Posted on 01/06/2009 11:52:38 AM PST by Kevmo
1. I am Sandra Ramsey Lines, With an adddres at... I am a former federal examiner and law enforcement officer. I began training as a forensic document examiner in 1991. I am a Certified Diplomat of Forensic Sciences, a member of the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners, a member of the Southwestern Association of Forensic Document Examiners, and a member of the Questioned Document Subcommittee of the American Society of Testing and Materials. My background and credentials are set forth in Exhibit I attached hereto.
2. I have reviewed the attached affidavit posted on the internet from “Ron Polarik,” [PDF] who has declined to provide his name because of a number of death threats he has received. After my review and based on my years of experience, I can state with certainty that the COLB presented on the internet by the various groups, which include the “Daily Kos,” the Obama Campaign, “Factcheck.org” and others cannot be relied upon as genuine. Mr. Polarik raises issues concerning the COLB that I can affirm. Software such as Adobe Photoshop can produce complete images or alter images that appear to be genuine; therefore, any image offered on the internet cannot be relied upon as being a copy of the authentic document.
3. Upon a cursory inspection of the internet COLB, one aspect of the image that is clearly questionable is the obliteration of the Certificate No. That number is a tracking number that would allow anyone to ask the question, “Does this number refer to the Certification of Live Birth for the child Barack Hussein Obama II?” It would not reveal any further personal information; therefore, there would be no justifiable reason for oliterating it.
4. In my experience as a forensic document examiner, if an original of any document exists, that is the document that must be examined to obtain a definitive finding of genuineness or non-genuineness. In this case, examination of the vault birth certificate for President-Elect Obama would lay this issue to rest once and for all.
SANDRA RAMSEY LINES Forensic Document Examiner ........ Paradise Valley, Arizona 85253
SRLines@cox.net
Former Federal Examiner Retired Law Enforcement Officer
* Identification of handwriting, hand printing, signatures, typewriting, photocopying, and printing processes
* Examination of paper, inks, stamps, seals, and other documentary evidence to determine identity, source, authenticity, and possible date
* Forensic analysis of business and medical records to determine whether there are alterations, additions, deletions, erasures, substitutions, and/or if the records were manufactured in a normal course-of-business manner
* Distinguishing forgery from genuineness
* Restoration or decipherment of erased, obliterated or hidden writing
* Expert testimony in state and federal courts, and regulatory hearings
Certified Diplomate, American Board of Forensic Document Examiners Fellow, American Academy of Forensic Sciences Member, American Society of Questioned Document Examiners Member, Southwestern Association of Forensic Document Examiners Member, American Society of Testing and Materials, Forensic Sciences Committee, and Questioned Document Subcommittee
Also, the crux of the matter is where was Obama born? Everything else is just window dressing.
I would like it to be resolved so we can move on and rebuild the GOP. I would hate to see an issue like this drive more conservatives to vote third party because they are mad at other conservatives.
The one banned last night was Hulka, right? Just getting my facts straight.
marker-
BTW Kevmo, I’ve spend many hours over glp off and on (most 02-03, maybe into 04). Could write a book if someone put a gun to my head AND gave me big $ AND I unearthed old files w/ many weeks work.
Curious if ur there outside “Anonynous Coward” (I dipped in there often this summer on the COLB as an AC)...
and why you cross-posted from there instead of closer source.
I don’t understand your post. What is glp?
Brutus509... maybe we’re talking about 2 different threads.
Did you even read the message issued by Fukimo which has been posted for you, repeatedly? One more time: what the state of Hawai'i has verified is that they have a birth certificate on file which is protected from release just like all other documents in their vault. Lingle never stated what the vault copy shows, Fukimo never stated what the vault copy shows, and if you had a brain, n00b-troll, you would reason it out and realize these people cannot state what the vault copy shows else they will be criminally liable for revealing what Obamessiah doesn't want revealed.
It's one thing to be stupid, but to lie repeatedly when you've been shown the facts and miss the very ppint you keep trying to protect is just ridiculous. So now you look really stupid and incompetent. Why not slink back to DU, YOU FAIL?
A birth certificate shows that a person was born somewhere...for example Hawaii. Opinions can not be considered lies...they are what you think is true....opinion may be wrong, but can not be considered lies. You think my opinions are incorrect...who knows for sure?
I dont agree with you that this is simply a matter of feelings (in the sense of emotions.) One can make rational judgments about human behaviors in the absence of complete set of facts. Juries are compelled to do this every day.
My thinking goes like this. Although I grant it is possible, the notion that Obama would run for president knowing he was not born in the U.S. strains credulity. He is an attorney. Were he born elsewhere, he would realize that were he found out, it would ruin him for life. That is why I have had doubts about the born-in-Kenya concept from the get-go.
That said, the fact remains that he has spent millions of dollars fighting to keep the original cert secret. It likewise strains credulity that he would do this were there nothing on the cert to hide.
I don’t see that emotions have anything to do with either position.
"He is now in the Individual Ready Reserve." How the heck does someone join the Reserves after he retires? And why would he?
