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

To: supercat

Janice Okubo has already said they HAVE to “stay mum”. When I asked her directly whether she would report a known forgery to law enforcement and refrain from speaking positively to the public about that forgery, she said they can’t reveal ANYTHING about a birth certificate.

The HDOH is as crooked as they come and has manipulated their records to cover for Obama, so at this point - after having observed them closely for the last 2 years - I would not trust a word from them at all. What I would trust are the unmanipulable computer transaction logs. Period.

But the HDOH has already stated publicly that they would NOT TELL US if somebody posted a forgery of one of their records. Given that fact, Obama would have no reason to NOT disclose a forgery - since no court will allow anybody but the HDOH to ever know whether his posting was genuine. We already know the system is set up to be totally safe for Obama to post whatever he darn well pleases. The courts and HDOH have publicly revealed that they “have his back”.

People really, really need to understand this. The supposed means of accountability have all already stated publicly that they will NOT hold Obama accountable if he posts a forgery. And INDIRECT (IOW, accidental) confirmations by the HDOH say that he’s done that twice now.


94 posted on 05/07/2011 5:15:27 AM PDT by butterdezillion (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]


To: butterdezillion
Janice Okubo has already said they HAVE to “stay mum”. When I asked her directly whether she would report a known forgery to law enforcement and refrain from speaking positively to the public about that forgery, she said they can’t reveal ANYTHING about a birth certificate.

If that is true, I'm 99.99% sure she is misrepresenting her obligations. Confidentiality requirements would probably prevent her from saying what was wrong with a particular BC, or from responding to "probing" attacks (e.g. if shown a bunch of BCs that were identical except for certain bits of information, identifying which one had the right information). On the other hand, when the person who is the subject of a BC puts out what he claims to be an accurate representation thereof, she could challenge the authenticity of the alleged BC without revealing anything meaningful about the information thereon.

Actually, the right approach for the state certifying anything would be to allow a means by which people can request that a BC be made directly available to any specified person or persons, so that those persons could request an electronic or physical copy directly from the state. That would eliminate any possibility of tampering.

102 posted on 05/08/2011 9:13:30 AM PDT by supercat (Barry Soetoro == Bravo Sierra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | 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