The PDF that Nero posted above this post verifies the existence of a certificate for Obama born in Honolulu. The gender is not verified but does not seem critical, nor does island since the city is verified. The time is there, but not the date and the date is critical. Not sure about the parents' names, why are those critical?
The most critical verified fact is that Obama was born in Honolulu. There may indeed be some sort of caveat that Onaka left out. So there are two questions in my mind, what are the legal ramifications of evasiveness if any. Second what would cause a 1961 BC to say Obama was born in Honolulu if he was not born there? What other process would create such a certificate? I heard theories in 08 about that, but don't keep up.
Regardless of the evasiveness in Onaka's answer, the most critical question of birth place is answered in the affirmative. Any theory that says otherwise has to explain how Onaka can legally say that.
The alleged father was a Kenyan.
Beside the verification to SoS Bennett (linked by Nero)there are two other verifications.
http://www.obamabirthbook.com/wp-content/uploads/verification.jpg
http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/kansas-verification.pdf
In both of those Dr. Onaka verifies the information on the pdf matches the information on the original.
These are the only Hawaii verifications that have been posted to the net. So we have no idea what’s the standard format for a verification.
The form that SoS Bennett sent to Hawaii is the standard form used to request a birth certificate. The items on the form are normally used by the DOH to locate the correct BC to be verified.
1) On a normal verification (not Obama’s) would Dr. Onaka list all the items on the request form?
2) Or would he simple say “I verify we have the original vital record for so and so on file at the DOH indicating birth in Hawaii.”?
3) Are the request form’s items implicitly verified by the fact that they used those items to identify the one correct BC containing that info?
On Bennet’s rquest form, he entered the following info:
Name: Barack Hussein Obama, II
Gender: Male
DOB: August 4, 1961
Place of Birth: Honolulu, Oahu
Father’s: Name: Barack Hussein Obama
Mother’s Maiden Name: Stanley Ann Dunham
He also requested the following information be verified:
Department of Health File: 151 61 10641
Time of Birth: 7:24 p.m.
Name of Hospital: Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital
Age of Father: 25
Birthplace of Father: Kenya, East Africa
Age of Mother: 18
Birthplace of Mother: Wichita, Kansas
Date of signature of parent: 8-7-1961
Date of signature of attendant: 8-8-1961
Date accepted by local registrar: August-8-1961
Butter’s contention is that those last items are only a verification that the original BC claims these items. But couldn’t you use the same argument even if all the items (request form and extra items) had been listed on Dr. Onaka’s verification?
And wouldn’t that hold true for every verification issued by Hawaii?
How would you very know whether or not there was a big red “ALTERED” stamped on a particular BC by just looking at a verification?
Could there be legal reasons that Dr. Onaka cannot use the magic word “identical” and those reasons have nothing to do with the legal validity of the BC? For example, the coping and scanning process and the creating of the pdf all cause image distortions would they still be legally identical?
If in coping the original onto the green security paper was the image reduced to fit on the paper? If so would it still be “identical”?
On SoS Bennet’s verification, Dr. Onaka did not list the items on the request form, but he did verify that those items are on the original BC held by the DOH.
“Additionally, I verify that the information in the copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama that you attached with your request matches the original record in our files.”
Does that mean that he is verifing that all of the items on the request form match the information on the original BC?
