Post 61 - “Hawaii statute allows law enforcement to request a totally fake BC to be created for somebody if they say that person is endangered without it.”
In June 2007, who in law enforcement told the DOH to issue Senator Obama a new birth certificate?
Post 63 - “What he verifies is the existence of a record.”
The title of the form is “Verification of Birth” not “Verification of the Existence of a Birth Record”. And the first sentence is “Pursuant to a Hawaii Revised Statutes §338-14.3 I verify the following:”
“1. A birth certificate is on file with the Department of Health indicating that Barack Hussein Obama, II was born in Honolulu, Hawaii.”
He verifies the DOH has a birth certificate showing that Barack Hussein Obama, II was born in Honolulu, Hawaii. I don’t know how he could have made it any clearer.
That first sentence verifies the items on the request form.
The rest of the verification verifies the “other information” requested by SoS Bennett.
Post 65 - “Which of these facts was verified as true by Onaka: male, Aug 4, 1961, Honolulu, Oahu, Stanley Ann Dunham, Barack Hussein Obama?”
All of them. Otherwise Dr. Onaka could not issue a verification of the existence of the birth certificate based on the items listed on the request form.
Post 63 - “BTW, why did Janice Okubo tell me that this form doesn’t exist since they don’t issue letters of verification?”
The verification says it is a form created or revised in 08/01/01. But what is the form? Not much more than Hawaiian DOH letterhead and the closing certification. I would guess that in the last 13 years they have issued 3 verifications. The reason is that it would be rare that an applicant wouldn’t just request his or her COLB.
The COLB Obama posted is a fake. It has a “raised seal” that doesn’t bend when the paper it was supposedly on bent.
And Gov Neil Abercrombie told a Star-Advertiser columnist in January of 2011 that his investigation was finding there was something “actually written down in the archives” - not something you’d expect him to say if there was a BC just like the White House image right there at that time in the bound volume where it belonged. He told his friend Mike Evans that he had been to the hospitals and could find no proof that Obama was born in Hawaii - not something you would expect if the labor room log had Dunham’s name right there would it would be expected to be.
IOW, the BC with the Kapiolani claim was not in existence in January of 2011. It didn’t come into existence until they got rid of HDOH Director Neal Palafox a week after Evans told the world what Abercrombie had told him, and got Fuddy in there, who was willing to give in to law enforcement’s exploitation of the John Roll assassination in Tucson, to say that these “crazy birthers” might kill Obama if there wasn’t a BC that pretended Obama’s claims were legally-substantiated.
That form is supposed to be for verifying a birth. The certifying statement is the way it is because there are supposed to be facts verified. Unfortunately for Obama, Onaka gave no sentence where he says he verifies the truth of ANY birth fact for Obama. Any birth facts that were verified were verified through the use of the original record - but there weren’t any that were verified.
“indicating that Barack Hussein Obama, II was born in Honolulu, HI” is a clause that modifies the noun “certificate”. The certificate indicates. Even a non-valid certificate “indicates”. What Onaka is required - by statute - to do is to issue his own verification that they have a BC, and issue his own verification that such-and-so claims are true. All he ever says HE verifies as true is that they have a birth record. Onaka is fully capable of using complete sentences which state exactly what he is verifying about something. He did it in the first and last sentences of Bennett’s LOV and did it all the way through on Kobach and MDEC’s requests which asked for nothing that means anything legally. He didn’t do that on the itemized part of Bennett’s request. He treated Bennett’s additional requests totally different than he treated the claims on the application form. Why did he do that? If the verification itself is verification of teh truth of EVERYTHING SUBMITTED, then why did he list any of the items? Those were all on the White House image also. If his way of verifying Aug 4, 1961, for instance, was simply by issuing any verification at all, then why didn’t he verify all those other items the same way? Why did he treat it differently?
And you folks keep ignoring the critical questions I’ve asked. Bennett admitted that Onaka had not verified Aug 4, 1961 but assumed that it was just a mistake. Is that a legally acceptable way to do things - to ask a question point-blank and then when the answer comes under oath, simply assume that the answer was a mistake? Bennett is NOT agreeing with what you’ve said about how a LOV works. He has admitted that Onaka has to mention a fact in order to verify it. He just thinks Onaka “overlooked” six out of six items submitted on the application form... Is that an acceptable standard? We can just legally assume that Onaka was 100% inaccurate on the items from the application form?
And you’re totally blowing off what Okubo actually told me. She didn’t say that nobody ever asks for a letter of verification. She said they won’t issue them any more. She said they have no form for a letter of verification, when they’ve had one since 2001 if that form is genuine. Of course, she also told me that they have no statements of what is to be included on a standard copy of a birth certificate, which seems odd if there was actually a 2001 memo saying they would only issue the abbreviated BC (but then, the properties on that “memo” show that it was created the day that Obama released his forged long-form...)
As always, it is a total waste of time discussing with you because you ignore the hard questions and the evidence I present and just keep giving the same boilerplate responses. There is none so blind as he who will not see.
I’ve wasted too much time on you already. Good-bye.
My guess is that Letters of Verification in Lieu of Certified Copies are issued to persons who don’t qualify under HRS 338-18 for receiving a copy of the birth certificate but whose official position (such as a state Secretary of State) allows them to demonstrate a “direct and tangible interest” in receiving such a letter. Hawaii statutes give the Director of Health discretion in determining who can receive a Letter of Verification.
Janice Okubo was the Communications Director for the Department of Health. She was not directly connected to the Registrar of Vital Statistics’ office and she may not have been familiar with every statute related to the release of vital statistics.