Posted on 06/21/2008 10:56:04 AM PDT by pissant
I have acquired additional information related to my earlier posts today (at my blog) on the subject of Barack Obama’s ‘Certification of Live Birth.’
My first post on this subject, Obama Birth Certificate, Fake?, included an analysis that I came across by a blogger named Polarik, who concluded based on “20 years of experience in computers, printers, and typewriters” that the document provided by the Obama campaign (and published by Daily Kos) was manufactured.
In a subsequent post, Certification of Birth from Hawaii: Where’s the Seal?, I showed a ‘Certification of Live Birth’ from Honolulu County for Patricia Decosta, which I found posted at Free Republic (thanks to reader shainzona). (And yes, I know it’s a “right wing” publication but that does not make the information false).
Here is the document posted by the Obama campaign on its Fight the Smears website as evidence of Obama’s birth in Hawaii in 1961:
And here is Ms. Decosta’s certification:
Now, compare the two documents. Polarik’s technical analysis notwithstanding, my lay person’s eye noticed three differences right away:
1. Ms. Decosta’s certification displays fold marks, which you might expect to see on a document sent through the mail.
2. The certificate number on Obama’s document is blacked out; Ms. Decosta’s is not.
AND
3. An embossed seal is visible on Ms. Decosta’s certification; there is no embossed seal on Obama’s. (You can see the embossed seal very clearly on the larger image at FR here.)
The Vital Records office in Hawaii has confirmed the following with respect to requests for certified copies of birth certificates:
1. Certifications of live birth are always mailed from the VR office, and never transmitted electronically.
2. Certificate numbers are never blacked out.
AND
3. Certifications will always have an embossed seal.
Doesn't matter. What's important is that both of the documents have "OHSM 1.1 (Rev. 11/01) LASER" written on them, meaning they're both generated after November 2001.
Is BO’s mother’s name really Stanley?
It would be nice if you could come up with a Hawaiian Birth Certificate from 1961 to make the comparisons.
What this could be though, is that this is an unofficial birth certificate.
When I was born in PA, when I was going into the navy, I found out that the birth certificate I had, wasn’t. I found out that even though it says birth certificate, without the state seal on the paper, it isn’t official.
They delayed me joining until I requested a new certificate and they mailed it to me.
Asking my mom about it, she said that they gave her the document that she thought was a birth certificate at the hospital and didn’t mail it to her.
I don’t know what the reason for this is, just that my mother and everyone believed this was a birth certificate while the Navy clearly new it wasn’t.
It does not matter. Obama’s document is a modern document, not a copy of his 1961 birth certificate. That is how they issue these things these days, unless specifically requesting a copy of the original. But it is a FAKE of the modern version.
Big mistake a lot of folks are making. These are Certification of Birth, not original Birth Certificates. They could have been printed yesterday by a registrar's office.
However, it doesn't mean the certificate of birth Obama's folks are putting out isn't a fraud. I was sort of hoping that the father and mother's religion was included with this.
But the question remains, why would they forge a birth certificate, UNLESS he was not born in this country. Is that where we are trying to go with this?
On Obama’s certificate, the issue date shows up as 2007. Can you make out what the issue date was on the example certificate. Is that 2005? Could there be any changes to the form between this period?
This is a photo of his mom:
Hey, fake but accurate. :O)
Doh! These are both already the same revision number. So therefore, they should be the same, and contain the same information.
How about if you try ordering one?
https://www.ehawaii.gov/doh/vitrec/exe/vitrec.cgi
I agree, if Obama’s is from 2007, it would be better to compare to another 2007 issue. But I can’t imagine a difference between 2005 and 2007 when the bottom of BOTH clearly state the form was last revised November 2001.
Have at it. LOL
BTW, why, if they are the same revision of the document, would they have such a vastly different border hatching?
Don’t get too excited....
I used to run Background Investigations for the Fed. Govt. Whenever I would need a “Certified” birth certificate or, for that matter, any certified document from a court or any government office, it would normally have, not only a seal of some type, but also a stamped caveat stating that the copy I was obtaining was a “true copy” of the original document of record and was ALWAYS signed by a records official .
Looking at the birth cert. for Patricial Decosta, you can clearly see this caveat to the lower left of the seal.
The Obama cert does not show this. Thus, based on what I see, I would not call it a “certified” document.
Why not? he posted a fake version on his own stopthesmears website.
FAKE....FRAUD....LIE!
One would think so.
Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
Obama's father was an alien and Obama's mother was a citizen of the U.S. who certainly lived in the U.S. for at least five years. Therefore, it doesn't matter where Obama was born; he's a natural-born American citizen, and is therefore eligible to become President.
Of course, this is quite separate from the question of whether Americans will be foolish enough to actually elect him President!
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.