The Problem with the Announcement Stories

Two items have been offered as evidence of Barack Obama being born in Hawaii: an online COLB image which the HDOH has indirectly confirmed in 2 different ways as a forgery, and online images of birth announcements in the Hawaii papers shortly after Obama’s birth. This post will explain why I believe we’ve been fed – and swallowed – a lie about where those images came from. Later posts will give a glimpse of just how far it seems somebody was willing to go in order to have something – anything – that would suggest Obama was born in Hawaii, a critical need since Hawaii Governor Neil Abercrombie told Mike Evans (transcript and audio link) he had gone into both hospitals (Kapiolani and Queens) with a search warrant but found no birth certificate for Obama.

Shortly after Barack Obama’s campaign website posted what they said was Obama’s Certification of Live Birth (COLB) and questions arose regarding its authenticity, Lori Starfelt decided to see if there was a newspaper birth announcement for Obama in Hawaii. She contacted the HDOH and was told that on Fridays they printed out a list of the week’s births; “The Honolulu Advertiser” used that list to print birth announcements in their Sunday paper. So Starfelt calculated that if Obama was born on Friday, Aug 4, 1961, his birth would have been on the list the following Friday, Aug 11th, and should appear in that Sunday’s paper – Aug 13th. She contacted the Hawaii State Library (hereafter HSL), asking for a copy from the microfilm of the Advertiser’s birth announcements on Aug 13, 1961, and was sent an e-mail with an image that had Obama’s announcement on it. She posted that image, along with her story, at Texas Darlin’ Blog around July 21, 2008. (See Post 7679 )

Several days later “Infidel Granny”, posting at Atlas Shrugs Blog, said she had asked a woman at the Advertiser office about birth announcements and was told to check the HSL. She asked the HSL for a copy of the Aug 13, 1961 “Advertiser” birth announcements and the librarian sent an e-mail with the image, saying she had it handy since somebody had just asked for it a week earlier.

On Aug 13th “Koa” at Texas Darlin’ Blog posted an image for the Aug 14th Star-Bulletin announcements, which he/she had copied directly from the HSL archives.

Around Oct 21 a poster at Prius Chat also posted an image of the SB announcement, saying, “Here's a copy I made today of the August 14th (could have been the 15th or 16th), 1961 Star Bulletin newspaper showing Obama's birth announcement stored on microfilm at the Hawaii State Library in Honolulu. I had to enlarge it to the point of losing the top of the page with the date and day in order to make it readable. The microfilm is stored in the basement of the library and was in the box marked Star Bulletin Aug 1, 1961-Aug 16, 1961. ..."

On Oct 29th Whatreallyhappened.com posted images of both the Advertiser and Star-Bulletin images, which were said to be directly from the Star-Bulletin and Advertiser – which both had their microfilms stored at the Advertiser building. Note that he was not told to contact the HSL, as “Infidel Granny” says she was told.

Texas Darlin’ Blog archives, Atlas Shrugs Blog archives, the original article on Whatreallyhappened, and the Wikileaks page which also posted a copy which was a text-searchable file, have all been removed from the web, and the page at Prius Chat requires registration first; neither I nor several others who tried to register were allowed to do so. So the whole story of these claims and the images themselves have been scrubbed, except for fragments (such as the ones I link to) where others discussed and/or copied material, some of which have now been scrubbed from the web also.

I got Starfelt’s Advertiser image from a link referenced elsewhere as being Starfelt’s image, when the image was still available (“Infidel Granny” was given the same image). Whatreallyhappened still has their images posted. The Prius Chat Forum still has the link to their Star-Bulletin image. I copied Koa’s image from Photobucket when it was still available as linked to from the original post atTD Blog. (In my analysis links below I cite where each image came from.) So the images I have used come directly from the original sources.

To verify that I have not altered the images, here are some other places that still have images (as of today), although not necessarily saying the source: Both, Advertiser, Advertiser, Star-Bulletin .

When a person looks at the documents and claims about the documents, and compares them to what is actually in the Hawaii State Library microfilms, it is obvious why somebody would want these claims buried – although I am not making any specific allegations about who has done what. That should be investigated by someone with subpoena power. Here is a concise summary of what we have:

The Advertiser image that Starfelt and “Infidel Granny” supposedly got from the HSL is pristine. But in reality the HSL microfilms are so scratched up they are nearly unreadable. When a colleague asked the HSL librarian in late April, 2010, for a copy of the Aug 13, 1961 Advertiser birth announcements – the exact image that Starfelt and “Infidel Granny” supposedly got from there - this is what she was told about the condition of the microfilm (emphasis mine):

"As for your request for the Aug. 13, 1961 Honolulu Advertiser birth announcement page, I looked it up, but unfortunately, the microfilm is so worn down on top of being poorly microfilmed, that it is hardly legible. You might be better off asking another library that has a better, less used copy than ours. Or does it have to be the Advertiser? I checked the Star-Bulletin and that date and that film is fine. Let me know."

