Posted on 02/07/2010 9:15:33 PM PST by butterdezillion
Here’s some new information – haven’t even added it to my blog yet.
According to http://uspolitics.about.com/od/senators/a/barack_obama.htm , Axelrod started videotaping Obama in 2003 for footage that he later used in Obama’s January 16, 2007 announcement that he would run for the presidency.
According to the UIPA responses received by Terri K and myself and the retention schedules for receipts, Obama’s amendment happened sometime between September of 2006 and January of 2007, since those records are to be retained for 3 years and receipts for fees to amend Obama’s vital records were denied to Terri K in September of 2006 and no longer existed when I requested them in January of 2010.
IOW, the DOH has revealed that in the last 6 months before Obama announced his run for the presidency he amended his birth record in Hawaii. That amendment was before the Factcheck COLB was printed in June of 2007 so if that COLB was legitimate it would definitely have had note of the amendment. So the Factcheck and Fight the Smears COLB’s are definitely forgeries and not just a COLB printed before the amendment was made.
Again, my conclusions are entirely based upon what the Hawaii Department of Health has stated in official responses to official UIPA requests and the laws, rules, and regulations which govern the records and statements they have made. If we take Hawaii at its word this is the natural conclusion we would make.
The certificate number and filing date that are mismatched according to the Nordyke certificate numbers and filing date confirm this also.
I haven’t checked this out yet, but the documentary requirements to amend a birth certificate 45 years after the birth would be hard to come by. What kind of evidence would be sufficient to prove that a record in existence for 45 years and never corrected before had been wrong all along? What would a person legitimately correct 45 years after the birth – after having used that birth certificate for 45 years whenever documentation was needed and never challenging the facts contained on it?
1 Certified copy of original birth certificate
2 Columbia University transcripts
3 Columbia thesis paper
4 Campaign donor analysis requested by 7 major watchdog groups
5 Harvard University transcripts
6 Illinois State Senate records
7 Illinois State Senate schedule
8 Law practice client list and billing records/summary
9 Locations and names of all half-siblings and step-mother
10 Medical records (only the one page summary released so far)
11 Occidental College Transcripts
12 Parent’s marriage Certificate
13 Record of baptism
14 Selective Service registration records
(Did Obama Actually Register for Selective Service?
This supposed revelation of 0's SS records has been debunked here and here.)
15 Schedules for trips outside of the United States before 2007
16 Passport records for all passports
17 Scholarly articles
18 SAT and LSAT test scores
19 Access to his grandmother in Kenya
20 List of all campaign workers that are lobbyists
21 Punahou grade school records
22 Noelani Kindergarten records are oddly missing from the the State of Hawaii Department of Education.
23 Page 11 of Stanley Ann Dunham's divorce decree.
24 Why did Barack Obama resign from the Illinois bar and where are all of the relevant documents?
25 Why did Michelle Obama resign from the Illinois bar after only about four years of practice and where are all of the relevant documents?
Anyone who cares about their country would be very concerned that a POTUS had hidden every scrap of information of his life that he possibly could.
If you want to do some looking of all the links to Hawaii, here’s the search criteria and Google link below.
“amend birth records site:hawaii.gov”
I am starting to think that he is not the real Barack Obama.
He is an imposter. Maybe thats why we never heard from his grandma, and why Mooshelle never visited her with him.
Who the heck is this person?
The Administrative Rules are posted at http://gen.doh.hawaii.gov/sites/har/AdmRules1/8%208A%20B%20VR%20Admin%20Rules.pdf .
In Chapter 8b, Section 3.1 tells when the certificate needs to be marked as “altered” - including when there are major administrative changes 90 days or more after the event. 3.4(B) describes major administrative amendments. 3.5(B) lists the major administrative amendments. 3.9 describes how the certificate has to be marked when amended. 3.11 describes that fees are only charged when the registrant or his/her representative was responsible for the error on the certificate.
Regarding the COLB, Section 2.5 addresses “Eligibility for Copies of Birth Certificates” and lists two kinds of certificates - standard and abbreviated. That corresponds to what most people call “long-form” or “short-form”. Those are the only two kinds of birth documents mentioned in the Administrative Rules. It doesn’t refer to certifications. Hawaii statute (HRS 338-18) refers to “verification in lieu of a certified copy” but the DOH confirmed that they don’t do that. When they are asked to verify something they send a certified abbreviated birth certificate (Certification of Live Birth).
So what is (or was) titled the “Certification of Live Birth” is the abbreviated birth certificate referred to in the rules. It is a birth certificate. The rules referenced above talk about amendments needing to be noted on the certificates. It doesn’t say only the standard certificates so it seems to apply to ALL certificates - even abbreviated ones.
The abbreviated certificates don’t have a place to record the witnesses to the birth. I also would love to see some COLB’s that have amendments to the place of birth. I don’t think they are very common though, because very few people would mistake the city where they gave birth. In what kind of circumstance would a person change the place of birth?
Especially if a person was born in a hospital, since the hospital would fill out the location and other general information like that. If a person was born at Kapiolani Hospital, for instance.... the hospital would put Honolulu as the place of birth. Why would a person ever change that place of birth if they were born at Kapiolani Hospital? If the doctor signed the birth certificate saying they witnessed a birth at Kapiolani Hospital in Honolulu, how would a person change that detail on the birth certificate without calling the doctor who signed it a liar?
