Posted on 03/13/2012 3:39:58 PM PDT by rxsid
"VITAL RECORDS INDICATE OBAMA NOT BORN IN HAWAII HOSPITAL (PART 3)
DIRTY LITTLE SECRET: Historical evidence provided by the National Center for Health Statistics and the U.S. Reference Library System now confirms the information appearing within the image of Obama’s alleged 1961 “Certificate of Live Birth” disregards his actual foreign birthplace while, instead, providing a statistically based “geographic allocation” which is a result of a widely misunderstood natality data reporting policy which began in 1950. Stalling for four years since Obama announced his candidacy in February of 2007, under mounting political pressures and legal challenges, the White House unveiled a lone scrap of counterfeit information in the form of a desolate internet image which, after a six month criminal investigation, now confirms that Obama’s presidency is the single greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people.
By Penbrook Johannson and Daniel Crosby
NEW YORK, NY – Barack Obama has misled millions into believing he is eligible to hold the office of the U.S. presidency by exploiting a little known secret about his Hawaiian-based natal records which were issued in conjunction with a commonly used, but publicly misunderstood, vital statistics reporting anomaly used to allocate birthplace according to residency by the State of Hawaii in 1961.
...
As early as 1934, this arbitrary, but necessary method was enacted by the U.S. Census Bureau and later written into law with the passage of the Model State Vital Statistics Act of 1942. It was then fully adopted by all state-level vital records agencies, including those within the then territory of Hawaii, in 1950 in order to improve the collaborative accuracy of data harvested by America’s decadal census and statistics reported annually by state vital records agencies.
...
The birthplace shown on a birth certificate is entered as the result of the mother’s place of residence, not the location of the occurrence of the birth.
...
As discussed previously in parts one and two of this report, the combination of Hawaii’s unique culture, isolated geographic characteristics, unfettered immigration policy and municipal development challenges in the 1960s prompted the use of vital records registration protocols by the State of Hawaii’s Department of Health which undermine the reliability of birth certificate information as a means of determining the natural-born citizenship of any individual.
However, it is now clear that Obama exploited the existence of a widely misunderstood natal data reporting method implemented by the federal government, 11 years before his birth certificate was issued, based on an arbitrary statistical application which classifies the actual place of birth by allocating it as occurring in the same location as the mother’s “place of residence”. This allocation is made regardless of the actual location of the birth because the data provided about the birth to the Census Bureau is used for calculating the impact of natality on resident population and, therefore, must be recorded by the registrar using the same criteria used to count those defined as residents by the Census.
The allocation of births to “place of residence” protocol was implemented sporadically beginning in 1935 to provide for statistical integrity between decadal Census data collection and more frequently collected natality rates taken from real-time birth registrations. Prior to the implementation of the policy, the accumulative affect of non-resident and foreign birth statistics on U.S. birth volumes caused a skewing of natality rates when compared to Census population rate data. These errors had to be corrected in order to use the data for accurately measuring resources in developing public health services, municipal infrastructure and women’s reproductive health research.
Between 1937 and 1949, the NCHS published the annual version of its statistical reporting manuals containing a section called “Vital Statistics of the U.S., Part II Geographic Classification By Place of Residence” which explains, among many other arbitrary rules, the reasoning and methods used to show natal statistics for foreign-born children of U.S. resident mothers.
The manuals repetitively explain that the tabulation of vital statistics taken from birth certificates, on a “place-of-residence” basis, requires that the information given on the certificate must be allowed “to be interpreted in such a way” as to afford statistical classifications of birth geography used to calculate natality rates which are comparable with statistical classifications of population geography used to account census data.
This means the Hawaiian registrar was/is directed to record the place of birth as being the same as the mother's place of residence, regardless of where it actually occurred. This explains why Obama’s alleged 1961 “Certificate of Live Birth” states that his birthplace was in Hawaii even though he was not likely born there. His birth affected the population of the community where his mother lived, not where she gave birth to him.