The Starfelt and “Infidel Granny” images are pristine, with no sign of being “poorly microfilmed”, which would be a constant state for the microfilms, not affected by usage. Those images are clearly not from the HSL microfilms as claimed. However, they match perfectly the images WRH got from somebody at the Advertiser office (with the exception of one C&P line in the left margin below the Asing announcement, which disappeared by the time WRH got a copy). A comparison of the images is here.

Conversely, the Star-Bulletin image – which is the exact same image for WRH, Koa, and the Prius Chat poster (right down to the same piece of hair caught in the viewer when the copy was made and the same waviness in the page being scanned), even though they each claim to have acquired their copy independently, and WRH even claims a different source - has a large scratch down the column of text. But the HSL’s Star-Bulletin microfilms are pristine, including the copy from Aug 14th, where there are no extra marks or scratches anywhere. A comparison of the images is here. To believe the stories of Koa and the Prius Chat poster, you’d have to believe that scratches disappear over time.

It is clear that what we were told about where these images came from is not true.

It appears that somebody at the Advertiser office gave out images to select people with the instruction that they were to peddle them off as genuine – the Advertiser image to the librarian at the Hawaii State Library, the Star-Bulletin image to “Koa” and the Prius Chat poster (who may have been the same person), and both images to Whatreallyhappened.com.

This is according to the statements already made and images already made public, which show glaring discrepancies in the stories. There are other discrepancies in the claims which stand out to those who have researched the microfilms as well, and those will be addressed later.

But for now the question is this: Why would somebody at the Advertiser office deceive the public into thinking their birth announcement images were actually copies made directly from the Hawaii State Library microfilms by individuals acting on their own? Why intervene at all, rather than letting these individuals get what really IS in the HSL microfilms? And who was in on this deception?

Those are questions that deserve an answer. Those like Bill O’Reilly and certain “news sources” who cite these images as their reason to ridicule “birthers” would do well to find out exactly why somebody worked so hard to deceive them on where those images actually came from.

I am going through and reading the posts here one by one, and something occurs to me...

We are being run in circles at this time.

I am not saying that we should give up on this, because I don’t believe that at all. But we must take up an issue which is related, but just as serious.

I would not matter if Obama was born in Hawai’i, or in Washington D.C. It is his parentage which precludes Natural Born Citizenship, not his place of birth.

It is Obama’s parentage which precludes Natural Born Citizenship.

Obama has forcefully put forward that this is his real parentage as if being born under the British Nationality Act of 1948 is ok. It is not.

Hawai’i breaking it’s laws, the clear potential for fraud, coverups, and all the other illegal activites seemingly undertaken on Obama’s behalf are a HUGE issue, and not one that should be dropped either.

But we must also stress, Obama’s stated parentage is what makes him an Usurper. This is evidence we have, evidence Obama has coorborated, and is ultimately his achilles heel.

No matter where Obama was born, he could never be a Natural Born Citizen having been born British, which is what “Born under the British Nationality Act of 1948” MEANS.

Technically, there isn’t a law that defines natural born citizenship. This is what the Supreme Court said in at least two cases. The definition is extraconstitutional.

What Obama lacks is proof of birth in Hawaii. His birth appears to have been registered in Hawaii, but it was either registered as out-of-state, en route or unattended. In all three circumstances, there’s no solid evidence to confirm where he was born and his real Hawaiian birth certificate exposes this fact. Rather than trying to address that deficiency and the obvious questions that would have threatened his viability as a presidential candidate, he had the COLB doctored, and perhaps the birth announcements were created to back up the appearance of a local birth.

Obama’s Certification of Live Birth states that he was born in the City of Honolulu, in the County of Honolulu, on the Island of Oahu, in the state of Hawaii on August 4, 1961 at 7:24 P.M. His birth was registered with the state of Hawaii on August 8, 1961 and the state of Hawaii, through its Director of Health, Dr. Chiyome Fukino has officially confirmed Obama’s birth in Hawaii. Dr. Fukino even went as far as to declare Obama “a natural born American citizen.”

“The state of Hawaii has said that the President was born there. That’s good enough for me.”—John Boehner, Speaker of the House of Represenatives.

