Obama Born In The U.S. ? New Facts And Questions Say; 'Probably Not!'

"I guess it is all decided then. The statement of one flunky in the Hawwaiian Health Department has pretty much decided the issue on her own. Why did Dr. Fukino never come out to confirm this? Has Ms. Okubo seen the original documentation related to BHO’s birth? Has Dr. Fukino even seen the original documents? I tend to be suspicious of second hand information."

The "flunky" is the official spokesperson for the department. It is fair to assume that the official spokesperson spoke with Fukino, and had access to the records. Expecting Fukino to make a further statement confirming what the spokesperson already said makes no sense.

"I tend to be suspicious of second hand information."

When the officials at the department speak about the records they have on file, it is not second hand information.

"I think there is ample evidence to suspect the information that the Hawaiian Health Department has provided."

I see. So this department of the State of Hawaii is in on the conspiracy.

"Has Hawaii performed forensic investigations on the original document(s) and confirmed the veracity of the data provided to them? We have not been given any information on what level of verification that the Hawaiian officials have performed."

Again, a completely unreasonable expectation.

“Any person born in Hawaii who is one year old or older and whose birth has not been previously registered in Hawaii, or that person’s parent, guardian, next of kin, or older person acting for that person and having knowledge of the facts of birth may request the registration of a late certificate of birth, except that an application will not be accepted for a deceased person.” http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/vital-records/latereg.html

It is clear that the child/person being registered must be one year old or older. Obama’s birth certificate was registered on August 8th, 1961, which is only 4 days after his birthday. If the copy of his birth certificate is accurate, he cannot have a delayed certificate of birth.

I also found this on a website for Kamehameha schools admission. It indicates that a certificate of delayed birth and a certificate of hawaiian birth are different documents from the certificate of live birth, and are used for those who do not have a certificate of birth from Hawaii.

http://www.ksbe.edu/datacenter/hooulu-verification.php
“In situations where certified birth certificates do not exist or cannot be obtained due to hardship, alternative documents may be accepted to establish Hawaiian ancestry. Examples of alternative documents are listed below in the preferred order of acceptability:
1. Certificates of Delayed Birth
2. Certificates of Hawaiian Birth, including all testimonies and notations
3. Marriage certificates
4. Death certificates”

I also confirmed this with the Hawaii department of health.
According to the department of health in Hawaii, a certificate of Hawaiian birth does not qualify an individual for a certification of live birth. Some may have both, but a certificate of Hawaiian birth alone does not qualify. A certified copy of the certificate of Hawaiian birth is issued instead.

Based on that information, if the COLB at factcheck.org is real, then BO was really born in Hawaii.

"You'd get the Certification, which is an abstract, regardless of which type of birth certificate you had."

What basis do you have for this statement?

http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/appforms/applyhhl

The primary documents used to show you are of age and a qualified native Hawaiian are:
A certified copy of Certificate of Birth;
A certified copy of Certificate of Hawaiian Birth,
including testimonies; or
A certified copy of Certificate of Delayed Birth.
You will need the certified birth certificates for:

Yourself
Your biological father; and
Your biological mother
The state Department of Health, (DOH), Vital Records Section, records documents by island and district (geographically) and by the date of the event (chronologically).
...
In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL.

So what is your basis for implying that one would get some other document if the original birth certificate was not Certification of Live Birth?

Not that it matters much, since a Certification could be generated by the mother and a grandparent certifying a home birth. They might fudge the place and date a little to obtain citizenship for the child. Given that there is a statement on record that little BHO Jr was in Seattle while still all "pink" and when Stanley Ann did not yet know how to change his diapers, there is at least some indication that he may not have been born in Honolulu. If not in Honolulu, then perhaps in Seattle, which would mean the Certification is indeed a fake. But why bother to fake Hawaiian birth if one was born in Seattle? But if one was born in, say Vancouver BC, that would be some motivation for preparing a false document. He might even have an original with the correct place of birth on file, or he might not. But at least an examination of the Certificate would show whether it was the more usual "born in a hospital" sort, or the more unusual, especially when the parents live in the city, "filed by parent" sort.

From Cyropaedia (post #1435):

b. In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or mid wife, then, up to the first birthday of the child, an adult could, upon testimony, file a “Delayed Certificate”, which required endorsement on the Delayed Certificate of a summary statement of the evidence submitted in support of the acceptance for delayed filing, which evidence must be kept in a special permanent file.

If that statement posted by Cyropaedia is true (and I suspect that there must be some mechanism for births to be recorded without an attending physician or midwife), then there is a way to file a delayed certificate of birth without waiting until after a year of age. In fact, it could have been filed on Aug. 8 immediately after BHO was born. The same person that reported the questionable birth announcement in the newspaper (with unlikely address for Obama's), could easily have filed the request for birth certificate with the State of Hawaii. This is all very speculative and hypothetical, but it is within the realm of possibility.

ga medic:"According to the department of health in Hawaii, a certificate of Hawaiian birth does not qualify an individual for a certification of live birth. Some may have both, but a certificate of Hawaiian birth alone does not qualify. A certified copy of the certificate of Hawaiian birth is issued instead."

From what I understood (but of course, there is much misinformation flying about on this subject), the document at factcheck.org is a CERTIFICATION of live birth and not a CERTIFICATE of live birth. I was under the assumption that these are different documents. I think the CERTIFICATE of live birth is the long-form, original document that is the primary document.

You really need to stop and think about this for a moment. If BO was born on August 4th, and his birth certificate was filed on the 8th, by definition that is NOT a delayed certificate of birth.

