Posted on 05/18/2010 8:41:44 AM PDT by butterdezillion
The Hawaii Department of Health claims in official communications that the original birth index and index of foreign births (which are both required to be retained permanently) don't exist.
When vital records were converted to their current electronic format and the computer itself allowed sorting and locating, the HDOH submitted the old, original paper indices (VR-1)to the comptroller for a determination of what should happen to them. The comptroller agreed that those indices should be retained permanently, as originals and/or as security and search microfilms.
The HDOH at the same time made a separate request for the certificates themselves (VR-2)to be analyzed and it was decided that they, too, should be kept as originals and microfilm security and search copies authorized.
So there were 2 different requests for 2 different kinds of documents which were in physical form, able to be microfilmed.
The Hawaii State Archivist says that microfilm copies were not requested for the indices and the Vital Statistics Office should have the originals as required in the retention schedule.
I asked the HDOH for their documentation regarding the destruction of these documents. (Every department is required to keep detailed records of what documents they have destroyed, showing that they followed the retention schedule.) The deadline for them to respond is past and they have not provided those records.
The illegal destruction of permanent records SHOULD prompt an investigation in Hawaii. We will see what the Ombudsman does with this. (Don't hold your breath)
The documentation for all this is on a new post at my blog, which I will link to in the 2nd comment.
I don’t. I think that is a strong possibility. Who did it, what was their motive and what did they find or do? Will those questions ever be answered or will the charges be dropped and we will never hear another word about it except that the ones that did it have relocated to some remote Caribbean island?
It may be a pipe dream, but it is ALSO the ONLY legitimate and legal reason for his removal there is.
We cannot get his records. Thats a fact. We have no options but to stick with what we know, and to keep DEMANDING that the government recognize this. Otherwise, THE UNITED STATES DOES NOT LEGALLY EXIST.
I am not giving up on making the government legitimate.
I don’t think Obama claims the proof has been destroyed. And the HDOH hasn’t said they destroyed his actual BC; in fact they’ve actually said they have it. They’ve also indirectly said that the Factcheck COLB is forged and what they have for Obama doesn’t count as prima facie evidence.
So you’re exactly right when you say the burden of proof is on Obama. Because Hawaii’s documents aren’t prima facie evidence, Obama would have to prove the Hawaii birth claim over and above the Kenyan birth claims if the issue was ever taken up by a court.
That’s why he’s fighting so hard to keep any court from considering it - even to the point of asking Judge Carter to note the Factcheck COLB, which we know is a forgery by the HDOH’s own admissions.
Is there any info on who they were? Were they Barry supporters? If we had more info on who did it, that might answer the motive questions. Were they like James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles or were they Rahm/Axelrod types?
“They’ve also indirectly said that the Factcheck COLB is forged and what they have for Obama doesn’t count as prima facie evidence.”
Thats because they will not give state legitimacy to a photo of a COLB. You can’t prove anything from a photo, and they made the right call in refusing to say that it was legit. They said they could not say that it was legitimate, and they are correct.
This does NOT mean HDOH it is a fraud. It means they cannot verify that what is pictured in the photos is legit, and no one else can say yea or nay either. It is one of the few calls in all this I think Hawaii made correctly.
Selective service registration - forged.
Passport - security breaches.
Social security numbers - used at least 2, both from places where he never worked.
COLB - forged.
College loan records - security breaches.
That’s what we’ve got so far. How the heck in a non-Third-World country can law enforcement sit on its hands for all of this, while Obama takes over the auto, banking, healthcare, and student loan industries?
How can the Republican and/or conservative leaders and talkers sit on their hands while this is going on?
I don’t get it.
I was not aware of the fact that this was done in 2007. Now I think it WAS to change them.
Danae, I think you might not be up on the latest that the HDOH has said. Disclosures that they’ve made have actually shown that the Factcheck COLB is a forgery because
1) the HDOH has made (and re-confirmed several times) a statutory admission that Obama’s BC is amended. The Administrative Rules require that amendment to be noted on any certificate the HDOH prints - including the abbreviated certificate, which is what the COLB is technically called. Because neither Factcheck nor the Fight the Smears COLB’s have note of that amendment, they are known to not be genuine documents from the HDOH. And
2) Okubo stated that Oahu BC’s have always been received at the state registrar’s office and given a number by the state registrar on the same date - the “date filed”. The Factcheck COLB has a “date filed” of Aug 8th but has a later certificate number than the Nordykes’ which have a “date filed” 3 days later.
The previous explanations for the discrepancy have been eliminated by Okubo’s statement because the hospitals were not given either pre-numbered certificates or a block of numbers to use, and there were no piles that sat around for 3 days at the state registrar’s office waiting to be numbered.
So the HDOH has actually confirmed in 2 different ways that the Factcheck COLB is a forgery.
I should also say that it would be very easy to not be up on the latest information. It’s hard to keep track of things because there’s so much going on. So I meant absolutely no offense by my response. I can barely keep up with stuff myself, and this is my main focus.
They may have been able to change them there, but not everywhere. Everything is sealed and locked, because the paper trail and even hard drive trail cannot be entirely 100% sanitized. It is not humanly possible. Plus there people who saw things and did things and ordered others to do things, and IMO eventually some of those people will start to sing. They can’t all be killed.