“A spurious claim questioning the President’s constitutional legitimacy may be protected by the First Amendment, but a Court’s placement of its imprimatur upon a claim that is so lacking in factual support that it is frivolous would undoubtedly disserve the public interest.”—US District Court Judge Clay R. Land

Obama’s Certification of Live Birth states that he was born in the City of Honolulu, in the County of Honolulu, on the Island of Oahu, in the state of Hawaii on August 4, 1961 at 7:24 P.M.

The state of Hawaii has not legally confirmed the validity of this alleged document. You know that and pretend otherwise.

His birth was registered with the state of Hawaii on August 8, 1961 and the state of Hawaii, through its Director of Health, Dr. Chiyome Fukino has officially confirmed Obama’s birth in Hawaii.

Wrong. She made a statement that is NOT officially supported with any legal documentation. It is nothing more than hearsay. You know that and pretend otherwise.

Dr. Fukino even went as far as to declare Obama “a natural born American citizen.”

She made this claim on the basis of unidentified vital records. NO OFFICIAL VITAL RECORD makes such a statement, plus a "natural-born American citizen" is not a legal entity. In this country, we are UNITED STATES citizens. You know that and pretend otherwise.

“The state of Hawaii has said that the President was born there. That’s good enough for me.”—John Boehner, Speaker of the House of Represenatives.

Wow, someone who fell for hearsay. This is not legal proof of Obama's nativity myth. You know this and pretend otherwise.

“A spurious claim questioning the President’s constitutional legitimacy may be protected by the First Amendment, but a Court’s placement of its imprimatur upon a claim that is so lacking in factual support that it is frivolous would undoubtedly disserve the public interest.”—US District Court Judge Clay R. Land

Land's comment and assumptions are lacking in factual support. You know this and pretend otherwise.

Right now I’m helping to close loopholes in an eligibility bill that’s been introduced in Nebraska which operates according to Vattel’s definition of NBC. It’s been referred to committee but isn’t scheduled for a hearing yet. I and another person are working with Sen Christensen’s office to develop amendments which will close some loopholes in the bill as initially introduced.

We will need help from as many people as possible, to let our senators know why this bill is important and should be passed with the amendments that Christensen will propose.

If this bill is passed the DOJ will certainly challenge its constitutionality and the courts will end up having to rule on the definition of NBC. Whatever documentation requirements in the bill are in line with the definition they come up with will remain in effect and Obama will have to provide that documentation.

We are working on an amendment that would give standing for any registered NE voter to challenge an eligibility decision in court and allow them to subpoena any necessary documents as well as the embedded and written transaction logs and records for each document.

If we can get this bill amended and passed as amended this will be the real deal.

But the media will be against us all the way. There’s already been an article published about it, quoting some poli sci professor claiming to know nothing about anybody even thinking that parents’ citizenship is relevant. So we’re pushing to make sure that we get the NBC issue resolved but it seems like that is going to be what the media will hone in on to try to label the bill as “extreme”.

Starwise, your posts always show such transparent love of country and reliance on God. I just wanted to share what I said in e-mail to somebody who is on the front lines of this battle and is getting discouraged, because I believe it to be true:

I’m happy to trust you. You’ve definitely put your name and livelihood on the line, and there’s no way I can do anything but respect that and recognize it as a sacrifice of love for this country. There are SO MANY people who share that love and who stand together. There are definitely more who are with us than against us. It’s just that the people who control the infrastructure, such as the media, are the people against us. Against the America we know and love. But with courage, skill, and the help of God, little David can bring down Goliath. One of these stones is going to hit the vulnerable spot and this giant will come down.

Until that happens we’ll all just keep plugging on, not knowing which stone will be the one. I’m rooting for ALL of them.

butterdezillion: Thanks for all your great work on this.

I have a question that I'm sure you've already considered: Why would Kapiolani or Queens have ANY documentary information from 1961?

The law only requires records to be maintained for 25 years, and since the big push to digitize began a few years ago, hospitals have been extremely aggressive about destroying old paper records that can make space for new mainframes and associated equipment.

I had a case recently which turned to a degree on something that happened in our hospital in 1958.

I assumed recovering the data would be simple - in fact, it turned out to be impossible. Not even the record of the person's admission oas a child existed any longer.

If Abercrombie (or anyone) went to my hospital with a search warrent for 1961 records, the records office would die laughing.

Why does everyone assume that Kapiolani or Queens have any records from 1961? I'm almost sure they don't.

Thank you for taking the time to read and respond. I know it’s an investment of time, and I don’t take that for granted.

I do challenge the veracity of what is in all the microfilms now. Not just at the HSL but at every library we checked, there are signs of tampering.

But the story is too big to make it into one article. It has to be done a piece at a time.

The first piece is that the stories about where the images came from were a deliberate lie coordinated between somebody at the Advertiser office (with access to all the old microfilms and microfiche for both newspapers), the HSL librarian, and at least one anonymous online poster.