Since the Bureau of Census held authority over both the implementation of the census and the standards for collecting and reporting vital records until the 1960s, this policy was implemented using the census’ population enumeration protocols as the standard by which all vital statistics data was to be collected and processed. This is logical since the collection of census data on a decadal frequency is what drives long-term public health services and municipal funding in the U.S. Of course, therefore, population is directly affected by statistics taken from vital records documenting birth data, as well as mortality data.
The NCHS assumed authority over vital statistics management under the U.S. Department of Health, Welfare and Education when the National Vital Statistics Division and the Office of Public Health Survey were combined in 1960.
The Origins of Birthplace Allocation By “Place of Residence”
The Vital Statistics Instruction Manual (VSIM) and Vital Statistics of the U.S. Report state:
Historical information referencing “resort states” provides a weighty indictment against Obama’s claim to Hawaiian birth origins. The resort states in the U.S. in 1961 were Florida, Nevada (Las Vegas) and Hawaii. An analysis of the changes in population outside of urban areas of these states confirms this report’s accurate assessment. Hawaii’s population outside of Honolulu increased by 97% between 1950 and 1960. This rate is the highest behind Florida’s, during this same time, whose population rate outside of Miami increased by 161% due to a flood of Cuban aliens fleeing Castro’s communist regime, and Las Vegas’ population which exploded between 1950 and 1960 as a result of that state’s legalization of gambling, prostitution and the development of Las Vegas’ Sunset Strip casinos.
Beginning in 1950, all natality data was exclusively reported based on “place of residence” of the mother. The manual for that year states:
“…births and deaths were assigned to the actual place of residence, no matter where they occurred.”
Birth Certi-Fiction
Based on the continued development of criteria between 1935 and 1961, the alleged year of Obama’s birth in Hawaii, the definition of residency in relation to birth statistics collection was refined to provide more accuracy in natality rates so as to demonstrate the impact of births on resident population, therefore, providing better Census and Vital Record data collaboration, without regard for the actual location of the occurrence of the birth.
These revisions included the standardization of the template form of the U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth”, in coordination with the Public Health Conference on Vital Records and Statistics in 1956, which would clearly provide referential uniformity for NCHS coding efforts when classifying geography of vital records origination. The revisions allowed coding and data collection from the “Location of Birth” and “Usual Residence of Mother” entry boxes from all certificates in the same manner, not just for those recording births occurring in the U.S., but also for births occurring to U.S. residents, anywhere.
...
The standard certificate used for births occurring in the U.S. must also be used for births occurring outside of the U.S. to resident mothers, but both circumstances had to provide the same formatting of information for data classification. Therefore, the location of the birth must state that the birth occurred in the U.S. in order for data from the certificate to be reported as a birth which impacts U.S. and state population figures. Simply stated, there is not a separate certificate for births occurring in the U.S. and births occurring outside of the U.S. to residents of the U.S., but both circumstances are recorded as births which, obviously, impact the population and municipal services of the U.S.
The problem with this misrepresentation of information is that the NCHS only defines a “resident” of the U.S., not a “citizen” of the U.S. The difference is obvious. Essentially, Obama has exploited this NCHS statistical protocols used to report natal statistics in order to declare himself a natural-born citizen by proxy of his mother’s U.S. residency, without being forced to be accountable for his own Constitutionally disqualified “citizenship” status as president. Since births are recorded in real time while populations are measured every ten years, the VSIM manual actually acknowledges that the necessity for such interpretation “introduces arbitrary and controversial factors into the procedure of allocation” by each state. As we now know, the factors applied by the State of Hawaii in granting Obama’s native birth registration has been nothing but arbitrary and controversial.
...
With regard to Obama’s birthplace, the only documented reference appears on a digitally fabricated image, proven to be a forgery, posted to the internet and ignorantly endorsed and accepted without inquiry by many. However, we now know that Obama’s actual birthplace information was recorded in four separate sources, not just a birth certificate, by four different agencies in 1961.
His birthplace was recorded by the foreign health agency with jurisdiction over the facility where he emerged from his mother’s womb. It was then recorded by the local registrar’s office upon registration in Hawaii before being reallocated to his mother’s place of residence. It was then recorded by the State of Hawaii’s main office prior to being tabulated and coded for reporting to the NCHS. And, it was transcribed for record exchange with the foreign health agency and recorded by the National Center for Health Statistics for storage to data file tape currently residing at the National Archives and Records Administration, from which Obama restricted its release with Executive Order 13489.
