodont

No, it’s a promising comment, but the Alabama Supreme Court still denied the petition. They said they didn’t have original jurisdiction in this matter. I haven’t seen the particulars on this case, but earlier this year, I had found election law in Alabama that indicated the state has the authority to keep Obama off the ballot. The courts have been playing a legal game of “pass the buck”, failing to acknowledge what the law actually allows.


10 posted on 03/29/2012 11:21:42 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: del4hope

Ping...... thought you might want to see this...:-)


11 posted on 03/30/2012 1:19:22 AM PDT by LadyPilgrim ((Lifted up was He to die; It is finished was His cry; Hallelujah what a Savior!!!!!! ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil
Forgery is a crime in all States and such a criminal act falls under the jurisdiction of Sheriff Arpaio. He is on the right track.

Broken record here.

If the "forger" was an employee of the Department of Health in Hawaii, and if he was operating at the direction of a court order, then the "forgery" was legal and there is no criminal case.

12 posted on 03/30/2012 6:21:55 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Alabama must be in need of a new nuclear energy plant, or perhaps, they need Mobile Bay dredged.

Once their price is met this will sink into the muck never to be heard of again.


13 posted on 03/30/2012 6:44:22 AM PDT by Buckeye Battle Cry (Not Romney - Not ever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

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

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


14 posted on 03/30/2012 6:58:58 AM PDT by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Rep Issa: Remember it is the SERIOUSNESS OF THE CHARGE and would
take almost zero dollars to find out who this guy really IS. What is the holdup?


15 posted on 03/30/2012 7:25:29 AM PDT by robroy12 (robroy12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Thanks for this notice.

Arpaio is scheduled for another public event tomorrow where I expect there will be more ruckus raised, escalating the calls for justice.


16 posted on 03/30/2012 7:51:52 AM PDT by TexasVoter (No Constitution? No Union!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp; LucyT; Berlin_Freeper; Hotlanta Mike; Silentgypsy; repubmom; HANG THE EXPENSE; ...
Ping

Thank you, seizethecarp.

17 posted on 03/30/2012 7:54:10 AM PDT by melancholy (Professor Alinsky, Enslavement Specialist, Ph.D in L0w and H0lder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: melancholy

Thanks, mel. Sheriff Joe has another press conference tomorrow. FReepers will be there and will be reporting back as to what happened...without the media spin.


18 posted on 03/30/2012 8:28:56 AM PDT by azishot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: TexasVoter

Prayers for Joe.


19 posted on 03/30/2012 8:36:37 AM PDT by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: 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.”

Forging selective service docs IS a crime.

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

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


20 posted on 03/30/2012 9:04:21 AM PDT by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57 returning after lurking since 2000))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Texas Fossil
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.

21 posted on 03/30/2012 9:28:18 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: WildHighlander57
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.

22 posted on 03/30/2012 9:35:45 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: 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?
23 posted on 03/30/2012 9:40:57 AM PDT by GregNH (>>>>>I am SO ready to join a brigade of pickup trucks to surround DC<<<<<)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: azishot

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!


24 posted on 03/30/2012 9:43:15 AM PDT by melancholy (Professor Alinsky, Enslavement Specialist, Ph.D in L0w and H0lder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: 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?

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.

25 posted on 03/30/2012 9:56:00 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: GregNH
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.”

26 posted on 03/30/2012 10:07:28 AM PDT by melancholy (Professor Alinsky, Enslavement Specialist, Ph.D in L0w and H0lder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: 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?
27 posted on 03/30/2012 10:12:53 AM PDT by GregNH (>>>>>I am SO ready to join a brigade of pickup trucks to surround DC<<<<<)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: GregNH

Greg,

VACCINATION! !

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

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

” I have you now...... -D. Vader”


28 posted on 03/30/2012 10:22:00 AM PDT by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57 returning after lurking since 2000))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: 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??


29 posted on 03/30/2012 10:25:02 AM PDT by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57 returning after lurking since 2000))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: 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?

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.

30 posted on 03/30/2012 10:38:05 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: melancholy

” His Narcissi Highness “

LOL....good one!


31 posted on 03/30/2012 10:52:31 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp; Beckwith; mojitojoe; Fred Nerks; Danae; butterdezillion; LucyT

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


32 posted on 03/30/2012 12:35:49 PM PDT by Candor7 (Obama fascist info....http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Candor7
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.

33 posted on 03/30/2012 1:35:41 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

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.


34 posted on 03/30/2012 1:52:23 PM PDT by GregNH (>>>>>I am SO ready to join a brigade of pickup trucks to surround DC<<<<<)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp; Candor7

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).


35 posted on 03/30/2012 1:59:20 PM PDT by Smokeyblue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Candor7

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.

36 posted on 03/30/2012 1:59:51 PM PDT by Fred Nerks (fair dinkum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

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!


37 posted on 03/30/2012 2:12:37 PM PDT by Candor7 (Obama fascist info....http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks

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

Straws are being grasped.


