I’m not talkng about opinions, I’m discussing documentary evidence that is admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence.
Both Honolulu newspapers have confirmed that they did not accept birth notices from family members or friends, only directly from the Health Bureau. That’s why the section of the newspaper was called “Health Bureau Statistics.”
The burden of proof for all of your “coulds” lies with the challengers. Over seven years of trying they have not been able to meet that burden.
How would one go about confirming a home birth fifty four years later when the name and signature of an attending physician at Kapi’olani Hospital is on the birth certificate, signed on August 8, 1961?
‘How would one go about confirming a home birth fifty four years later when the name and signature of an attending physician at Kapi’olani Hospital is on the birth certificate, signed on August 8, 1961?’
If you’re talking about the signature on the LFBC, that’s a forgery. CNN, via info from HI, confirmed it:
‘NEW YORK, July 24 (UPI) — CNN/U.S. President Jon Klein told staffers of “Lou Dobbs Tonight” the controversy over President Barack Obama’s birth certificate is a “dead story.”
Klein wrote in an e-mail to staffers Thursday that CNN researchers had determined Hawaiian officials discarded paper birth documents in 2001. Thus, he said, Obama’s long-form birth certificate no longer exists, and a shorter certificate that is public is the official record.
“It seems to definitively answer the question,” Klein wrote in the e-mail, first reported by the Web site TVNewser. “Since the show’s mission is for Lou to be the explainer and enlightener, he should be sure to cite this during your segment tonite (sic). And then it seems this story is dead — because anyone who still is not convinced doesn’t really have a legitimate beef.”’
And as usual, I am pointing out that even though the great and lofty "Federal Rules of Evidence" say it's good, it doesn't actually PROVE ANYTHING FACTUAL.
You see, this is the difference between a procedure bound institution and a clear thinker.
Both Honolulu newspapers have confirmed that they did not accept birth notices from family members or friends, only directly from the Health Bureau. That’s why the section of the newspaper was called “Health Bureau Statistics.”
And as has been pointed out innumerable times, if Grandma filed the paperwork, then the Health Bureau generated the newspaper announcements automatically.
The burden of proof for all of your “coulds” lies with the challengers. Over seven years of trying they have not been able to meet that burden.
Procedure bound dinosaurs will be procedure bound dinosaurs. I hear Galileo (who was ACTUALLY RIGHT) had a hard time convincing authorities too.
How would one go about confirming a home birth fifty four years later when the name and signature of an attending physician at Kapi’olani Hospital is on the birth certificate, signed on August 8, 1961?
And as has been pointed out before, the Hawaiian procedures allow for an examination of the child for up to a year after birth, and whatever physician examines that child will be listed as the doctor signing the birth certificate.
You are really just blatantly ignoring all the weirdities and abnormalities of Hawaiian birth certificate law. Everyone that tacitly looks at this just assumes that everything is done according to the normal processes they are familiar with. That Hawaii is really a weird bird when it comes to birth certificates (because they have made a cottage industry out of giving them to foreigners all across the pacific rim for half a century), never enters their mind. They just assume Hawaii is just like all the other states when it is not.
Their laws reflect their needs and desires. Selling American citizenship would be a pretty lucrative effort for them after World War II.