THE END OF THE ROAD: FOREIGN BIRTH TRANSCRIPT EXCHANGE AND DATA TAPE FILE RECORD
The instructions for allocating births to “place of residence” were published in the Vital Statistics Instruction Manual, Part 1: “Coding and Punching Geographic and Personal Particulars of Births, Deaths and Stillbirths Occurring During 1961.” An internal office copy of this document resides in the NCHS main office in Hyattsville, Maryland, and was made available for in-house review for this report, but was not provided for public disbursement. However, it was provided to all state Health agencies by the vital records coding regulatory office of the National Center for Health Statistics Office of Vital Statistics in 1961.
The report states:
"Allocation of births to place of residence. The allocation of live births to “place of residence” is made according to the same general principles as the allocation of other vital events in the U.S. In the case of births, the usual residence of the mother is considered to be the place of residence of the child, and the allocation of the birth to the mother’s place of residence is not affected by the mother’s length of stay in the location in which the birth occurs. For the purpose of coding natality transcripts, these rules have been expanded in definite coding instructions which state the procedure followed in each case.” "According to the procedures for birth allocation to “place of residence” the NCHS outlines those used for this statistical reporting method as follows:
1. Natality data should be compiled so as to correspond with enumerated populations (Census data) on which rates are based. Each birth should be assigned to the area which was the “usual place of residence” of the mother.
2. Mothers who, at the time of the birth, had been living more than one year in a community are considered residents of that community even though some other place may be stated on the certificate.
3. Mothers of births which occurred in nonresident institutions such as hospitals, T.B. sanatoriums, convalescent homes, jails, etc., are reallocated to the usual place of residence if they were confined in the institution for less than one year.
4. Mothers in resident institutions, where length of stay is usually extended, such as mental institutions, orphanages, retirement homes, homes for the blind, disabled and deaf, etc. are reallocated to their prior place of residence.
5. Births to mothers whose usual place of residence is a foreign country or a United States possession outside of the United States are not reallocated to the usual place of residence.
6. Infants born at locations other than the place of residence of the mother are reallocated to the place of residence of the mother.
Essentially, this protocol instructed the Hawaiian Registrars Office to oversee the content of Obama’s birth certificate in such a way that his natal statistics would be tabulated as a result of an allocation of his birth to Ann Dunham’s “place of residence” in the U.S., regardless of the actual location of the occurrence of the birth. Simply, in the interest of data uniformity between the census bureau and the NCHS, Obama’s birth certificate was required to show his birth place as being the same as the mother’s residence because his birth impacted the population and municipal services of Hawaii, not those of the foreign government and population where his birth actually occurred.
The allocation of Obama’s birth to “place of residence” in 1961 was deeply subjected to the Hawaiian municipal agency’s need for conveying natal statistics and census data which would demonstrate the most need for funding and resources needed to expand its public health services, meet infrastructure demands of the population and provide natal-health care for future birth rates. The only way provided by the federal government to do this was by allocation to place of residence using the standard birth report form known as a U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth”.
...
The 1961 Vital Statistics of the U.S. Report, Volume 1: Natality states, “The principal value of vital statistics data is obtained through the presentation of such data, which are computed by relating the vital events of a class (Hawaiian geography) to population of a similarly defined class (Hawaiian residents). Vital statistics and population statistics must, therefore, be classified according to similarly defined systems and tabulated in comparable groups.”
Logically, births and deaths effect population. Therefore, the NCHS employs methods for accounting natal statistics in the U.S. which serve the interests of public health services and municipal agencies which operate on resources provided directly as result of census and vital statistics data. This situation was especially attributable to the new state of Hawaii’s government, just after the 1960 Census in which it was included for the first time.
The 1961 Vital Statistics Instruction manual states: "For State totals, only those persons who cross State lines need be considered in a reallocation by “place of residence”, since any movement within the State is irrelevant."
