Replies

Then your problem is "original document". It probably doesn't exist anymore. Now I demonstrated that the file cabinet area in the records section of the building could actually hold original documents to the number suggested by the number of folks born in Hawaii since it became a US possession.

A copy would be fine, provided that it is certified as a copy of the ORIGINAL document, not an "abstract of the record on file." Someone needs to put their neck on the line and swear under penalty of law that the document shown is the actual document produced on or about august 4th, 1961, and that it has not been amended or changed since.

Then your complaint is with the wording of the rubber stamp?

Do you know what the Hawaii State Supreme Court says that means? There are subtle nuances in legal jargon.

BTW, that federal statute I cited doesn't care if it's a certified copy of an original ~ so in Federal Court, your complaint wouldn't last 10 seconds ~ that statute was drafted and passed in 1996 so that certifiable documents could be created at will from a data base maintained electronically, or in digital formats on some media other than paper.

Although the folks in Hawaii state government seem to have the patter down to talk about their birth records data retrieval system correctly, some of them have indicated in the past they didn't really understand it.

Governor Ambercrombie, who has a really bad history of addictive substance abuse, probably couldn't understand it if he had wires stuffed in his head.

You do understand that a certain level the debate over Obama's birth certificate(s) is taking place with IDIOTS and BRAIN DAMAGED Democrat politicians.