38 posted on 03/30/2012 2:14:44 PM PDT by Candor7 (Obama fascist info....http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
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.

39 posted on 03/30/2012 2:25:51 PM PDT by wintertime (Reforming a government K-12 school is like reforming an abortion center.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

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.


40 posted on 03/30/2012 2:26:12 PM PDT by Smokeyblue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue; Candor7
...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...

I agree...BUT if Ann D 'somebody' gave birth to a child named BHO2 at the same hospital where the Sunhara child was born, then Verna Lee would have been the Local Registrar for the birth, and it's the name of the mother and the date of birth that doesn't fit the narrative.

Why can't Virginia's brother obtain a birth certificate for his sister who died the day after she was born?

Why was Virginia issued with an amended birth certificate more than 400 numbers in the future of her August 4, 1961 birth?

41 posted on 03/30/2012 2:28:35 PM PDT by Fred Nerks (fair dinkum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue; butterdezillion
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.

I am trying to make this argument because this is true. The States not only CAN do such a thing, they do it every single time an adoption occurs.

If it 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.

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying it is! It is LEGAL for the state to produce such "Frankenstein" documents, and it is done routinely. According to this web page, the United States has 120,000 adoptions per year. That is 120,000 fake birth certificates created every year.

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).

I don't think they faked the doctor's signature. You are right, that's fraud and I don't think the state can go that far, but if you will consider what I am saying about Obama having an "at home birth" affidavit as his original record, then you will understand that Hawaiian law allows a parent up to a full year to have the child examined by a doctor. (I think butterdezillion can confirm this.) Stanley Ann Dunham was back in Hawaii in August of 1962.

I have been told, (though I haven't verified it myself) that if the child is examined by a physician within a year of it's birth, the physician will be regarded for legal purposes as the "birth physician."

42 posted on 03/30/2012 2:28:49 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: 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.

I do not understand why I am not getting through, but it is obvious I am not getting through. I have posted the pertinent law which Allows Hawaiian DOH officials to create fake birth certificates. I do not understand why you think they won't do such a thing.

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.

I agree. Obama has not demonstrated he meets the legal requirements of office, and it is my opinion that he CANNOT meet the legal requirements for office.(His Father was not a citizen.) Furthermore, I'm not even sure he's an American Citizen at all. If he was not born in Hawaii or some other state (Which I am not convinced of) then he is NOT EVEN a citizen at all.

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.

They don't have that power, but they have effectively taken it so far. Hopefully "We the People" can take it back.

43 posted on 03/30/2012 2:37:05 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

I do understand your point about certificates for adopted children. But there are rules, protocols, standards, laws for how each state handles and produces those documents.

They don’t have a standard for all adopted children and ONE SPECIAL ONE FOR OBAMA where they use Sally Smith’s original birth certificate and take the letter “a” and hand paste it 50 times throughout and then take a square check box and paste it over half the other check boxes from Billy Jone’s original birth certificate and then take Verna Lee’s signature from Trayvon’s original birth certificate, then scan a copy of the hand stamp text block, import it and then print out a Frankenstein abstract and then call it “legal.”

Hawaii would need to hire 50 graphic artists just to issue handcrafted birth certificates for adopted children.


44 posted on 03/30/2012 2:43:28 PM PDT by Smokeyblue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue
I do understand your point about certificates for adopted children. But there are rules, protocols, standards, laws for how each state handles and produces those documents.

They don’t have a standard for all adopted children and ONE SPECIAL ONE FOR OBAMA where they use Sally Smith’s original birth certificate and take the letter “a” and hand paste it 50 times throughout and then take a square check box and paste it over half the other check boxes from Billy Jone’s original birth certificate and then take Verna Lee’s signature from Trayvon’s original birth certificate, then scan a copy of the hand stamp text block, import it and then print out a Frankenstein abstract and then call it “legal.”

Hawaii would need to hire 50 graphic artists just to issue handcrafted birth certificates for adopted children.

They usually create the replacement document to look like an Original birth certificate. This is a normal and accepted process. If they cannot access the original, they must piece something together to LOOK like the original. On *my* document, they scrubbed all references to my original parents,their Vocations, Home Addresses, Place of their birth, etc. and substituted all new information in it's place.

Even within the law there is a great deal of leeway with what they can put on one of those documents, but according to some researchers, Hawaii has been prone to going outside of the law for quite some time. Have you seen this chart?

This article indicates that Hawaii was playing fast and loose with foreign births which were registered in Hawaii back in 1961.

45 posted on 03/30/2012 3:00:33 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue; Candor7
Update on New Lawsuit Filed Against Hawaii Department of Health (Virginia Sunahara's Brother) Obama Release Your Records ^ | January 5, 2012 | Dean C. Haskins

Posted on Friday, 6 January 2012 7:41:40 AM by Smokeyblue

SOURCE LINK

When we visited the Department of Health, we weren't quite sure what we would find, since Loretta Fuddy had insisted that Virginia's records didn't exist. However, we were pleasantly surprised that Duncan's application produced several certified copies of Hawaii's new short form birth certificate (which they now absurdly call their "long form"). Upon closer inspection, we learned that the number assigned to Virginia's birth certificate is 151-1961-01180, and realized that, statistically, that number simply cannot be legitimate.