In conclusion, with regard to the birth of Barack Obama, the principal value of his individual natal data is obtained by presenting that data in relationship to the community and geography of which he becomes a member as a result of his birth, not migration. It is meaningless for a community to present foreign births on a birth certificate in a manner which prevents the impact of that birth data from being considered in the resident population of the community which is affects.
The allocation of birth place to “place of residence” is a highly significant declaration in determining the manner in which Obama’s foreign birth was recorded, collected, tabulated and reported by the State of Hawaii and how that birth information led him to falsely claim that he is a natural born citizen. Combining the allocation of “place of residence” for birthplace with Hawaii’s unique geographic characteristics, along with its unique indigenous cultural history, we now understand how the State of Hawaii Department of Health issued a birth certificate for Obama’s foreign birth which shows Hawaii as the place of birth by proxy."
Complete article: http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2012/03/vital-records-indicate-obama-not-born.html
“Its possible.”
The non-Muslim traditional tribal marriage that Kezia describes in the Daily Mail article conforms exactly with the Wiki description of Luo religion and marriage customs.
begin quote
“Barack was also worried about what his father would think because I was so young, but he gave us his approval. He sent my mother and father 14 cows for my dowry.
“Barack’s father was only a cook so it was a big sacrifice. Very soon after, we were married.”
That was January 1957. Kezia and Barack Snr set up home in Jericho, a section of Nairobi created for government employees, and began a family.
First son Roy was born in March 1958. Kezia insisted: “Barack was a good husband.”
It was not long before Barack’s potential was noticed by his employees and he was offered a scholarship to the US.
end quote
What multiple marriages there were among the Luo and I believe in the BHO Sr.-Kezia case were NOT Muslim but tribal. The baby boys were NOT circumcised, as is the Muslim custom. There is a sect begun in 1907 that is a mash-up of Christianity, Islam and tribal customs but would not be recognized as Islam or Sharia-following by Muslims.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luo_people_of_Kenya_and_Tanzania
begin quote
Religious customs
Like many ethnic communities in Uganda, including the Baganda, Langi, Acholi, and Alur, the Luo do not practice the ritual circumcision of males as initiation. Instead, children formerly had their six lower front teeth removed at an initiation. This ritual has largely fallen out of use.
In 1907, Johanna Owalo formed the first African independent church in Kenya called Nomiya or “the mission i was given”. Nomiya church is a mixture of Christian, Islam and traditional African religious doctrines. The church practices circumcision for male children at the age of 8 days and they pray facing north. The church currently has a following of 800,000 in the Nyanza region. Other local churches include Legio Maria, Roho and Fwenya among others.
Marriage customs
Historically, couples were introduced to each other by matchmakers, but this is not common now. Like many other communities in Kenya, marriage among the Luo at the moment is fast becoming westernized and people are moving away from the traditional way of doing things. The Luo frequently marry outside the tribe. The traditional marriage ceremony takes place in two parts, both involving the payment of a bride price by the groom. The first ceremony, the Ayie, involves a payment of money to the mother of the bride; the second stage involves giving cattle to her father. Often these two steps are carried out at the same time, and, as many modern Luos are Christians, a church ceremony often follows. If the husband should die during the marriage, it is customary for the brother to act as a replacement.
end quote
Remember that BHO Sr. was an atheist and communist. His father only converted away from the tribal religion and became Muslim to spite the Christian British whom he loathed after being tortured for aiding the Mau Mau.
BHO Sr. went to an Anglican school that only accepted Christians and taught Chrisitanity and he was assisted in Nairobi with his high school education by Christian Missionaries.
BHO Sr. and Kezia were living openly as legal husband and wife in Nairobi with his infant son before leaving for the US.
BHO Sr. asked Tom Mboya to provide support for his “wife” in Nairobi.
Kezia didn't raise her own son Muslim and neither did Ruth.
There is not a trace on the part of BHO Sr. of Muslim upbringing, marriage, observance, raising sons in Islam in any of this.
So I would say, no, there is no possibility that the Marriage to Kezia was a false one to protect her from Muslim justice for having a child out of wedlock.
I may be mistaken about this, but I don't think marriage is a federal issue. I think it is a state issue. If RXSID is correct about this, Hawaii may have had no law against it. Is there a Federal law against polygamy? And if so, what is it's basis in Constitutional authorization?
