Another happy heaping helping of weasel words, with a side order of dodged questions. A simple yes or no answer would have been good, and the absence thereof just makes the alleged documents more suspect.
We know who Obama’s father is...”The author of confusion”.
I can hear the dancing from here....the Obama Shuffle.
There is a bit of obfuscation going on around here.
Interesting.
Obama’s mom didn’t apply for a Certificate of Citizenship, she applied for a Green Card for Obama to live in the US as a Legal Resident Alien.. After he turned 18, Obama naturalized as a US Citizen.
water-boarding Hawaii Department of Health officials might bring out the truth, little else will .
AZ should just deny him a spot on the ballot. Put the onus on HIM to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. He will send Holder to do his bidding anyhow.
Even so, Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett said on Wednesday that Hawaii’s “Verification of Birth” satisfies Arizona requirements, and that Barack Obama will appear on the November ballot.
............................................................
Why did Bennett accept it and place Obama on the ballot if he isn’t satisfied?
Why did he ask in the first place if he wasn’t willing to carry out his threat.
Why is the State of Hawaii deliberately involved in Treason by covering up facts?
Ping
Sure looks to me that the “original” on file that matches the WH LFCOLB.pdf is not the only information that Hawaii has regarding Obama’s birth. There is likely an amendment or an invalidation on that “original” record.
There are a few other possibilities, but given the changes from the standard records verification to the highly specialized one that was used, this one seems to fit.
I’m glad to see the WT picking up on this issue.
“Hawaii State Registrar does not verify authenticity of President Obama’s birth certificate”
Of course not. Because they know someone could seriously be going to prison for this.
In other words, "is the original record in your files the same fake document that was released on the White House website?"
In other words, "is the original record in your files the same fake document that was released on the White House website?"
What the HDOH is even more incriminating than not confirming the genuineness of Obama’s forged long-form.
Bennett was required to change the “wording” on his request before HI deputy AG Joshua Wisch would allow the HDOH to send anything at all. There were 2 parts of Bennett’s request that were changed:
1. the “wording” on this part of Bennett’s SPECIAL (non-application-form) request
2. Bennett dropped the form request altogether.
Addressing those 2 changes:
1. The wording change was so the HDOH would not have to verify that Obama’s forgery is genuine but WOULD confirm that the information in Obama’s forgery matches the information on their record. So what’s the difference then? Why did Obama have to forge a BC if the info was the same? Because there was MORE on the real record than he wanted people to see. Not more items, because his forgery had all the items normally on a LFBC. What was different? The real thing has stamps saying “LATE” and “ALTERED”, and a notation (right where the seal is supposed to go) of what evidence was submitted in support of a late and/or amended filing, and when. This conclusion is consistent with the claims of the HDOH, former OIP Director Paul Tsukiyama; Chiyome Fukino, and Gov Neil Abercrombie - AND makes sense out of #2 below.
2. The form request was withdrawn (at the demand of Joshua Wisch, presumably) even though it actually contained the items that pertain to presidential eligibility: place and date of birth and parents’ names. Why? Not because these items are off-limits to ask, obviously - because they are on the standard request form. But that’s the problem: they are a standard request for verification. According to HRS 338-14.3 a standard request for verification requires the HDOH to certify the TRUE facts of birth. And HRS 338-17 says that a late and/or altered BC is not legally probative - IOW, the claims on that BC are legally questionable and the State of HI cannot vouch for their accuracy. So the HDOH CANNOT verify the true facts of Obama’s birth. Onaka knew that, and as “client” of the HI AG’s office let them know that he COULD NOT respond to Bennett’s STANDARD request.
So they went with Plan B: Bennett’s SPECIAL REQUEST. The request that asked the HDOH to verify FROM THE RECORD ON FILE, 11 particular items. That, the HDOH could do. They verified that they have a record on file (never said it was legally valid, which it’s not) and that the record on file CLAIMS blah, blah, blah. In his certifying statement Bennett states that they are verifying what is sworn on the record on file.
There is a thread about this at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2887501/posts There’s more analysis in some of the comments there.
And I’ve got a detailed analysis (plus links to a bunch of supporting documenation and corroborating details) at http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/hi-non-verification-1.pdf
We need to understand - and make known - the fact that Joshua Wisch required these changes to Bennett’s request to specifically accommodate the fact that Obama’s BC is late and amended and therefore legally non-valid.
I have sent an e-mail to Ken Bennett, noting that the info that actually pertains to presidential eligibility was on the standard request form, which he did not receive a response to even though he said he got what he had asked for. I asked him why he withdrew that request form. We’ll see what happens but I’m not holding my breath.
Come on, man! Two days ago Arizona SOS said this was over. The article comfirms, “Even so, Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett said on Wednesday that Hawaii’s “Verification of Birth” satisfies Arizona requirements, and that Barack Obama will appear on the November ballot.”
So, WTF didn’t the Times reporter ask why he is going to be on the ballot if there is still a question?
What crappy reporting. Does anybody know the answer?