Skip to comments.Flags in Hawaii
Posted on 02/13/2010 8:07:19 AM PST by butterdezillion
Flags in Hawaii Posted on Saturday, February 13, 2010 in The Blogs
Hawaii Flag A blogger under the name Butterdezillion (BZ from here on) has written an article titled Red Flags in Hawaii about how the actions of Hawaii Department of Health officials should raise red flags about President Obamas birth. In an earlier article BZ tells the story of his frustration with phone calls and emails to the Hawaii Department of Health trying to get copies of the DoH regulations.
There are two ways of looking at this story. Certainly from BZs point of view, it is the story of one lone heroic figures quest for the truth against corrupt government bureaucrats. From the viewpoint of the Hawaii Department of Health, it is probably just the story of just one of a thousand nutty birthers pestering them and preventing them from doing their real jobs. BZ appears to be frustrated and offended, and perhaps for this reason engages in hyperbole when describing what happened while piling up real and imagined slights from the DoH, inflating uncooperativeness on the part of the Department of Health to criminal status.
The Red Flags article really doesnt make much sense outside of the context of the earlier article, and so I suggest the interested reader read the earlier article first.
So lets look through BZs numbered issues. The following include the statement of the complaint, but not the lengthy explanations, for which I refer readers back to the original article.
1. DOH Director Fukino illegally hid until Nov 2009 the DOH Administrative Rules showing that election officials could have received a copy of Obamas original birth certificate without his permission. This is simply false, since the rules are publicly available on a state web site, easily located and accessible
(Excerpt) Read more at obamaconspiracy.org ...
I posted this in response:
"It is obvious that you didnt look at my links.
For instance, you dont note that I provided e-mails showing that the DOH would not even say which rules they were following during all that time -much less have them published. You look at it now and say, The rules are there now so they were there all the time, when Ive shown the hassle a lot of us went through to get them there.
The proof that you didnt even look at my links is your calling me a him when my e-mails have my name on them: Nellie.
If you cant get even the basic facts straight and you did the same thing with every point of mine, not just the first one then its clear youre not willing to do this issue justice.
I will approve your pingback in the hopes that as people see what Ive actually got there, they will see that you are being blatantly dishonest and in their heart of hearts they will wonder why.
Instead of waxing philosophical about the pathology of conspiracy theorists, some basic honesty about documented facts would be nice."
Any ideas on what else I can do to inform the people who will blindly follow whatever inaccurate assessment this guy gives?
You can't because it's deliberate.
Good job, flak, target etc.
You took his bait.
Here is the 1st lie exposed that they have refused to debate with me:
Go after them with the truth, keep it to the point and target the lie, not the writer of the lie. It gets them every time.
Thanks for your good work. The Hawaii DOH and other parts of the bureaucracy has been involved in faking birth places on their certifications for a long time, for reasons of political and bureaucratic convenience.
Basically, more federal welfare money and more Democrat votes.
So Obama’s documentation is probably entangled in that, and is only the tip of an enormous iceberg that they’d prefer not to let see the light of day.
Yeeehaaaw! You know you’ve got them on the ropes when they feel like they need to address your post, and then willfully ignore your links in the hopes that no one else will follow them! LOL!
So if I understand this right, and I’m not sure I do...
A request is made for a birth certificate.
The response is, we are not able to release it due to administrative rules.
A request is then made for a copy of the rules.
A response comes saying that according to the administrative rules, the administrative rules cannot be released.
And then, Yosarian climbed the tree naked.
Then weeks later the rules turn up and sure enough, they say the birth certificate can’t be released.
In Obama world, this is becoming more and more common.
Perhaps the amendment was to remove his father's name, so as to avoid the need to have renounced UK/Kenyan citizenship despite a Hawaiian birth? Who knows, but I think the focus should be on how he's keeping it secret, not on what is there.
lol. It was longer than 3 weeks (I think somebody tried for 4 months to get the Admin Rules)and they turned their phones off and “lost” requests rather than actually bothering to answer any of the requests (which is why we had to go through the higher-ups including the lieutenant governor and Hawaii legislature) but aside from that you’ve got it exactly right.
Funny how Dr. Conspiracy missed all that. You must be a genius! =)
Under the current statute Cheney would be too distant a relative to be able to receive the certified standard copy. Under previous statutes he would have been able to, so it seems like that disclosure might have been “grandfathered in”.
I agree that the focus needs to be the hiding. For one thing, we’ve got so many contradictory statements from the DOH that only God knows which of their statements is true.
Actually, like you said, Cheney COULD have received a copy under the statute. But currently they are saying the ancestor has to be once or twice removed from the person requesting. I’m not sure what they use as the basis for that. Seems like I’ve seen something (in an OIP Opinion letter?) about it.