Well, it would not be the first time someone hid behind the law.
"Beckwith Mar 13, 2012 03:21 PM John McCain was NOT born in the Panama Canal Zone as stated in this article.
John Sidney McCain III was born at the Colon Hospital, located at Avenida Melendez and 2nd Street, Manzanillo Island, City of Colon, Republic of Panama. The time of birth on the birth certificate issued by Panama Railroad Company (that owned the Colon Hospital) was 5:25 PM and the day and date of birth was Saturday, August 29, 1936"
On what basis does beckwith say this? My understanding is that allegations that John McCain was born in Colon are FALSE, and that this is an internet meme which was spread by Liberals in an effort to undermine his legitimacy. There is a FALSE birth certificate floating around, which is purported to be John McCain's birth certificate, but it is purportedly a FAKE.
Did I say *A* false birth certificate? Apparently there are two of them.
On the other hand, we have a few bits of proof to show that McCain was NOT born in Colon, but rather that he was born on the Coco Solo Naval base. According to this article, John McCain has NOT RELEASED his birth certificate, but he HAS shown it to a reporter.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/05/john_mccains_birthplace.html
http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/mccain_irvine_2.pdf
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/mccain_announcement_041708.pdf
If some information is not correct, we ought to make efforts to find out what *IS* correct. If someone has any proof that McCain was NOT born on the Coco Solo Naval base, then they should show it.
And this is a point that doesn't seem to be sinking in in some circles. Barack Obama sr was DEAD BROKE. How does he pay for pleasure travel (for himself and Stanley Ann) back and forth to Kenya when he couldn't even pay to fly himself over here in the first place?
I'm not suggesting that you are advocating that he did, but I wanted to take the opportunity of your comment to point out that this is a SERIOUS problem with any "born in Kenya" theory.
Why did you not agree with the plausibility of this scenario when *I* mentioned it? This is exactly one of the points I was trying to get at when I said I thought Obama had been adopted.
Great minds!
Upthread the federal law was posted. Remember that Utah wasn’t allowed to become a state until it agreed to pass an anti-plural marriage law meeting federal requirements.
Yeah, I saw that later. I also remembered about Utah, but I got to thinking by what Constitutional Authority is the Federal Government empowered to regulate marriage or any other Issue not within the province of a FEDERAL mandate?
I think that a Federal Law regarding marriage is an overreach of Federal power. (Of Course, now days, Federal Overreach is the norm, not the exception.)
Anyway, thanks for pointing that out to me.
:)
John McCain was not even made a citizen as of the time of his birth until a retroactive act of Congress was passed two years (IIRC) after he was born. It did not matter where in Panama he was born in 1936, he wasn't a citizen at birth, period, and could not possibly be a natural born citizen, IMO, under MvH. IMO, McCain was a unitary Panamanian citizen at birth and then two years later became a statutory citizen at birth retroactively...thus becoming a dual citizen at age two or thereabouts.
Unlike Barry, McCain's father was an active duty officer and it “offended the conscience” of legislators not to regard the child of such an officer to be NBC, but it didn't offend them so much as to amend the Constitution when they had the chance on numerous occasion.
I expect that BHO Sr.’s sponsors (parents, missionaries, Cora Weiss, Tom Mboya, KGB?) would give him just enough to meet his expenses and no more while in school, just as any good parent/guardian/sponsor would do to encourage him to focus on his studies.
I am keeping my own son that same age on exactly that short leash.
However, just as with my son, if an emergency arises that might threaten his ability to stay in school, I have substantial resources that I can use to “rescue” him if he gets into trouble (without creating a moral hazard of enabling bad behavior, of course).
Two such emergency or special occasions in 1961 warranting the production of extra funds for BHO Sr. and/or SADO to return to Kenya come to mind out of the pockets of his sponsors.
First, SADO getting pregnant and the bigamous marriage was fraught with legal and reputational peril to BHO Sr.’s educational plans. Senior was supposed to be studying but he was banging coeds and putting the large sunk cost of his backers at risk. In 1961 a black man getting an under-age white girl pregnant in or out of wedlock could get Senior thrown out of college, deported or worse and eventually did get him deported (suspicion of sham bigamous marriage to obtain immigrant status clearly in INS FOIA docs).