The next piece is the lies openly aired in public by those people regarding how the HDOH and newspapers handled the birth announcements. This shows that there was a false narrative they wanted to support in order to make the announcements, even if genuine, mean more than they actually do - a narrative that is revealed by the discrepancies in their accounts and by the actual hard evidence in the newspapers. At this point I believe the HDOH actually altered their 1960-64 birth index to cover for all this as well, so the treachery runs deep.

And then the final piece is the actual physical evidence of microfilms being tampered with at every library we checked. Five libraries. Each shows unique signs of tampering.

Opportunity, motive, evidence, cover-up. It’s all there.

And altering historic government records such as microfilms at a State Library or the Library of Congress is a crime, I believe.

As many have pointed out, the birth announcements have no legal significance, even though used by folks like Bill O’Reilly as the absolute proof that Obama was born in Hawaii. The reason the story matters is because it shows the coordinated efforts between government and media personnel to support an elaborate crime that was done - all to cover the fact that there has been no GENUINE evidence yet presented to support Obama’s claim of a Hawaii birth.

We all thought it was crazy to think that somebody would actually make new microfilms with a forged birth announcement page and change out the microfilms at all the libraries where those microfilms existed. We thought that would be more bother than it was worth, and that it was just too conspiratorial to believe.

But it sure seems like that’s exactly what happened. That tells you how desperate they considered the need for ANYTHING that would support the “official” Obama birth story. Why go to that extreme if there’s no “there” there?

The chorus of “You know this and pretend otherwise” is very effective at summing up where Jamese777 is coming from.

I’ve gotten to where I see it’s from him so I just skip over it because I already know it’s going to be some variation of “Nobody in government is on your side. Give up and die. Nyeah.”

I don’t need that. Life is too short to waste time on that. He knows all the things you said he does, just as you said, and he’s not willing to let the truth make any difference to him. I’m shaking the dust off my sandals as far as he is concerned; God can sort it all out for him in the end.

I had asked that of somebody and their response was that vital records would be different than medical records, because vital records are legal proof that a hospital might need - for instance if some parents claimed that the hospital had mixed up which infant they sent home with them.

If you’re still at a hospital maybe you could ask if they treat vital records differently than the medical records. Do they keep a birth certificate in the medical chart/file, or are the BC’s stored somewhere else? Are death certificates stored in the medical files?

Amen.

Luke 8:17

“For nothing is hidden that will not become evident, nor anything secret that will not be known and come to light.”

We shall all know the truth .. one day. I pray you and all God’s warriors for truth and justice are guided with His grace, mercy and discernment to the secret keys that unlock and reveal all the subversion, mysteries and lies . and soon.

God bless you with continued safety, endurance, patience and
perseverence, butter. I pray those devout patriots with the
skills your presentation requires will soon appear.

One other thing. The logical place for a long-form birth certificate to be would be the HDOH. I can only presume Abercrombie went with a search warrant to the hospitals rather than to the HDOH because he had already checked the HDOH for it and found nothing. Which fits his statement to a reporter that a recording of Obama’s birth was actually written down in the archives.

Seems like the sequence of looking would have been: HDOH, hospitals, archives.

I’ve got the retention schedules for documents and I should look again; there was only one kind of record that was actually sent to the archives; everything else was to be retained at the HDOH office.

OK. I looked it up. The only 2 kinds of records that are allowed to be transferred to the State Records Center are the master microfilms of Registrations of Foreign Birth (p 1 of retention schedule) and the security microfilms for Certificates of Hawaiian Birth once the records are 75 years old (p 5 of retention schedule).

Obama’s not 75 years old yet (as far as we know. lol) So it seems like if what Abercrombie said is accurate (big if, I know), what they have for Obama in the Archive is a microfilm for a registration of foreign birth.

I thought I had posted the HDOH Retention Schedule on my blog but I hadn’t so I posted it just now. It’s at http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/doh-records-retention-schedules.pdf

Amen. And thank you.

Right now endurance is so critical. Obama’s game plan seems to be to demoralize his opponents by doing so much, so big, so fast that it seems hopeless to even try to catch up to all the damage he’s done. I look at how he’s lost every ally we ever had, since they all now know they can’t trust him and can’t trust America as long as our voters are this stupid.

Well... I was going to list all the giants. But rather than looking at the waves and thinking how impossible it is to walk on water, I guess we need to look to the outstretched arm we’re walking towards. He won’t let us fall. His outstretched arm is mighty to save, even from the most crushing and real enemies. Even death couldn’t hold Him down. That’s what I need to remember, so I have strength and hope enough to keep putting one foot in front of the other.

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.