DOH indirectly confirms: Factcheck COLB date filed and certificate number impossible

Butterdezillion | Feb 23, 2010 | Butterdezillion

[edge919]

You’ve mistaken a dribble for a fumble. You keep missing this part of the citation: “... so long as he remains in it, as a duty upon him by the mere fact of his residence and that temporary protection which he enjoys ...” This acknowledges temprorary allegiance, not permanent allegiance ... you know, the kind that made Wong a citizen, but doesn’t apply to Obama since his papa was not a permanent immigrant ... and because his mama was possibly an expatriate and definitely not a permanent resident of the United States.

[BP2]

I can't believe you have yet to figure out that you will never personally touch a certified copy of Obama's birth certificate.

I do not want to personally touch it. Quit shifting the argument to something it's not.

I DO want Obama's "birth certificate" to appear in Court as a "prima facie" FACT, which it never, ever has. As such, HRS 338-13(b) and 338.19 has never been "activated."

YOU and the rest of the After-Birther foolishly and mistakenly put your TRUST in internet-based prima facie, originating from LIAR-in-Chief Obama with a very dubious Chain of Custody on its way to another LIAR, Nancy Pelosi at the DNC Convention in August 2008.

The JUDGMENT and TRUST of yourself and all of the other After-Birthers is highly, HIGHLY misplaced.

A LIAR lies, both AFTER and BEFORE the Election.

[parsifal]

Argggg! Look at the Indiana decision again. Same thing. If you are born in USA you are an NBC. The “law” since at least 1608.

parsy

[parsifal]

“Many a truth is said in jest, little boy”

Yes! I jest a lot.

parsy, who is glad you noticed!

[parsifal]

I stand corrected. A Swiss dude who speaks the language of cheese eating and surrender monkeying.

parsy, who keeps forgetting where Vattel comes from

[edge919]

It’s about all you have.

[EnderWiggins]

"Yes it would be interesting to see what was presented and what it says and if it actually matches the alleged COLB, which has still not been proven authentic nor sufficient to be presented for a passport."

Well... you're not quite correct on that one. You forget that the State Department filed a formal response in the Strunk case in which they testified under penalty of perjury that the COLB presented by Obama absolutely is sufficient to prove his citizenship status. They also declared him a "natural born citizen," and as we are all aware, they're in the position to know.

"It was barely visible in one of the scans, but not enough to prove it was a first-generation scan of an official COLB. The scan is just as consistent with a fraudulent document."

You keep trying to distract from the admission here by waving your hands at nonsense. Who cares if it was first or second or fifth generation scan? The bottom line is that the raised seal is visible on the originally released scanned images. It always was.

"Sorry, but I'm not convinced Polarik wasn't actually part of the Obama deflection team."

Well, after he was exposed as a total fake and fraud, no wonder you suspect him. But of course, he is the source of the whole "COLB is a forgery" meme. I get the biggest kick out of how Birther lies never die, even when it's demonstrated that they are wrong and their original source was a liar.

"A comparison of the race designation in matched sets of birth certificates and census records from the 1950 registration completeness test indicates very high agreement for white persons and Negroes."

What does that have to do with it? In the first place, that's comparing birth certificates to census records, not to the CDC reporting results. In the second place, that's talking about 1950... a time when its not even clear the Public Health Service collected demographics from birth certificates at all..

Would a BC that said "black" or "colored" be considered "agreement" with a category of "negro" on the census records? Would "African?" I know what I'd be willing to bet. How about you?

So, you remain here in error. The standardization of reporting categories to the CDC did not require anywhere that those standards be used on birth certificates.

"Again my point was that your example didn't invalidate what national requirements are. Hawaii may not have complied in 1961, but there were standard categories that were supposed to be used."

And again, you are talking about completely different things. There were national standards for reporting. But to this very day, there are still not national standards for birth certificates.

[EnderWiggins]

"Plenty contradicts it and very little supports it. Blind faith is the only thing faithers have."

You guys keep saying that. But as Judge Land told orly Taitz, "Unlike in Alice in Wonderland, simply saying something is so does not make it so."

[patlin]

““Every foreigner born residing in a country owes to that country allegiance and obedience to its laws so long as he remains in it, as a duty upon him by the mere fact of his residence and that temporary protection which he enjoys, and is as much bound to obey its laws as native subjects or citizens.

You really don't know how to comprehend what you read do you. You also neglect to address the fact that WONG swore an allegiance to the US & signed a promise to return in order to obtain the required papers he needed to show immigration upon his return. This is called citizenship by consent which is the definition of citizenship under the laws of nature.

I won't hold my breath that you actually comprehend this concept though since DRONES are incapable of this level of intelligence.

[parsifal]

The allegiance may be temporary. Amen! And the Wong court says that is enough to make an NBC. Finally you GET IT!

parsy, who just slam dunked you again....

[STE=Q]

In order for Obama's "birth certificate" to be accepted as a legal "fact" — it MUST appear in Court.

Bringing an ORIGINAL document to court has consequences that supersede giving a putative copy to a third party -- such as a news organization.

Deceiving a court with a fraudulent document would be a big no no... Yes?

Whether it would "satisfy" birthers, ant-birthers, or the dog catchers of America, is irelivant... it would "satisfy" the law: in that it would be a legally introduced piece of evidence.

Why the Obama administration doesn't do just that is anyone's guess.

STE=Q

[EnderWiggins]

"I do not want to personally touch it. Quit shifting the argument to something it's not."