So to avoid losing their sunk cost in Senior and his promise as a future leader in Kenya, the sponsors would be highly motivated to spend money Senor wouldn't normally have access to to “get rid” of the problem marriage and pregnancy. What better way than to make the problem “disappear” by removing SADO from HI first to Kenya and subsequently to WA? Only SADO need go to Kenya to solve this problem, perhaps sending her to the waiting arms of the missionary ladies who partially sponsored Senior. Or it could have even been Frank M. Davis a high level KGB operative who would not have wanted FBI to have ammunition to go after him or Senior whom I also believe was KGB in training (big Marxist while in HI and back in Kenya).
Second, there were momentous historic events back in in the summer of 1961, IIRC. Senior, as a Kenyan princeling, might well have been invited back with SADO to participate in celebrating the release of Kenyatta from prison by the British signaling capitulation to eventual Kenyan independence and a ticket ruling perks for members of the elite of the Luo Tribe.
I agree it doesn't matter, but if something is not true, we should not be spreading it. I've presented what I regard as decent evidence that McCain was NOT born in Colon. If someone has decent evidence that he WAS born in Colon, I would like to see it. I would like to know which is true and which is false, but as you have mentioned, it really doesn't make any difference at this point.
I just want Freepers to be regarded as credible when we say something.
It's from the Boston-Globe 1896.
Keep in mind that the educational background for the kenyan has him at the school in Maseno until he was about 17, local reports have him married at 18, and Maseno taught such useful things as tailoring and carpentry as well as english and science...and then, in 1959 he shows up in Hawaii and at his first interview claims to have a degree in business administration.
In that same article the interviewer in Hawaii writes that the kenyan said he had not been back to Kenyan for seven years.
Locals say that he left Kenya after leaving Maseno, that he went to the US, worked for an oil company and married a white woman named Anna.
There’s more missing in that story than just if he was married to Kezia or not, or who the father of her children was.
We have also ‘lost’ the elder brother with whom he went to school, who was mentioned in one article on a Kenya website (IMAGE REMOVED) as a slight man with a moustache...IN A RECENT ARTICLE.
My speculation: she couldn't be party to any adoption unless she had custody, she didn't have a birth certificate with her name on it as mother, so all she had to show was the divorce document. It's called adoption fraud through divorce, I believe. And I do not recall you even suggesting that. And that of course leads TO the question : was there a bc with the divorce documents? Probably, but it's been removed, page 11 might have been the request for it, just as page 7 was a request for items to do with the mailing and return of the documents. (IIRC)
Jomo Kenyatta was born Kamau wa Ngengi to parents Ngengi wa Muigai and Wambui in the village of Gatundu, in British East Africa (now Kenya), a member of the Kikuyu...
On 28 Feb 1960, a public meeting of 25,000 in Nairobi demanded his release. On 15 April 1960, over a million signatures for a plea to release him were presented to the Governor. On 14 May 1960, he was elected Kanu President in absentia. On 23 Mar 1961, Kenyan leaders, including Daniel arap Moi, later his long time Vice President and successor as president, visited him at Lodwar. On 11 Apr 1961, he was moved to Maralal with daughter Margaret where he met world press for the first time in eight years. On 14 Aug 1961, he was released and brought to Gatundu to a hero's welcome.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luo_people_of_Kenya_and_Tanzania
The Luo are the third largest ethnic group (13%) in Kenya, after the Kikuyu (22%) and the Luhya (14%). The Luo and the Kikuyu inherited the bulk of political power in the first years following Kenya's independence in 1963.
Kenya became independent on 12 December 1963. Oginga Odinga, a prominent Luo leader, declined the presidency of Kenya, preferring to assume the vice presidency with Jomo Kenyatta as the head of government. Their administration represented the Kenya African National Union (KANU) party. However, differences with Jomo Kenyatta caused Oginga to defect from the party and abandon the vice presidency in 1966. His departure caused the Luo to become politically marginalized under the Kenyatta and subsequently the Moi administrations.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.