The certificate number and filing date that are mismatched according to the Nordyke certificate numbers and filing date confirm this also.Out of sequence certificate number is indicative of a new birth record created by Court order after the original birth record is sealed.
to read in the morning
According to his book “Dreams”, Tutu gave Mooshelle a very high compliment “that she seems to be a very sensible girl” when they were visiting BHO grandparents in Hawaii before they got married,
So you're saying he's a dark-skinned caucasian who has uses a white guy dialect when he wants to?
saving
Only in America can you be born an illegitimate white kid and grow up to be an illegitimate black president. Kind of like Jacko, only different.
The "Frank" passage and the ones that follow, however, tell us something suggestive about Stanley Dunham, namely that he frequented otherwise all-black bars in an area rife with prostitution. That a black woman -- perhaps a friend of Davis's -- gave birth to a child of Dunham's may explain "the complicated, unspoken transaction between the two men." If this were the case, it would have caused far less societal stress for Ann Dunham to assume maternity of her little brother than for Stanley Dunham to assume paternity of his son.
We also know that Stanley Dunham so desperately wanted a boy that he named his only child "Stanley Ann." That he chose to raise the young Barack would not have been out of character.
Obama's father was not the Kenyan alpha male but a white furniture salesman from Kansas (his "grandpa")?
...There goes the whole exotic "Barrack Hussein Obama" myth... totally shattered. Career over.
Can you recall where you saw that article? Any idea how one might find that again?
Thanks.
Even though he isn't?
Why do you think they care?
I mean, superficially, the records are private, you don't have the right to have them released to you or to the media, so they won't give them to you.
I wouldn't, either.
At a deeper level, you claim that you have discovered an alternate pathway giving you the right to the information. That may be true (although it seems unlikely).
If it IS true, and the statute requires what it appears to forbid, why WOULDN'T the State of Hawaii do what you want?
The first rule of bureaucracy is not to make yourself visible. A good way to become visible is by breaking the law.
Why should the clerk you are dealing with care? As long as the law is in fact on your side, 99.99% of the bureaucrats on Earth would carry that document to your door.
So you aren’t going to read the Admin Rules? You are just going to condescend and talk down to her AS IF you have a clue?
It’s clear you have nothing but an opinion. And we all know about opinions—they are like you. Everyone has one on their backside.
“I wouldn’t, either.
At a deeper level, you claim that you have discovered an alternate pathway giving you the right to the information. That may be true (although it seems unlikely).
If it IS true, and the statute requires what it appears to forbid, why WOULDN’T the State of Hawaii do what you want?
The first rule of bureaucracy is not to make yourself visible. A good way to become visible is by breaking the law.”
BTW, the Department of Health is VERY visible. “
If the Certificate of Live Birth published by Factcheck etc is fraudulent, is there any way a criminal or civil suit can be brought against the Publishers?
In Australia it would be a Crime. http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_act/cc189994/s102.html
MCL 750.249 Forgery of records and other instruments; uttering and publishing.
Uttering and publishing forged instruments—Any person who shall utter and publish as true, any false, forged, altered or counterfeit record, deed, instrument or other writing mentioned in the preceding section, knowing the same to be false, altered, forged or counterfeit, with intent to injure or defraud as aforesaid, shall be guilty of a felony, punishable by imprisonment in the state prison not more than 14 years.
http://www.sjosephcross.com/FM/uttering.aspx
In United States law, uttering and publishing is a crime similar to counterfeiting. Uttering is the act of offering a forged document to another when the offeror has knowledge that the document is forged.[1] Uttering does not require that the person who presented the document actually forged or altered the document. For example, forging a log for personal profit might be considered uttering and publishing. Another example would be the forging of a university diploma. As an example of the law itself, the State of Michigan defines the offense (MCL 750.249): “Any person who utters and publishes as true any false, forged, altered or counterfeit record, deed, instrument or other writing specified, knowing it to be false, altered, forged, or counterfeit, with intent to injure or defraud is guilty of uttering and publishing.”[2]
Forging or illegal “publishing” of an official or unofficial document is not the essence of uttering. Uttering is the actual presentation of forged or official documentation as one’s own. So, for example, an underage teen attempting to get into a bar with an ID that is either fake or not theirs is guilty of uttering, though they may have had nothing to do with the actual making, or “publishing” of the ID.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uttering_and_publishing
I’d have to look to find out where we were told this, but the DOH has said that the certificate number remains the same when a new birth record is created.
Why did the Chrysler lawyer give in to Obama? Why did the media? This is Chicago politics. I think these people are fearing for their lives.
And there is a chance that Obama snuck something into his Presidential Order which created the czars’ panel to help Pacific Islanders that made them lose federal funds if they disclosed the records. Linden Joesting, staff attorney at the OIP, gave a cryptic response to John Charlton alluding to the possibility that records couldn’t be released if the release jeopardized federal funding.
All I’m saying is that there are enough red flags that law enforcement should be checking this out. The fact that none of them will stinks to high heaven and should itself be checked out.
I think right now that point that I’m making is unimpeachable.
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.