Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: butterdezillion
Quote;"But it couldn’t have been a hospital in Hawaii or Washington. If it had been from a hospital in Hawaii he would not have had to be charged for making an amendment and it wouldn’t result in there being a note of an amendment; it would be chalked up to hospital error.

I guess I have missed out on some things. I am confused about I think I read where you said he or someone wrote in on the OFFICIAL birth certificate his weight. Where has that ever been pointed out? You talk about the CDC. Is that the Center For Disease Control? All the Certified Birth Certificates that we have received come from the State of Washington Department of Social and Health Services Vital Records. There is nothing from the CDC.

About babies. Back during that time they pretty much had the mothers not gain more than 20 lbs for the whole nine months, so the babies weighted a lot less than they do now. My first 5 lbs 8 oz second 6 lbs 1 oz and my last 6 lbs 13 oz. All were full term and did great. My son was the only one who grew tall though.

80 posted on 08/02/2010 9:16:49 PM PDT by Spunky (You are free to make choices, but not free from the consequences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]


To: Spunky

Hawaii had a law saying that the HDOH could decide the form of the birth certificates but they had to include AT LEAST all the information that was required on the federal government’s standard birth certificate. The agency which comes up with the recommended standard certificates has changed names over the years; now it’s under the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

To find out what would have been REQUIRED for a BC in Hawaii to be considered legally complete in 1961, then, I went to the CDC’s 1961 Natality Report, which has a copy of the recommended standard birth certificate. At that point, BC’s were required to have those 3 medical items.

What makes me believe that it was the birth weight which was added to Obama’s BC to complete it is what I’ve gotten for responses from the HDOH on specific, targeted requests. I don’t want to reveal exactly what those requests were because if the HDOH or Obots knew exactly what I’ve got they could try to figure out a way to forge or change documents in a way that would explain those responses.

Sort of like how a teacher who knows the questions on a standardized test might teach only to get the kids to pass the test. If the teacher doesn’t know what’s on the test they can’t manipulate their teaching to get deceptive results.

That’s also why they do independent questioning of witnesses - so the witnesses can’t necessarily synchronize their accounts. If they don’t know what evidence they have to try to synchronize their accounts with, they can be cross-examined by the evidence they didn’t know we had.

It’s hard to know what the public should be aware of, and what to keep hidden for cross-examination purposes. Anything that I have kept hidden is because I feel that I must, because of the corruption I’ve observed and realize could happen again. I struggle with the tendency to reveal too much rather than too little.

So in this case what I can say is that I’ve got HDOH responses and other observed phenomena which support this hypothesis but I can’t reveal them yet.


100 posted on 08/03/2010 7:05:55 AM PDT by butterdezillion (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson