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

Butterdezillion | Feb 23, 2010 | Butterdezillion

[butterdezillion]

I've updated my blog to include the e-mail from Janice Okubo confirming that they assign birth certificate numbers in the state registrar's office and the day they do that is the "Date filed by state registrar".

The pertinent portion from Okubo's e-mail:

In regards to the terms “date accepted” and “date filed” on a Hawaii birth certificate, the department has no records that define these terms. Historically, the terms “Date accepted by the State Registrar” and “Date filed by the State Registrar” referred to the date a record was received in a Department of Health office (on the island of O’ahu or on the neighbor islands of Kaua’i, Hawai’i, Maui, Moloka’i, or Lana’i), and the date a file number was placed on a record (only done in the main office located on the island of O’ahu) respectively.

MY SUMMARY: As you can see, Okubo said that the “Date filed by the State Registrar” is the date a file number was placed on a record (only done in the main office).

There are no pre-numbered certificates. A certificate given a certificate number on Aug 8th (Obama’s Factcheck COLB) would not be given a later number than a certificate given a number on Aug 11th (the Nordyke certificates).

There is no way that both the date filed and the certificate number can be correct on the Factcheck COLB. The COLB is thus proven to be a forgery.

[butterdezillion]

Thank you. I’ll put that info in with what I’ve got and see if it helps establish a pattern.

I bet you had an interesting New Year’s celebration that year. lol.

[BuckeyeTexan]

There is enough questionable here to make one wonder what the heck is going on.

Certainly there is enough reason to question the dates. I'm just trying to find a logical explanation rather than jump to a conspiracy.

I can't tell from your picture - do the datestamps appear to made by the same stamp?

[Danae]

No, we both got half answers until Butter forced their hands. Personally I don’t think they wanted to give that information out.

TODAY they mean the same thing, because offices in outer islands can send the documents a WHOLE lot faster, perhaps generate them on that island because the system is all digitally linked. Back in 61, the documents had to be physically transported to Honolulu before being Accepted by the state. That could take days, granted, Hawaii is tiny, but if you have only one mail plane every couple days... yea it could take some time. So they made allowances, and created a system by which they could TRACK the documents. A deputy registrar dates the form, sends it to Honolulu and the Reg. General (Or on mine “Accepted By State”) then gives it a file number.

The system change has been in place ling enough that all the current employees have been using them more or less interchangeably, they think they are all the same, and today they are. Information moves a LOT faster now.

However in 1961, the day a registrar outside Honolulu accepted a form and dated it, and it got TO Honolulu to be given a file number could easily have been different days. The BC’s given to members of the military are a good example. They were dated on one day by a registrar at the base, then sent on to Honolulu and dated again when Filed and given a number. The two dates were NOT necessarily the same in the 1960’s.

[EnderWiggins]

"What Okubo is saying here is that they used to have a “date accepted” and a “date filed” on their COLB’s."

Why then can no such a COLB can be found? Have you ever seen one? Can you show us one of these old scholl COLBs that used to have both these dates? or a long form?

Here is what Hawaiian short forms looked like before they computerized them.



No sign of either.

But while you're at it, take a look at the "race" of the father. Hmmmm... "American." What does that remind you of?

[BP2]

You’re ridiculous.

Negative Brown-eye.

You're the ridiculous one, Mr. "Integrity, Honesty, Character, & Loyalty still matter".

You're like an abused wife that keeps coming back to her pig husband who beats her, over and over again. Defending Obama — the man who has LIED to Liberals like you more than ANY other group — is so sad.

Again, I ask:

Based upon Obama's track record, what is the likelihood Obama has ALSO lied about or covered up facts surrounding his birth?

On the scale of LIES vs TRUTHS,
where is Obama's Credibility?

[Aurorales]

Why do you think the long form “Certificate of Live Birth” does not use the term “filed by”.

The long form has “Date Received by Local Registrar” and “Date Accepted by State”.

Do you think “Date Received” on long form is the same as “filed by” on short form?

If so then they are not the same thing.

First there wouldn’t be two separate boxes for the same info. (long form)

And second, my “Received by Local Registrar” date is 4 days before the “Date Accepted by State”

Obviously two different actions, and in my case happened on two different dates.

[patlin]

WOW, you are correct, they were all filed locally, then accepted all on the following Friday. So it will be interesting to see if Obama’s original shows Aug 11th.

It still does not get past the fact that the number was issued on the 8th though.

[butterdezillion]

They’re already doing outright fraud. I’ve had the proof of it posted on my blog for over a month now and I’m still waiting for all he!! to break loose.

Could be waiting a while....

I think Obama’s people are afraid of nothing because they know they have control of the systems in this country.

Still, I’d dearly love to know if there were any infants that died in August of 1961, or someone born shortly after the Nordykes who has since died.

We’ve already got 3 proofs that Factcheck is a forgery: The authenticating “seal” that doesn’t bend when the paper it’s on folds, DOH confirmaton of an amendment that wasn’t noted on the Factcheck COLB, and DOH confirmation that the Factcheck cert# & date filed are incompatible with Nordykes’.

But hey, maybe if we came up with the name of the person the cert number really belongs to..... they’ll.... believe........ us?

[mojitojoe]

You can get a birth certificate in many ways. Lots of people born at home never had birth certificates and got them years later. We need to see the long form and what is attached to it.

[EnderWiggins]

"The DOH manually stamps the birth certificates they are given. There are no pre-numbered piles. It doesn’t equate with what you’re saying about tags where each clerk has their own pile of tags."

There you go again, making stuff up. Okubo certainly says nothing like that in what you've published here. I hope you're paying attention to Buckeye Texan because (based on my information) he had got it almost exactly right.

[tutstar]

HAHA! Troll

In spite of facts to show the COLB is forged.

Blogger admits Hawaii birth certificate forgery, subverting Obama claims (Uh-oh)

You are just as treasonous as those who have helped ZERO get where he is. Maybe you can be the next CZARS.

Free Republic is no place for Obama lovers or Obama defenders.

[mojitojoe]

[patlin]

ROFL, your entire premise is that the local registrar sat on all the certs, issued the numbers all on the same day and then they were sent to the main office for final acceptance.

You tried to pass off the premise that birth certs are handled the same way car dealer transactions are done.

You are the one that is pathetically drunk on koolaid.

[BuckeyeTexan]

Poppycock. I’ve never defended Obama not one time. In fact I’ve written and posted many articles at FR criticizing him. You birthers just choose to ignore that evidence because it doesn’t fit your tired narrative that I’m an Obot troll. But that’s typical of birthers - ignore all the evidence that doesn’t suit your purpose.

[mojitojoe]

butter.....please do not give this Obot any info.

[butterdezillion]

The BC of “Alan” shows an Army Tripler Hospital birth with all the signatures on a Friday and the state registrar accepted it on the following Tuesday. That was in 1963.

The more certificates we have data from, the more clear we can be on what the procedures were.

Since Obama’s claim is that he was born at Kapiolani, the Kapiolani procedures are especially of interest.

[EnderWiggins]

"It seems like the DOH rules allowed for a very smooth rhythm. I would imagine that if there were several clerks in the registrar’s office, there would have been one who did birth certs, one who did death certs, and another who did marriages. The person would know what they were looking for, the regs they had to follow, etc."

There you go... making up stuff again.

[mojitojoe]

Hey Obot, 1907? LMAO!

[Aurorales]

True...so true.

This whole issue is fraud.

Plain as day. I mean for anyone who has eyes and will see.

My prayer has always been for God to shine light down on these lies.

Thanks for all your work by the way.

[john mirse]

Yes, the dates of birth also differ.

You simply can’t say with certainty that the hospital registrar signed all of the certs on the same day. That doesn’t even make sense from a logistical perspective.

Isn’t more likely that the hospital registrar signed the certificate immediately after the physician signed it in front of her? Otherwise her signature is attesting to information that she personally did not witness.

Obama is born on the 4th. The twins are born on the 5th. Obama’s doctor is available to sign paperwork on the 8th. He signs, the hospital registrar signs and stamps date accepted/filed (whichever) because she IS an authorized registrar. She would have to record a date somewhere!

The twins’ doctor is available on the 11th to sign paperwork. He signs, the registrar signs and datestamps the certificate. She places the twins’ paperwork in her outgoing box to be sent to the state.

The state receives the paperwork. The twins’ paperwork is reviewed for accuracy. The state registrar stamps the certificate number at the top as her approval of the local registrar’s work. She moves on down the stack to Obama’s paperwork.

I’m not trying to convince you. I know you’ll believe what you want. Just consider that there are other plausible answers to your questions.

*******

You could be right.

Of course, there is a simple way to prove whether you are correct or not: Have Hawaii officials and President Obama simply release Obama's 1961 Hawaii long form birth certificate that will tell us if there are a doctor name and a hospital name on it.

1. Still, I have problems with your timeline concerning the Nordyke birth certificates.

2.For instance, in your timeline, you have the Nordyke twins' birth certificates stamped on Aug. 11 by the hospital registrar, who next put the certificates in his/her outgoing box to be sent to the state.

3. My question is this: If the registrar stamped and signed Obama's birth certificate on Aug. 8, did the registrar also put Obama's certificate in her outbox to be sent to the state on the same day, as you say?

4. That is, where did Obama's certificate, the one you claim could have been signed by the registrar on Aug.8, sit between Aug. 8 and Aug. 11, when the Nordyke twins' certificate was signed?

5. That is, it seems to me that if the registrar signed Obama's certificate on Aug. 8, then that would be the day that he/she put it in her outbox to be sent to the state, if we are to apply your theory about the Nordyke twins' certificates: The registrar signed the Nordyke twins' certificate on Aug. 11 and put it in her outbox and sent it to the state on the same Aug. 11.

6. So my question to you is this: Could you explain again how Obama's birth certificate filed on Aug.8 has a HIGHER number than the Nordyke twins' certificates, even though the Nordyke twins' certificates were accepted/fled THREE days later on Aug. 11?

7. I'm sorry, but it seems more logical/reasonable to me that Obama's birth certificate should have a lower number than the Nordyke twins' certificates, because Obama's certificate was filed on Aug. 8 while the Nordyke twins' certificates was filed on Aug.11, three days AFTER Obama's certificate was filed.

8. In my opinion, the flaw in your theory is this: You cannot explain where Obama's Aug.8 certificate was sitting between Aug.8 and Aug.11, when the Nordyke twins' certificates were filed/accepted.

9. That is, was it still in the registrar's inbox or outbox? Was it still in the hospital, or was it lost temporarily in an office in the Department of Health, and so the Department of Health did not get around to stamping a number on it until AFTER it had stamped the Nordyke twins' certificates?

10. I'm sorry, but the idea that Obama's certificate sat forgotten in a Department of Health clerk's office until AFTER the Nordyke twins' certificates were stamped with a number seems unbelievable to me.