But then they’ve been saying a lot of stuff that just isn’t so, so maybe there isn’t anything legal that narrows it down that much.
He concedes the point:
“If you think I am willing to wade through every stray hyperlink on your web site, then you have an inflated idea of the importance of your controversy.”
My point was just that it could have been obtained many ways, such as via a nice payment to one of the relatives he's thrown under the bus.
I think he was clearly born in Hawaii, but has something embarrassing on there.
In reading the document at the link I realized that liberal “progressives” will interpret the Constitution in any way they feel justified, and the same way they interpret the Bible!
The hospital refuses to admit he was born there. Other than hiding behind the HIPAA rules that they cited, why wouldn’t any hospital WANT to claim a future President was born there?
The laws actually provide for a new birth certificate to be made to cover up the “embarrassing” situations - illegitimacy, gender ambiguity or change, adoption - with the original one containing the embarrassing information being sealed. So none of those things would require an amendment, nor would an amendment be apparent to anybody looking at his documentation.
So if it was something embarrassing it would have to be something besides those things.
They printed on their website a letter signed by Obama, with raised White House seal, saying he was born at Kapiolani. And they swear that the letter is genuine.
Seems like that would be authorization from Obama to reveal that he was born there - since he himself says so.
But Obama won’t admit to having signed the letter. He won’t allow himself to be on the legal record in ANYTHING he says. Why?
Don’t get upset with me, but what is the endgame for this birth certificate hunt? He’s not going to leave office or be forced out. Remember, the Democrats still hold large majorities in the Congress. Does anyone remember Bill Clinton, who was not convicted in an impeachment trial?
I think this movement’s energies would be better spent to try to get laws passed in the states that in order for people to get on Federal ballots, they have to show proof of citizenship in the case of Senator and Congressional candidates and have to show proof of natural born citizenship in the case of the Presidency. If even one or two states passed this law, it would force Obama to prove his natural born citizenship before re-running for re-election. If he did not and was not on the ballots in those one or two states, then you would have a real scandal brewing. Mainstream America would start really asking questions then.
IMO, this is a fruitless endeavor to try to drag the birth certificate records out of Hawaii. It’s not going to happen and this idea will be relegated to fringe status. Don’t make this issue about Obama, make it about adherence to the Constitution for everyone who wants to run for President.
Has anyone erected the historical place name plates at his place of birth and first residence? This is common for presidents. Also, people in the town usually come forward and talk about his mother’s pregnancy and birth. Can some one link us to those exciting stories as told by the actual witnesses? It’s important to capture these people on video before they die of old age.
So you believe that the Democrat House and Senate would pass such a law? Yeah, right.
Good questions. No answers coming from the WH. What is he hiding?
Once again, I ask what does paperless mean? The term "paperless" means nothing, zero, nada. The original paper vault BCs are still there otherwise, there would be front page headlines with color photos of all the original records being burned in a huge bonfire in front of the courthouse and the state department. Can you imagine the uproar from the citizens of Hawaii.
Get Aunt Zeituni to request it. If she had any sense she’d already have about six copies hidden around the world. It’d be her ticket to stay in the US. I’d be willing to forgive her past transgressions if she’d present it at her next hearing.
I’m certainly not upset at you for asking that. I ask myself that at least 5 times a day. lol.
If you read my post at http://www.butterdezillion.wordpress.com you’ll see that for me the issue is lawlessness. Getting Obama out would be nice but as long as we have no law enforcement he will just be replaced by another lawless creature. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Until we get a handle on how to make our government obey the law, it won’t matter what laws are made.
And until we get an honest media, elections are a sad joke.
We need to work on the stuff we clearly can impact, such as passing laws that require disclosure. But the fact is that Hawaii ALREADY has laws that require disclosure - and they’re blatantly thumbing their noses at anybody who says they should follow those laws. If we allow that behavior to stand, it doesn’t matter what laws we make.
That’s why this issue transcends political party and the particular individuals involved. It is an issue of America becoming a place where laws are enforced. The corruption in Washington is obvious to everybody with a halfway-open mind. But we’re all impotent to do anything about it. When the people are impotent, absolute power will corrupt anybody we send to Washington.
I hope you can see what I’m saying. Elections and laws are one battle, but unless the proper checks and balances are in place - including law enforcement and the people’s right to petition the government for a redress of grievances - government will not be truly accountable and the bigger war will be lost. Mexico has laws. Zimbabwe has laws. Every nation has laws. But not every nation is free, and that is the war we face - the war to keep America free.
The Ambassador of Kenya says yes, they are planning to make a monument where Obama was born in Mombasa.
They are the same people in both places with the same deliberate obfuscation. If you think that you are going to persuade them, get that out of your head. They are idealogs, emphasis on the “logs”.
lol. Quote of the day! You’ve pegged it well, Uncle Chip!