LOL... I'm shifting nothing, BP. I'm just pointing out to you that you will never, ever personally get any more proof of Obama's eligibility than you already have, even were it it to get in front of a court.

"I DO want Obama's "birth certificate" to appear in Court as a "prima facie" FACT, which it never, ever has."

Why? You still won't believe it. You will still have nothing more than an image of the COLB and the confirmation by a third party that it's real.

You already have that.

"YOU and the rest of the After-Birther foolishly and mistakenly put your TRUST in internet-based prima facie, originating from LIAR-in-Chief Obama with a very dubious Chain of Custody on its way to another LIAR, Nancy Pelosi at the DNC Convention in August 2008."

That's why we certify them, BP. That makes the "chain-of-custody" irrelevant. How is it that you have not yet figured this out?

We all get the same amount of information the same way. You don't trust it. Other people do. Awesome. Ain't democracy a wonderful thing?

[parsifal]

True. You are correct. That is why Wong was a citizen. His parents were here and

“owe[d] to that country allegiance and obedience to its laws so long as he remains in it, as a duty upon him by the mere fact of his residence and that temporary protection which he enjoys, and is as much bound to obey its laws as native subjects or citizens.”

That is what takes them out of the “ambassador” exceptions——and what makes their bouncing baby Wong, AN NBC!

All you are doing is driving nails in your own foot. You are stuck. You have the language right. You get it. NOW, put it into context with Wong. That allegiance and obedience, NO MATTER HOW SHORT IN DURATION are enough to make little NBCs!!!!

parsy, the hungry Drone who is wolfing down his salad....

[EnderWiggins]

" Bringing an ORIGINAL document to court has consequences that supersede giving a putative copy to a third party -- such as a news organization."

Of course it does. But first, someone needs to actually make the case that a court should even care. That requires evidence.

You got any? No?

So... we are still waiting for you guys to manage that neat little trick.

"Deceiving a court with a fraudulent document would be a big no no... Yes?"

Ah... but that's not one of those different consequences. Simply presenting the document would meet the "prima facie" standard, and the case would be closed with no further investigation. It has always been up to you guys to provide evidence to challenge it... and after more than a year and a half, you've still got exactly nothing.

[butterdezillion]

It is supported by multiple official, double-checked statements from Hawaii officials, Hawaii law, OIP Opinion letters, DOH Administrative rules, and posted birth certificates.

If that’s not solid evidence, then what would you consider solid?

And how do you feel about the fact that the FBI told me three times that they don’t investigate document fraud? Or the ombudsman’s response that they can’t investigate because there are crimes involved?

[butterdezillion]

Did you bother to read the UIPA Manual which was linked in “Red Flags”? Did you bother to read the OIP Opinion Letter which showed that the process to find out whether a denial of access is proper begins by the OIP attorney actually seeing the document in question - and the statement that UIPA only applies to records which exist? That’s right in that OIP letter.

Compare that OIP Opinion Letter with what Tsukiyama and Joesting sent Terri K and you will see that the responses that they gave are confirmation that the document exists - since you CAN’T give a UIPA denial for a record which doesn’t exist.

I’m not going to waste time arguing with you though. Anybody who is capable of seeing will see; those who refuse to see won’t see no matter what I put in front of them.

[BP2]

We all get the same amount of information the same way. You don't trust it. Other people do. Awesome. Ain't democracy a wonderful thing?

Well, Wiggie, since the words "democracy" appears neither in the Declaration of Independence nor the US Constitution of the republic, I'll just chalk up that statement to your own lack of understanding of the law and your flawed, Progressive interpretation of it. Please compare your After-Birther notes with Parsifal's "understanding" of the Constitution and miscellaneous legal interpretation.

Listen, Wiggie ... this really isn't that hard for you and your brethren After-Birthers.

YOU have BLIND FAITH in LIARS. It's that simple. PLEASE ... prove me wrong on this.

Rate the integrity & honesty surrounding the Chain of Custody of Obama's "birth certificate."

Answer the following honestly ("1" is LOW, "10" is HIGH):

Rate the integrity & honesty of Barack Hussein Obama?

Rate the integrity & honesty of Obama's
2008 Chicago Campaign office?

Rate the non-partisanship of FactCheck.org
in "evaluating" Obama's COLB?

Rate the integrity & honesty of Nancy Pelosi and the DNC?

[butterdezillion]

Even the CDC’s standard birth certificate in effect today doesn’t use the term “African” - and Alvin Onaka was one of the people who contributed to the recommeded certificates. Those who are in the EVVE (Electronic Verification of Vital Events)System - including Hawaii - have standard protocols for reporting on vital events, such as birth. That’s one reason the CDC has recommendations for electronic vital statistics: to make the reporting uniform across the country.

But it’s a waste of time to point things out to you. The claims you supposedly heard from your “friend” have been proven from actual birth certificates to be a lie.

I am amazed that you have the audacity to show up here again.

You’re still ignoring the fact that the DOH has now TWICE confirmed that the Factcheck COLB is a forgery.

It’s a waste of time talking to you. I suggest to everyone here that we just don’t even respond to Ender again; he can talk to himself and get as much original thought as he’d allow into his brain if we discussed with him for a millenium.

[stephenjohnbanker]

F-

Good post.

[butterdezillion]

I think he’s just farting in our general direction, hoping to make the air hazy enough that innocent bystanders can’t see the truth.

In reality, he’s the one who can’t see the truth, and as long as his “ender” goes wherever his brain goes, nothing we say could ever clear things up for him. lol.