46 posted on 03/30/2012 3:03:10 PM PDT by Fred Nerks (fair dinkum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

You may be right but I don’t see Hawaii jumping up to claim ownership of this Frankenstein abstract. I suspect they haven’t because they know themselves that it isn’t “legal” and they’ve broken their own laws to produce it (if they are responsible - not someone outside the DOH).

If caught, I’m sure the “legal” forgery will be their play but that will only work if he was born in Kapolani Hospital in Hawaii.

For your document, the base of your original birth certificate is the same. All they changed was the parental information. The doctor’s signature, the registrar’s signature, the seals, the stamps, the time of birth, the weight, the location, etc. are still the same. Meaning it’s not a butchered certificate. Only the areas that you would expect to be changed for an adopted child are changed.

I don’t see how you get around the doctor and the registrar’s signatures. What if this specific doctor only delivered two babies in the state of Hawaii. If they can’t use his signature from the original (sealed) certificate can they take (copy) it from the other baby’s birth certificate?

Also, if no original was available, how would they know who the doctor or the registrar were? Can’t imagine a doctor would like his signature being used for babies he/she didn’t deliver.


47 posted on 03/30/2012 3:51:02 PM PDT by Smokeyblue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks

Did Dr. David Sinclair deliver Virginia Sunahara?

Am I correct that Verna Lee shouldn’t have been the registrar for Obama?


48 posted on 03/30/2012 4:01:48 PM PDT by Smokeyblue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks

Sorry, I missed this post.

“BUT if Ann D ‘somebody’ gave birth to a child named BHO2 at the same hospital where the Sunhara child was born, then Verna Lee would have been the Local Registrar for the birth, and it’s the name of the mother and the date of birth that doesn’t fit the narrative.”

True. It’s all so strange.

“Why can’t Virginia’s brother obtain a birth certificate for his sister who died the day after she was born?”

I would LOVE to know the answers to this and so much more.


49 posted on 03/30/2012 4:21:13 PM PDT by Smokeyblue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp; ALOHA RONNIE; Candor7

Hawaii gave parents and/or the local registrar (in cases where parents were not available) a month to get together all the information required for the birth certificate. If that information was not received within a month of that time period, the BC had to be stamped with “Delayed” and it would not be legally probative.

Lori Starfelt says she spoke with somebody at the HDOH who told her that they required a doctor’s examination to verify the information from at-home births. Whether that is true, I have no way of knowing for sure because Lori Starfelt is apparently the only person in the world who can get the HDOH to answer questions. What they are REQUIRED to do is to provide records and they claim no records that clarify what the procedures and requirements were for that time.

Aloha Ronnie has mentioned overhearing women talking about how they could register their foreign-born newborns as having been born in HI. Whether they had to be seen by a doctor he didn’t know. But there was a 2-month window in which they could have gotten a BC completed, with the doctor signing off on the details. And they must have done that, because the CDC’s statistics for attended and unattended births shows very few unattended births - but does clarify that an unattended birth would be one where the mother and baby were not examined by a doctor afterwards, regardless of the circumstances of the birth.

If Obama was born in HI there would be no reason at all for him to not have a HI birth certificate. If there was an adoption involved the only thing that would be different would be the names on the BC - his, and his parents. If his name is in the birth index as Barack Hussein Obama II then there is supposed to be a discloseable BC for him under that name, and adoption by Soetoro would have no bearing on that. However, we do know that the birth index has been manipulated to include birth names for at least some adoptive children. If there is not a Barry/Barack Soetoro in the birth index then it should be concluded that either he was never adopted by Soetoro or he was adopted and then unadopted - in which case the only discloseable BC they would have would be under the name Barack Hussein Obama II.

So if there is a Barry/Barack Soetoro in the birth index then there could be a BC for him under the adoptive name - in which case they could not disclose the BC under the Obama name unless they had a court order. I did request to see the court order allowing them to disclose an original birth certificate for Obama and they said there was no record responsive to my request.

It’s hard to know anything about the records when you know the HDOH is altering official records. But if anything about their records or what they’ve said in UIPA responses is true, then the adoption angle doesn’t fly.

In any event, what Candor7 said is very relevant. Even when BC’s are fabricated to cover for an adoption they are created as complete paper documents. If there was a supplemental BC created after an adoption that paper BC would be in the volume of BC’s and when somebody requests it there would be no way to tell it from any other BC. It wouldn’t have to be manipulated digitally like the Obama long-form was manipulated.

Nor would a COLB have to be forged.


50 posted on 03/30/2012 4:40:18 PM PDT by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-91 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson