Posted on 07/28/2009 2:01:51 PM PDT by Smokeyblue
DinkyJackson wrote on this thread
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2302882/posts?q=1&;page=101
Obama’s (finally published) birth certificate serial number is 151 1961 - 010641, he was born on 8-4-1961, and the certificate was filed by the Registrar on 8-8-1961 ( http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html )
Today, the Honolulu advertiser publishes a story, and at the bottom includes a set of long-form BC’s from a woman who had twins at Kapiolani on 8-5-1961 who went to school with Obama.
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20090728/NEWS01/907280345/Hawaii+officials+confirm+Obama%E2%80%99s+original+birth+certificate+still+exists
These twins were born the day AFTER Obama AT KAPIOLANI. And their certificate numbers are LOWER than his (10637 and 10638). They were born 8-5-1961, the certificates were signed by mom 8-7-1961, signed by the MD 8-11-1961, and signed by the Registrar 8-11-1961.
THIS MEANS HE DEFINITELY WAS NOT BORN AT KAPIOLANI, because his BC number (born on Aug 4th and filed with Registrar Aug 8th) should have a lower number than the twins (Born Aug 5th at Kapiolani and filed with Registrar Aug 11th)
Maybe there is something embarassing on it, or maybe he’s just playing games.
A lot of the numbers on these nearly adjacent BCs reasonably line up with what’s on FactCheck’s high-res photos.
So far it seems these new BCs don’t look politically suspicious.
It’s gonna REALLY suck if the birthers are proven wrong. It would cost the Right a whole lotta political capital.
*****
You could be right.
But I have been commenting on this Obama birth certificate issue on the internet since last April/May 2008, and I am starting to seriously believe that Obama's problems could be that he was adopted by his Indonesian citizen stepfather Soetoro and/or there is no doctor's signature on his 1961 long form birth certificate.
My husband was born in Hawaii in 1953. His Certificate of Live Birth has a birth number of 151- 53 05xxx. I would say the sequencing numbers are 151- then 2-digit year, then 5 additional digits.
When would an airline allow a newborn to fly to Hawaii in 1961? Just a few days old....or weeks?
My husband was born at Tripler in 1953 and the last digit sequence is 05xxx - only 5 digits.
"Passport breach march 21.
On April 8, 2008, Obama confessed to having taken a trip to Pakistan in 1981.
Here is what Obama said - Jake Tapper was there: "So when I speak about having lived in Indonesia for four years, having family that is impoverished in small villages in Africa --knowing the leaders is not important -- what I know is the people...I traveled to Pakistan when I was in college -- I knew what Sunni and Shia was [sic] before I joined the Senate Foreign Relations Committee."
Tapper was surprised and said: This last part -- a college trip to Pakistan -- was news to many of us who have been following the race closely. And it was odd that we hadn't hear about it before, given all the talk of Pakistan during this campaign.
Much speculation has been made about what national passport Obama used when he traveled to Pakistan in 1981. So Obama confessed to this trip two weeks after his passport was tampered with.
Pakistan was in turmoil in 1981 and ruled of martial law. Millions of Afghan refugees were living in Pakistan, while the Afghan Mujahedeen operated from bases inside Pakistan in their war with the Soviets. One of the leaders that based his operation in Quetta, Pakistan was Usama Bin Laden (The Sheik).
Pakistan was on the banned travel list for US Citizens at the time and all non-Muslim visitors were not welcome unless sponsored by their embassy for official business. (more here)
We need to understand the numbering system better.
I have no idea why there are some with 5 digits or some with 6.
Just for the record (and for anyone compiling info on HI BC numbers)
I was born in Hawaii, Sept. ‘68 at Tripler Army Hospital...
Long form BC (Certificate of Live Birth) # as written:
68 0101XX
My son was born in Hawaii, Dec. ‘88 at Tripler Army Hospital...
Long form as well.. # as written:
88 0186XX
File number is same on both: 151
(X's of course are numbers I will not put out on the net)
I’ll stop posting my BC info. I know that ‘68 is much later than Barry’s supposed birth year.
Also, my BC doesn’t list “Race of father or mother” as the twins BC’s and Barry’s BC does.
I guess in ‘68 the powers that be were not asking about race.
But on my son’s ‘88 BC, race of mother and father are listed.
This info might not help, but I’ll put it out anyway.
Something smells about this whole BC. That I do know.
Too much of the media that didn’t give a hoot before have suddenly become “Natural Born Citizen” and BC experts overnight to explain the “not seen by anyone” evidence.
Please Lord, let these lies come to light and let the truth be known.
Does anyone notice the line of marks above “Mr. and Mrs. Barack Obama” in the Sun Advertiser? It looks like whoever cut out the name that was originally in that position didn’t do a very good job? There are no similar marks on any of the other listings.
World Net Daily has now covered the file number sequence aspect.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105347
Mrs. Nordyke is still alive and well. She theorized that because her labor was so long, it is possible that two BC forms for her twins were pulled from a stack the day before the delivery (when she rolled into the hospital), whereas Obama’s mother perhaps came in afterward and had a shorter labor resulting in an earlier birth. However, everyone involved is merely speculating, because even Mrs. Nordyke has no memory of actually seeing Mrs. Obama there at the hospital during the delivery, or arriving at the hospital. Mrs. Nordyke is a very valuable source of 1st person factual information, since she remembers who the attending MD’s were during those days. Her children’s certificates are invaluable sources of verifiable information as well, and serve as references for comparison.
First, I will address the idea that birth certificates are “started” when a pregnant woman rolls in the door.
Most hospitals don’t “start” to fill out BC’s because they document live births, which is not guaranteed (especially with twins in 1961, but true still today). They are filled out a few minutes after the birth and after the “afterbirth” - when the medical situation is stable, no bleeding problems, etc. You don’t know how many live births you are going to have until you have a live screaming baby in your hands. Labor can last several days, and false labor is common. A large fraction of women presenting with a chief complaint of “labor” are not in labor. By the time a woman is known to be in labor (cervix dilation check, etc) the process is well along, and not much time is to be saved by pulling a certificate off the stack.
The only time saved would be the part with the mom and dad’s name, address, and profession, since every other field on the form (including the MD attending at the time) could change with a long labor. Obviously, the time of birth is not known until it actually occurs. That was as true in 1961 as it is today.
If the blank long-form BC papers had serialized file numbers already stamped on them when they were delivered to the hospital, this would further strengthen the practice of only starting to fill one out AFTER a live delivery, since any stillborn children would result in a major OOPS and a ruined serialized document.
We know that the serial numbers correspond at least roughly to the dates of birth / registration in the calendar year, because 10650/17592 is approximately equal to 220/365. The only practical way to make that happen is to have the file number stamped onto the form at the central Registrar General’s office. This is because births are happening continuously at large and small hospitals and doctors’ offices (and a few homes) all over the many islands of Hawaii. They could not all have distributed stacks of pre-stamped blanks, because nobody knows where and when the births will happen. You would have to ship out fresh mini-stacks of serialized blank documents to each location on a semi-continuous basis, that that is just not practical.
Therefore, the whole idea that the forms were stamped with filing serial numbers at the hospital is dubious. They were stamped with this number at the central office of the state Registrar General.
Since we have the long forms, we know that Mrs. Nordyke hadn’t signed it until 8-7-1961 and the MD didn’t sign until 8-11-1961. Therefore, those particular blanks DID NOT leave the hospital until 8-11, the day they were filed and ACCEPTED with the local registrar AND Registrar General.
Presumably, since Honolulu is the capitol of Hawaii, the office of the local registrar and the Registrar General are one and the same, which explains why both blanks on both of the Nordyke forms are stamped Aug 11 1961 with the same stamp, and individually signed by the local registrar. This also explains the “same-day” turnaround between the local and General. This assumption can easily be verified.
We know that Obama’s birth documents are alleged to have been filed with the registrar 8-8-2008, based on his non-redacted short form. We don’t know if that is the date of the “local” or “general” but if his birthplace really was Honolulu (which the short form seems to indicate clearly, legalistic interpretations aside), then his form ALSO reached the Registrar General’s office on or before 8-8-1961 in order to get that date (if he wasn’t born in Honolulu, then he has lied and misleading documents have been vouched for by public officials).
They absolutely wouldn’t roll back a date stamp if his document happened to come in on 8-11-1961 along with the Nordyke’s certificates as part of a batch shipment from Kapiolani. This would be an act of fraud, to certify a document as being on file before it actually is on file.
It is perhaps possible that the document was dropped off at the registrar’s office on 8-8-1961, stamped with that date, and then later stamped with a file number and filed on the same day as the twins’ BC’s as part of a Friday batch process. Because the Nordyke forms were only brought in to the Registrar’s office on Friday, they very well might have been “on top” of the stack.
However, that still doesn’t make any damn sense.
Hawaii had an average of 48 registered births EVERY DAY that year. Obama’s BC should therefore have not been anywhere near the “top of the stack” on Friday since his form was at the office on 8-8-1961. There should be approximately 48 in the stack for the 9th, and 48 in the stack for the 10th, and some fractions for the partial 8th and 11th. Due to the law of large numbers, there is a statistically significant difference between “2” and “96” even though the second number is stochastic and subject to innumerable sources of random variance. There is no way that on 8-9 and 8-10 only two other BC’s were dropped onto the inbox stack for batch processing.
Obama’s certificate number is alleged to be 10641. His certificate is alleged to have been in the office on 8-8-1961, and it was perhaps stamped with a filing serial number and then filed on a later date.
The Nordyke certificates are numbers 10637 and 10638. They were obviously processed back-to-back at all steps in the process, from delivery, to hospital data entry, to transmittal, to filing.
Obama’s certificate COULD not have followed a completely different path (Kapiolani to the office on or before 8-8-1961, then filed 8-11-1961) right behind the Nordykes, because there were 100 births all over Hawaii between them in the intervening time. Despite transmittal delays from different parts of the islands, a stream of 48 BC’s per day is to be expected.
Now, assume that the filing number is only stamped onto the certificates on Fridays, and the certificates from the past week are placed into “loose” alphabetical order before stamping(which explains the first-name alphabetical order reversal for the twins’ numbers). Under this scenario, there are 48x7=336 certificates to stamp and file on each Friday at the end of the day, in addition to doing all the other work for the 48 that happened to arrive during the day Friday.
The US Census publishes lists of last name frequency distribution for the total US, but there is likely a different pattern in Hawaii owing to the different ethnic distribution of the islands. The only common US names that appear alphabetically between Nordyke and Obama are Norman, Norris, and Norton.
So in other words, it is completely possible that they could be that close, but only if all of the forms are stamped at the end of the week after being put into loose alphabetical order in a stack of ~336.
If there was anything like a continuous process for filing, where documents were stamped with file numbers during the week, it is so unlikely as to be impossible.
Even ONE of the intervening certificates, 10639 and 10640, could answer the question. That person would have an N* or O* name, and would also give a few more datestamps.
Those two numbers should be broadcast, so that anyone born in hawaii within a week window knows to look for their number.
I’m 100% convinced O is not elligible to be POTUS because he is so secretive about his identification. So much focus has been payed to the birth certificate...WHAT If birthers are on the wrong trail? What if his Hawaii birth is actually legit? Take a second to consider that maybe the focus should be more on the adoption by Soetoro and the fact that O is Indonesian. What about the foreign student financial aid and passports? Why isn’t anyone suing O to produce these papers? Like someone mentioned in a previous post, at adoption a new BC may have been issued and the old destroyed. Someone would have to “recreate” the original, thus the document’s descrepancies noted by the pros. Regardless, his mother wasn’t 18 and was inelligible to transfer citizenship status. Maybe what we NEED is his MOTHER’S birth certificate!
He had Indonesian citizenship, and did he ever renounce it? The USA does not let most people have 2 citizenships.
Maybe this also has to do with why he muffed the oath of office, and quite possibly he is deliberately trying to set a precedent for the US to lose some of its sovereignity softening us up for our current and future world leader.
If you have a number of documents, they will all be in a continous sequence. You can also mail a document in and no telling when that will get filed, whenever its received and checked for accuracy. If the document is incorrect, has errors, or if you failed to include a check for the proper amount, they send it back to you.
Another great detail from these two Nordyke certificates - We know the Kapiolani typewriter in use for these certificates had a high capital “H” since it is present on the “Honolulu” and “Hospital” across both certificates. As more and more original certificates from Kapiolani are identified, that would be one more thing to verify on any alleged Kapiolani long form Obama might one day produce.
It would be high on the “Hospital” , “Honolulu” , “Hawaii” and also on the “Hussein” for father and son - LOL
The publication of the Nordyke certificates is reason to re-analyze other published long-form certificates to figure out when things were stamped and by whom.
There is a 1963 Hawaii long form (with blacked out names and other specifics) that circulates on the interwebz. This is a certificate from U.S. Army Tripler General Hospital, in Wahiawa, island of Oahu, Honolulu, Hawaii.
In this case, a “local registrar” (name redacted) was used, and the field #20 “Date Accepted by Local Reg.” was 6 Sept 63, which is typewritten. The local registrar in this case happened to be a LT COL, MSC, USA and so he was probably someone located at the military hospital who also served as a local registrar on behalf of the state.
Then it was later filed with the Registrar General and stamped (with a similar style of stamp to the Nordyke documents) SEP 10 1963.
This confirms that there were some cases where a “local registrar” would accept a document and then only later would it be stamped in field #22 with a date it was accepted by the Registrar General.
In terms of figuring out the Work Week in the local registrar and registrar general’s offices, the local registrar signed this 1963 document on Friday Sept 6 1963, as did the parent and the attendant MD. We don’t know if this was the day after this birth or what, since the birth date is blanked out. Both signature dates are typewritten 6 Sept 63.
The Registrar General stamped this document SEP 10 1963, which was a Tuesday.
So we know that in 1963, at least some stampin’ work was done on days other than Fridays. This makes sense, given that workflow would probably be similar throughout the workweek.
The idea of batch stamping of “accepted” dates is clearly preposterous because dates would then be meaningless.
It is still possible that the filing serial numbers were batch-stamped at some point in the work week after the documents were stamped as “accepted” with a date, but nobody has any proof one way or the other. If so, nobody has any idea about last-name-based alphabetization either, but that could explain the Obama filing number relative to the Nordykes.
A second public long-form Hawaii BC is the Edith Costa document from June 1962. This one has a birth date of June 15 1962, 3:51AM, at Wahiawa General Hospital, Oahu, Honolulu, Hawaii. This was signed by the mom on 6/15/62 (typed date), signed by the MD on June 15 1962 (handwritten date with penmanship matching the Richard Y Noda MD signature), and stamped with “accepted” dates in both the local registrar field #20 and Registrar General field #22 with the familiar-looking stamp JUN 19 1962. Again, this one appears to have been submitted directly to the registrar general’s office, since the dates are the same, and the stamp appears to be the same exact identical stamp. In other words, the “local registrar” in this case was actually the Registrar General as well - it was filed at the central office. June 15 1962 was a Friday, and June 19 1962 was a Tuesday. So we know from this document that some accepted date stampin’ work was done at the Registrar General office on Tuesdays in 1962.
We still don’t know anything about whether the filing serial numbers at the top were stamped in batches at the end of the week, or any other way that Obama could have a higher number than the Nordyke twins despite being transmitted to the registrar on an earlier date.
It would be great to get more long forms from Aug 1961 for further analysis of this type. People should look through Hawaii yearbooks for kids born in 1961, and call them on the phone.
A reward fund should be created, and rewards should be paid to any person who publishes their long form Hawaii BC from this era, in order to create a better database of records for analysis. I can’t see any ID theft issues that would result, since a digital image of the document is not the same as having a verifiable stamped document. Plus, it would be a powerful way of saying “We have nothing to hide by publishing our documents, how about you?” to the President. It would be a very powerful statement.
It wouldn’t take too many documents before a pattern emerged which could then explain how Obama’s certifiate could (or couldn’t) have a later (higher) filing number than the Nordykes despite being born first AND accepted by the Registrar first.
For the record, this is my speculation at this point: I think Obama was born in Hawaii, probably not at Kapiolani like he claims. I think his long form certificate indicates either a birth at another location (perhaps home) or some issue with his paternity. There is a remote possibility that it has something to do with his adoption. I don’t think the long form will show he is not eligible, but it will show that he lied about something significant. If his paternity were not as he states, it might even shore up some of the NBC issues relating to his father for him. If it says he was born at home, this creates NBC problems not at a technical level, but rather, at a credibility level. If he would have just said “I was born at home” then people might complain but nothing could be proved. If he lies, he will look very very suspicious even if he really was born at home.
With this, I urge Hawaiian citizens to keep publishing long form certificates, and maybe we should take up a collection to buy them all LifeLock and give them some money for their trouble.
Besides, as we have all learned, a long form Hawaii birth certificate is a worthless document for purposes of ID verification, since anyone can claim to have one and the Hawaii officials won’t say what’s really in the vault. LOL.
I might claim to be Magnum PI’s son so I can inherit a Ferrari. Or maybe I should be young Master Robbins...Hmm...
Good eyes, Inspector
It would depend on when the BC was issued, not when the baby was born.
I think the hospital would have to be sued for fraud instead.
Please help me out, here.
My best guess is that the serialization occurred at filing time, not at birth time (or alleged birth time) though I haven’t researched it. That’s when there would be an opportunity for a count, after all. It’s not like it’s a plant manufacturing operation.
Me, neither. Nowadays, I'm sure a birth cert number can be acquired by a hospital in a matter of seconds over the net, but back in the pen and paper days, since there was more than one hospital with maternity facilities in Honolulu at the time, let's assume the numbers were assigned by the registrar, in the order of birth date and time, from lists compiled and submitted by each hospital, then collated by the registrar. The Nordyke twins, born on Saturday, the 5th, were assigned numbers when the list (not necessarily the cert itself) was submitted to the registrar's office on the morning of Monday, the 7th. (Even though the certs themselves weren't signed and/or accepted by the registrar until the 11th.) In other words, the numbers were reserved according to the birth order.
If that were the case, and Obama was not born in the hospital, someone reporting the birth of August 4 directly at the registrar's office on the morning of Monday, August 7th, after the Nordyke twins and two other births had been assigned numbers, would be assigned a number higher than the Nordyke twins (and two other births following theirs) since that cert could only receive the next available number. The cert wasn't accepted until Aug. 8th, according to the COLB, which may simply mean that additional paperwork/signatures were needed.
By the way, the absence of the Nordyke twins announcement in the weekend papers of the 12th and 13th is probably due to the fact that the list was compiled from completed/accepted certs, and the Nordykes' weren't signed and accepted by the registrar until Aug. 11 -- they probably missed the cutoff time for submission to the papers, back in the olden pre-computer days of yore. ;)
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.