OK, now you're arguing fraudulence, but before you were citing the statute. Either way, there has to be evidence. Have you seen any evidence?
What exactly do you think applying for certificate of birth in Hawaii was about? A form was filled out by a parent with details.
I think they required a bit more than someone strolling into the DOH and filling out a form. Things like a doctor or midwife's affidavit, or at least some proof that the baby existed. But "Got baby? Here's a cert!" -- I don't think so.
Until obama shows his stuff, everything you are posting is speculation. So go ahead and continue on.
No, unfortunately, it's the other way around. The courts don't operate on what could have happened, they need some assurance that these things -- such as casual registration of births without proof -- actually did happen, on a regular basis, at the time and place specified. No one has come up with anything that supports your theories.
You have proof obama's mother registered obama before a year old? Let's see the evidence.
Why do I need proof? You referred to that old statute, and I said I didn't think it was relevant. If you think it is, that's your prerogative.
I placed to your observation two different ways Hawaii could issue a birth certificate stating the place of birth was Hawaii because you said nowhere does it state that.
[§338-17.8] Certificates for children born out of State. (a) Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.
Who is Eligible to Apply for the Issuance of a Late Birth Certificate in Lieu of a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth?The Certificate of Hawaiian Birth program was established in 1911, during the territorial era, to register a person born in Hawaii who was one year old or older and whose birth had not been previously registered in Hawaii. The Certificate of Hawaiian Birth Program was terminated in 1972, during the statehood era.
broward chad; The answer is "nowhere." You can speculate and theorize that they did, but you can't state it as a fact , since no one -- including the attorneys filing these lawsuits -- has come up with any evidence that Hawaii changed the place of birth on any such certificate.
Then I posted it would be achieved by obama's mother placing fraudulent information.
It would be fraudulent information given in order to obtain that type of BC.
broward chad; OK, now you're arguing fraudulence, but before you were citing the statute. Either way, there has to be evidence. Have you seen any evidence?
I cited a statute that a Hawaii birth certificate could be applied for even if born elsewhere that you disputed. There is no evidence to the contrary and obama has been requested in many lawsuits to show documents we all have to show when requested by the government. obama is not above federal requirements.
What exactly do you think applying for certificate of birth in Hawaii was about? A form was filled out by a parent with details.
You think people went in to get a birth certificate in Hawaii and place another country or state for place of birth? That would not be a Hawaii Certificate of Birth and those statutes would never have been on record.
broward chad; I think they required a bit more than someone strolling into the DOH and filling out a form. Things like a doctor or midwife's affidavit, or at least some proof that the baby existed. But "Got baby? Here's a cert!" -- I don't think so.
You THINK? You posted more theory and supposition with no proof. In fact a form with information was all that was needed. There was very little corroboration in those days due to inability to obtain information like we can today.
Until obama shows his stuff, everything you are posting is speculation. So go ahead and continue on.
broward chad; No, unfortunately, it's the other way around. The courts don't operate on what could have happened, they need some assurance that these things -- such as casual registration of births without proof -- actually did happen, on a regular basis, at the time and place specified. No one has come up with anything that supports your theories.
No, unfortunately for you, none of courts for obama's lawsuits have ruled that obama even has a legitimate U.S birth certificate. And no one requested the plaintiff's prove obama could get a Hawaii BC and not be born in Hawaii. It's makes no sense to anyone but you since the statues are clearly there for that to happen.
When you are sued in a court of law, since when is showing a simple document not the way it works? No one needs to show documents ever again in a court of law? I bet the radical islamists will love you to tell them that one.
You have proof obama's mother registered obama before a year old? Let's see the evidence?
broward chad; Why do I need proof? You referred to that old statute, and I said I didn't think it was relevant. If you think it is, that's your prerogative.
Exactly, you don't want proof. You want speculation and you want a end to anyone seeking the truth. I thought truth was important to everyone. I see you have nothing to add but obama talking points that have no validity whatsoever.
The people asking do want facts and truth. If you are willing to take whatever obama hands you in the way of truth then maybe America is not for you. North Korea sounds more to your liking.
Obama must show the vault birth certificate and not the abbreviated version with few details. Perhaps obama was born in Hawaii and all he is hiding is different name. Because that in turn could get him disbarred. Whatever the reason we want to know. If it is proven to be nothing then we move on to get rid of obama in 2012.