BTW, do you have any idea why the keywords for this thread are Cheese, Moose, Sister, and Conspiracy? lol.
Loved that statement, “this is the war to keep America free”.
Er - topics. Topics are Cheese, Moose, Sister, and Conspiracy.
I agree with everything you say. We have to be a nation of laws and a nation that holds everyone accountable to those laws. By taking on this one issue to make that point, it appears that your motives (to the public) is that you are going after Obama. No matter that your motives are that we are a nation of laws in which everyone (from the President on down) has to obey them, that is not what will come out.
Me personally, I think that he is most likely a natural born citizen, but there could be something embarassing to him that would be revealed on that birth certificate. However, I don’t know this for a fact because he has not presented proof of this. I believe your cause could be better served by going about it the way I suggested. Because we are a nation of laws that starts with our bedrock (the Constitution) we will push at the state level that in the future, any candidate that seeks election to office (be they state or federal) will have to give proof of their eligibility for that office. For the Presidency, that proof will require a birth certificate and whatever documentation is required to prove they are a natural born citizen as outlined by election laws at the time of their birth.
God bless you in those efforts. We definitely need them.
I think the media has framed the issue as though concerned citizens are out to get Obama no matter what proof goes against them.
Just like they framed the Man-Made Global Warming thing.
But then the e-mails came out. Never touched by the government-run media, but hearings were initiated in Congress.
ACORN was never touched by the government-run media, but Congress voted to block funding. And then a judge said our representatives can’t do that. So there it sits. We the people and our whole process have been screwed because of one judge sitting in an office somewhere.
The dinosaur media is dead. People are flocking away from them. So Obama goes after Fox, the only news media he had to worry about when he threatened annihilation via FCC license revocation if they reported on this one issue.
More than a “birther” I would say I am a government reformist. I think Scott Brown’s election shows that even rank-and-file democrats want government reform - an insistence that the rules and laws be followed. And the Tea Party Movement, I think, shows that independents and republicans want it too. The people who DON’T want it are the talking heads and power-brokers in both parties. I wonder why that is...
I think this is a winning issue, and that is why Obama’s people are trying so hard to neuter its impact by getting conservatives to ridicule it.
Case in point, taken from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/13/us/politics/13obama.html :
“but aides said last month that he (Obama) still reserves the right to ignore sections of bills he considers unconstitutional if objections have been lodged previously by the executive branch.”
That, right there, is an accurate summary of everything Obama has done, and everything he has pressured people in positions to expose him into doing.
And if he gets away with it, he and anybody who follows him would be a fool to NOT be that way.
And they actually didn’t stop issuing the long-form certificates in 2001. They stopped doing that in October of 2008, according to the revision date on what they now call the “Certificate of Live Birth”. Although even after that - until June of 2009 - they said on the DHHL site that the long-form contains more info and would be needed to establish native Hawaiian status.
Say, bgill, in vital stats offices do they have one person go through and stamp all the certificates with certificate numbers in order and then farm them out to several clerks to do the indexing on them? Or do they have more than one person putting numbers on the certificates and they have to check with each other to see which ones are already used as they go along? Any insights on that?
So does the judge have to tell them again that they can’t do it?
I suppose the prohibition on ACORN funding could be a portion of the bill that Obama decides to ignore because he thinks it’s unconstitutional (see http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/13/us/politics/13obama.html ).... Can his budget go against what is in the appropriations bill if he decides to ignore the portions he doesn’t like?
There are so many ways to skin a cat, as they say. (Although I like cats). So many ways to render the laws moot. Let us COUNT the ways...
Sorry, don’t know.
Who is Obama's birth doctor? Is that such a hard question for the President of the United States to answer?
1. Right now, I would just be satisfied with Obama coming out and announcing to all the world the name of his 1961 birth doctor so that the good doctor and his family can rightfully enjoy all the public glory and public rewards that a doctor who delivered a president of the united States should receive.
2. But surprisingly, dear old Obama has been conspicuously silent when it comes to publicly giving us his 1961 birth doctor's name.
3. Why is dear old Obama denying his 1961 birth doctor and his family all the public praise and rewards that a doctor who delivered the sitting President of the United States should be entitled to?
4. For instance, the doctor and his family could appear all over the television on such shows as Larry King, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Beck.
5. The good doctor could write a best-selling book about his experiences as a doctor at Kapiolani Hospital, the hospital where Obama says that he was born.
6. The good doctor could have a TV-movie made of his life, and he and his family could become rich and famous from books and movies.
7. The good doctor's family could have members who are important or not so important people today, people who could use the financial rewards and publicity that would come to them when Obama publicly announced the name of his 1961 Hawaii birth doctor.
8. But poor Obama, he is so silent about the name of his birth doctor.
9. So, again, why is the President of the United States behaving in such a terrible way and setting such a poor example to the people of the United States?