How would grandma or anyone else be able to go to the Hawaii department of health and file for a birth certificate, without any evidence of birth, and without the mom and son being present? If BO was born in Kenya, it would be impossible for mom and son to be back in Hawaii in time to have a birth certificate filed by the 8th. The state might have been lax in issuing birth certificates, but to believe that they would issue a certificate without the presence of a delivering doctor or midwife, the mother, or the child defies all rational thought. What would the reason have been to rush the process that much anyway?

And....I posted the link to the Hawaii Dept. of vital records which describes the process of issuing delayed certificates in detail. It says very clearly older than one year of age. Why would you take the word of an anonymous poster over the state’s own website?

And...One of the birth announcements clearly states that the information was provided by the state bureau of vital statistics.

If the certification of live birth is not a forgery, then I would think it would be impossible for a rational person to believe that BO was not born in Hawaii.

Please refer to this website from Arizona for an example of what is required (current law) for a birth certificate to be issued:

http://www.azdhs.gov/vitalrcd/Home_birth.htm

As you can see, the requirements are not very restrictive. I don’t know what the requirements were in Hawaii in August of 1961, but I would suggest they could be even looser at that time.

In the case of current laws of Arizona, you can mail all the information into the state, there is no necessity to appear in person (as long as you mail the info within 7 days of the birth). Anyone over the age of 18 can register this birth - all they need to do is fill in the proper form (no Dr. or mid-wife required).

I guess you are right in this case, it would not be a delayed bith record but an actual, bona-fide certificate of live birth.

By the way, I don’t think BHO was born in Kenya either, but that is not important for our discussion anyway.

ga medic:”And...One of the birth announcements clearly states that the information was provided by the state bureau of vital statistics.”

Could you please provide the link or reference for this? I had not heard this piece of news previously. Though even if it were true, it could have just been normal operating procedure once a BC request was made to the health department (in the manner I mentioned above).

But it doesn't say you cannot file (register) early and get the birth certificate later on. And besides Obama's COLB is a forgery any way so that date could have been just as easily forged.

“But it doesn’t say you cannot file (register) early and get the birth certificate later on. “

I don’t understand your point. Everyone can register their birth early and request a birth certificate later. That is the standard way it was done.

My point is that either the birth certificate is fake, or he was born in Hawaii. If he was born on August 4th and his birth was registered on August 8th (as his COLB says) there is no way he could have been born anywhere but Hawaii. The process of registering a birth that did not occur with a physician and in a hospital would take much longer than 4 days, and would have been impossible had BO been born in Kenya.

Just for the record, all of the genuine certifications that have been made public and where the dates of birth and registration were not blacked out, all of them were registered some days after the date of birth.

Of the available ones (Date of Birth/Date of Registration):

June 21/June 25

October 4/October 7

January 19/January 24

May 14/May 27

ga medic:”Check the links that I provided earlier and they show the requirements for registering a birth in Hawaii.”

I was unable to find the information or rules for filing an original birth record that was not performed by Dr. or Mid-wife. The only thing listed on the web site you provided is “Any person born in Hawaii who is one year old or older and whose birth has not been previously registered in Hawaii”.

I would assume from this statement that anyone who registers a birth within the first year is not a “late” registrant. I saw no where on this web site that tells what is to be done in that case. Because it is lacking, I assume the information that I posted about Arizona is most likely similar in Hawaii. Do you know where Hawaii specifically lays out the requirements for filing for a birth that was not performed by a Dr (a home birth, for example)?

And BTW, that article at texasdarlin was unreadable. Do you have a better image that I can actually read?

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0016.htm

This is the evidence required to file a birth registration by the birth parents. (not hospital or midwife) It can only be filed one year or more after the birth. This requires If a mother has a baby at home and wanted to register the birth, the baby would need to be seen by a doctor, who would then file the documentation to register the birth.

Other than these specific instances, birth parents cannot submit records to The Hawaii Department of Health.

§338-22 Other persons required to make records. Persons in charge of institutions for care or correction or for treatment of disease, injury, or childbirth shall record and report all statistical data required by this part relating to their inmates or patients. [L 1949, c 327, §26; RL 1955, §57-25; HRS §338-22]

If BOs birth was registered on Aug 8th, as stated on his COLB, then the information must have been submitted by the Hospital or Physician who delivered him or examined him shortly after his birth. Birth parents cannot file the information for a Certificate of Birth. If the parents do not get a physician or hospital to register the information, they must wait until the child is older than one year, and register the birth on a delayed certificate of birth.

That is the only link to the newspaper listing that I have. There is a close up of the listing for the Obamas, and the whole page is also included. It is hard to see the names on the page, but you can clearly see “Health Bureau Statistics” at the top.

Thanks for the Website link. That seems to have the birth requirements, in general...

ga medic: “Other than these specific instances, birth parents cannot submit records to The Hawaii Department of Health.”

This link from the same web site seems to imply that others besides doctors and midwives can register a birth (parents, “legally authorized persons”). As I have mentioned previously, 1961 law was likely less stringent:

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0005.htm

It looks like there is latitude also for special cases that a parent or authorized person is not required either:

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0006.htm

Note that these are not considered delayed or altered certificates.

My guess is that in Hawaii in 1961 (as would be the case for most all states at that time), the rules for procuring a birth certificate were not very strict and varied wildly from case to case.

At any rate, there appear to be mechanisms that the grandparents or the parents could have registered the birth in Hawaii even though the birth may not have been performed in Hawaii. It would be very helpful to have the original birth record that is under seal to help put to rest most all of these possibility.

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.