Except we're talking handwritten indexes at the time and you're talking data entry computer records of some unknown date of recent times. The handwritten entry or entries (county and/or state) from the first and second weeks of August 1961 are closer to the truth than the any data entry made decades later which may or may not have been taken from the index books. Every time information is transferred or re-entered or re-written is that much further from the original and true document. It opens it up for more typos or info left off or numbers transposed or info being mixed up with the one before or after it. Besides, we all know how easy it is to hack computer files. What is needed here in lieu of the actual b/c is the available to the public original handwritten birth index. If there were multiple database entries for Barack Obama, such as amendments, etc., then the index data would contain multiple entries.
That's a big IF. You're assuming everything was entered and everything is up to date with transferring the data. Any amendments would not show up as separate entries anyway because that would not cause his b/c to be moved to a different birth record book. His place in the big book and his number remains the same.
It would depend upon how the database designer modeled the data and constructed the tables and indexes. There are different types of databases, distinguished from each other by the manner in which the data is accessed.
Generally speaking, each database table is a set of like records, such as a list of all new vehicles at an automobile dealership. An index is a list of “keys” that identify (or point to) particular records in the corresponding database table.
An index key allows you to retrieve (access) a record or set of records from the corresponding database table. So when the data modeler creates the index for a table, he attempts to determine how the records will ultimately be accessed by the end user so he can determine what “keys” to create in the index.
For our discussion, let’s go with an automobile dealership database. It might have one table for new cars, one for used cars, one for salesmen, and one for sales data. (That’s very simplified for discussion purposes.)
Each of the above tables will have a corresponding index. In a table’s index, there will be at least one “key” but, more likely, multiple “keys.”
Here’s what a New Car record (in the New Car table) might look like.
Year: 2010
Make: Ford
Model: F-150
VIN: 1AB23CD4E567890
Color: Red
MSRP: $35,000.00
Cost: $27,500.00
Engine: V8
(And various other atrributes about a vehicle that you might see listed on the invoice sticker ...)
In order to access records in the New Car table, we need at least one key in the New Car index. A unique key would be the VIN (vehicle identification number). The VIN can point to one and only one New Car record.
However, our salesmen might want to see information about all red, 2010, Ford F-150’s. So, we might have a key in the index for “Year+Make+Model+color.” So when we use that key to retrieve records, we’ll get a list of records rather than one record because the information for which we asked is not unique. For discussion purposes, let’s say there are three, red, 2010, Ford F-150’s in stock: one basic model with cloth seats; one extended cab with leather seats; and one regular cab with leather seats.
Now consider the Hawaii vital records database. The data Okubo supplied indicated that there was a marriage table and a birth table. She requested all records in both tables for anyone with the last name “Obama” and the first name “Barack.” The result set (list of records) displayed one record in the marriage table for “Barack Obama Sr.” whose spouse was “Stanley Ann Dunham” and one record from the birth table for “Barack Hussein Obama II” who was a male born on August 4, 1961.
If there were amended birth records for Obama, there would be multiple records in the birth table. The original record is not deleted. An additional record is added to the table with the amended (corrected, changed, updated) information.
Hawaii law requires that the DoH maintain a birth index with the name, gender, and date of birth for every child born in Hawaii. Based on what Okubo supplied, that birth index appears to be an actual table of records not an index of keys. There were no records in that table for “Barry Soetoro” or his sister “Maya.”
It had to have been recent because just last year (has changed since then) the Hawaii Homeland Dept REQUIRED the original certified long form birth certificate.
Some of that I knew, the Nordyke twins etc. But this is new about the Amended admission! That is amazing. The two nubs who got the forgery to Factcheck should be up on fraud charges shouldn’t they?????
Oh goodness no! I don’t take that personally! Goodness no! I miss stuff all the time, and frankly more now than usual. My Dad is fighting stage 4 lung cancer which is also in his liver and brain. He just finished full Brain radiation, 15 days of it. Now to finish the interrupted 6 months of Chemo, he has 3 months of that crap to go...
I am in school also, taking a 300 level research writing course, have two kids, 9 and almost 5.... yea, I miss a lot! I don’t take your corrections at all personal! I am but a student, and I try to keep my cup empty for the next infusion of tea!
>>> Obama would have to prove the Hawaii birth claim over and above the Kenyan birth claims if the issue was ever taken up by a court.
I think the FACT that his father wasn’t a citizen makes the whole argument over place of birth moot as far as eligibility goes.... However, if we want to go further into proving that he is actually an illegal alien, then place of birth is relevant.
It's still hearsay. He can have no personal knowledge of who his Daddy was. He's relying on what his mama told him.
---------------------------------------
Unless, of course, he's referring to information he saw on the old b.c. that he allegedly came across.
If HI included the sex (doubtful), then they would take a black marker and scribble the M out and hand write an F (or F for M). An adoption might or might not be different (every office does things slightly different) but there would be a big scribble over the original birth name. The clerk might try to squeeze in the adoptive name - under the proper alphabetical tab and chronologically between the other babies born before and after him. Or the clerk might enter the adoptive name at the end of that particular alphabetical section. White Out might also have been used, but that can sometimes be scratched off so big black scribbles worked best. So, you see, any changes or amendments would be obvious on the original handwritten index. But pages could be switched out easily if someone had a mind to...
If Obama was adopted in Hawaii by Lolo Soetoro, then a new birth certificate was issued with his adopted name. The original birth certificate would be sealed.
We don't know how an adoption would affect the original entry in the birth index. Perhaps a new entry is added to the birth index for the adopted child. They issue a new birth certificate for adoptions, so there would have to be an index of some kind pointing to the new birth record instead of the original record.
According to M-W anyway, Hearsay evidence is not based on a witness's personal knowledge.
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.