10. Could this be the reason: There is NO doctor name or hospital name on Obama's 1961 long form birth certificate?
11. Yes, that is the reason, in my opinion.
I'd like a copy of your birth certificate. Please Freepmail me, no please post for all the world to see your full name, date of birth, place of birth, and parent's names. Along with a PDF of a signed statement to the Registrar of Births in the Jurisdiction in which you were born, stating that anyone in the world may obtain a certified copy of your birth certificate.
Why would I need all of that? Because you can't just go and get a certified copy of someone else's birth certificate. Its not just against protocol, it is a crime to release a birth certificate to an unauthorized party.
Which is common knowledge. I mean really, red light means 'stop', green's light means 'go', common knowledge. If you are really trying to sell the idea that the fact that a State won't just release someone else's birth certificate is a sign that the State is part of a conspiracy, well either A. your mental faculties are so limited that the rest of us hope you live in a group home, with a locked door, or B. you are so so blinded by hatred that you have forsaken the use of reason.
My guess is B. In case I'm wrong, and its A, I've got a great new conspiracy for you. Go to the United States Gold Bullion Depository, in Fort Knox, Kentucky. Ask to go inside, and count the gold, and make sure it is all there, and no bullion is missing.
I predict that...
You won't be allowed in to count the bullion.
Why, it must be A CONSPIRACY. Obama/Bush/Clinton/Nixon/the Bildebergers must have stolen all the gold! Go for it 240B! Contact Orly Taitz! Save the Republic!
Meanwhile, for Freepers who don't live in a group home, we have an election coming up in just over 8 months. Run for political office. Run for precinct chair. Volunteer to help out with the Get Out The Vote, or Ballot Security Committee, or Sign Committee, of the local Republican Party. And if those committees don't exist, create them, and get volunteers to help you.
When I decide to run for President CIC, I’ll do that.
But really, the request is nothing like you described. The request is to verify his birth by authorized personnel and not to “post it to the world”.
BTW, a copy of my BC was REQUIRED for both my passport and my TS.
I'd like a copy of your birth certificate. Please Freepmail me, no please post for all the world to see your full name, date of birth, place of birth, and parent's names. Along with a PDF of a signed statement to the Registrar of Births in the Jurisdiction in which you were born, stating that anyone in the world may obtain a certified copy of your birth certificate
If I were running for public office, say, for Head Dog Catcher, I would be more than happy to show you the voter my birth certificate.
I would feel that you as a voter have a right to know as much about me as possible before you cast your vote for the new Dog Catcher.
So, if I as a lowly office seeker of that most powerful position of dog catcher has no problem showing you my long form birth certificate, then why does Obama, the President of the United States, have problems showing us his 1961 Hawaii long form birth certificate or giving us the name of his birth doctor?
Is that too much to ask of the President of the United States? I don't think so.
They are actually required to disclose to the public what they relied on to state that Obama was born in Hawaii. Doesn’t have to be certified but it has to be what they relied on. It’s the law.
But the real point of all this is that Hawaii refuses to follow its laws (a LOT of them) - and that should be of concern to us all.
And BO released a copy of his birth certificate. One that was plenty good to obtain a passport. (I don't know what a 'TS' is.)
But it wasn't good enough for Birthers. No, they wanted something else. A 'long form' birth certificate, meaning a photo copy of the original, typewriter-on-printed-form birth certificate, with original (generally illegible) signature. Of course, when a person is adopted, it is common to create a new birth certificate, and seal the mythical 'long form', denying the whole world access to it. BO was adopted. Twice. So how suspicious is it that he didn't release a 'long form'? Not at all.
And what if he had, or does tomorrow, release the 'long form'? Are you, 240B, going to post Well the President really showed me. I'm sorry for my paranoid ravings to the effect he wasn't really President as he was born in Kenya/Canada/in orbit around Rigel 5 (I'm not certain of exactly what strain of Birtherism you espouse) I promise to confine my future activities to conventional political partisanship. My guess, not likely at all. In fact, no level of proof at all will ever satisfy you. Like Dan Rather, who has never had the falsity of his hit piece on George W demonstrated to his own satisfaction, you will never admit error.
That’s something I would donate to if they’d just send me a copy of his BC
Why you ugly bag of mostly water. It is clear you have confused me with someone else.
And since I have no idea what you are talking about, I’m projecting to you a mental image of a bunny with a pancake on it’s head sitting on the moose that once bit my sister.
But please keep me posted. I have to go jump in the shower.
He also could have invited the Dr.’s family to the Inauguration festivities.
I think that there is NO DADDY listed. The myth of Barack Obama II can’t be exposed now, not when Barry has made money off of it, and it helped to propel him to the WH.
Barry has no problem pimping other people out for “his self”.
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.