Please put me on your troll list. Thanks.
Late or altered certificates. A person born in the State may file or amend a certificate after the time prescribed, upon submitting proof as required by rules adopted by the department of health. Certificates registered after the time prescribed for filing by the rules of the department of health shall be registered subject to any evidentiary requirements that the department adopts by rule to substantiate the alleged facts of birth. [L 1949, c 327, §19; RL 1955, §57-18; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-15; am L 1972, c 66, §1(1); am L 1997, c 305, §2]
Procedure concerning late and altered birth certificates. (a) Birth certificates registered one year or more after the date of birth, and certificates which have been altered after being filed with the department of health, shall contain the date of the late filing and the date of the alteration and be marked distinctly “late” or “altered”. (b) A summary statement of the evidence submitted in support of the acceptance for late filing or the alteration shall be endorsed on the certificates. (c) Such evidence shall be kept in a special permanent file. (d) When an applicant does not submit the minimum documentation required by the rules for late registration or when the state registrar finds reasons to question the validity or adequacy of the certificate or the documentary evidence, the state registrar shall not register the late certificate and shall advise the applicant of the reason for this action. The department of health may by rule provide for the dismissal of an application which is not actively prosecuted. (e) As used in this section, “late” means one year or more after the date of birth. [L 1949, c 327, §20; RL 1955, §57-19; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-16; am L 1972, c 66, §1(2); am L 1997, c 305, §3]
And finally the law gramma posted before: §338-17
Late or altered certificate as evidence. The probative value of a “late” or “altered” certificate shall be determined by the judicial or administrative body or official before whom the certificate is offered as evidence. [L 1949, c 327, §21; RL 1955, §57-20; HRS §338-17; am L 1997, c 305, §4]
Note the portions in bold for emphasis (other than the section titles). These bold letters demonstrate these three laws are written in relation to one another, and all are in relation to a person born in the State, but not to people not born outside the state.
Now of course there exists the possibility of registering a birth that occured out of state,
§338-17.8, Certificates for children born out of State. (a) Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child. (b) Proof of legal residency shall be submitted to the director of health in any manner that the director shall deem appropriate. The director of health may also adopt any rules pursuant to chapter 91 that he or she may deem necessary or proper to prevent fraudulent applications for birth certificates and to require any further information or proof of events necessary for completion of a birth certificate. (c) The fee for each application for registration shall be established by rule adopted pursuant to chapter 91. [L 1982, c 182, §1]
However as one can see this law was adopted in 1982, and there exist no laws prior to this that such a provision applies to. That is, it is permissible now to register the birth of one's child in the state of HI if one's child was born in another state (or another country), but prior to 1982, the only "amendments" that could be made to one's BC was if one was born in the state of HI to begin with.
The 1982 law obviously can't be retroactive either, as it would create a giant loophole for identity thieves to exploit.
Thus, as the current law stands now, one can register a birth of a child in another country in HI, but before 1982, no such provision existed for a child born in another state, much less another country. The only "amendments" that could be done were to BC's of children born in the state of HI.
Similarly for individuals born in foreign countries adopted in HI.
Adoption; foreign born persons. (a) The department of health shall establish a Hawaii certificate of birth for a person born in a foreign country and for whom a final decree of adoption has been entered in a court of competent jurisdiction in Hawaii, when it receives the following:
(1) A properly certified copy of the adoption decree, or certified abstract thereof on a form approved by the department; and
(2) A copy of any investigatory report and recommendation which may have been prepared by the director of social services; and
(3) A report on a form to be approved by the department of health setting forth the following:
(A) Date of assumption of custody;
(B) Sex;
(C) Color or race;
(D) Approximate age of child;
(E) Name and address of the person or persons adopting said child;
(F) Name given to child by adoptive parent or parents;
(G) True or probable country of birth.
The true or probable country of birth shall be known as the place of birth, and the date of birth shall be determined by approximation. This report shall constitute an original certificate of birth; and
(4) A request that a new certificate of birth be established.
(b) After preparation of the new certificate of birth in the new name of the adopted person, the department of health shall seal and file the certified copy of the adoptive decree, the investigatory report and recommendation of the director of human services if any, the report constituting the original certificate of birth, and the request for a new certificate of birth. The sealed documents may be opened by the department only by an order of a court of record or when requested in accordance with section 578-14.5 or 578-15. The new certificate of birth shall show the true or probable foreign country of birth, and that the certificate is not evidence of United States citizenship for the child for whom it is issued or for the adoptive parents. [L 1979, c 203, §3; am L 1990, c 338, §3]
This proves my point...you must verify a legal document from Hawaii by checking up on the credentials of the doctor or nurse? I consider this completely ridiculous.
His response to you, MHG, proves that he is either highly intoxicated and/or has serious psychological problems, or what is more likely, an 0bama team player.
Or both, of course.
What about a simple copy of whatever they send these days...why would that not work. I used it at the DMV and other places? I have a feeling Hawaii will send the usual document and that will be it.
More insults....when all I yearn for is facts...alas, I am doomed to further disappointment I fear.
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.