You're trying to convince yourself (apparently) that the Hawaii Department of Health was hiding the document from the Governor of Hawaii. Why?
Not at all. I don't regard the statement above as being conclusive. "that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Barack Obama may not exist within the vital records maintained by the Hawaii Department of Health. "
In other words, it doesn't prove anything. Abercrombie is a bit of a flake, so the stuff he says is plausibly just as much nonsense as it is valid. I put little stock in this comment as proof of anything. Unless the Governor himself went down to the DOH office and looked for it himself, he's relying on what people are telling him.
His statement MIGHT mean something, but it also might not. That is the trouble with this entire issue. There is all sorts of indicative information, but not a lot of conclusive information.
Who is Hawaii? The Governor? The one who said in 2011 that the long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Barack Obama may not exist within the vital records maintained by the Hawaii Department of Health. Please.
It IS a curious statement. Perhaps the birth certificate was created AFTER 2008, and the Change date in the document is the result of someone having the date on their computer set wrong. I have several machines where the date and time are not set correctly.
Where exactly are you seeing this 2008 change date in the document anyway? I haven't gotten into an extensive analysis of every aspect of it. Noticing that the resolution and bit depths of the text characters are different is all I needed to see to convince me the document was pasted together from multiple sources.
Show me what you're talking about, and i'll mull it over.
You're wrong.
Maybe so, but you haven't demonstrated me to be wrong. You are just saying it.
Obama's birth certificate was poorly crafted by somebody within Obama's inner circle. It was held until it was needed. It is the only possible explanation.
In my mind that is a childish and stupid explanation. It postulates an illegal conspiracy involving suspects unnamed in the Obama Administration with complicity of Everyone in the Government of Hawaii (to include the Governor) who has access to the original birth document. Obama's attorney would also be in serious trouble, and could lose his law license and possibly serve prison time if such a thing were discovered. Why go through all this when the document can be legally faked without all of those nasty loose ends?
If you are going to suggest such a ridiculous idea, you need to have far better proof then an offhand statement from an idiot governor and a change date on a file. For all I know, they used a previous file from 2008 as the starting point in crafting the new one in 2011. I reuse computer code all the time, and if I was constantly doing something redundant, (like creating replacement birth certificates for adopted children) I would likely start with the last similar file I created and modify it from there.
My own personal opinion is that the idea of a "conspiracy" always needs to be rejected if there is any other plausible idea on the table. If everything else is ruled out, then and only then should the notion of a "conspiracy" ever be suggested. Using a "conspiracy" as your starting point for anything you don't understand just gets the rest of us labelled as nuts too, and is a large reason why it's difficult to get anyone else to pay attention to the issue.
Those people would undoubtedly include individuals within the Hawaii Department of Health. If they can't find it, what makes you think Abercrombie could. Again... if it existed, why would they hide it from Abercrombie? It doesn't make any sense.
Where exactly are you seeing this 2008 change date in the document anyway?
It's in this video between 3:00 and 3:30:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIsQJNTvlUE
The HEX Editor for Obama's PDF birth certificate shows a timestamp of 6/12/2008 8:42am indicating a change using Adobe Photoshop.
In my mind that is a childish and stupid explanation. It postulates an illegal conspiracy involving suspects unnamed in the Obama Administration with complicity of Everyone in the Government of Hawaii (to include the Governor) who has access to the original birth document. Obama's attorney would also be in serious trouble, and could lose his law license and possibly serve prison time if such a thing were discovered. Why go through all this when the document can be legally faked without all of those nasty loose ends?
It's not childish and stupid. It is, in fact, the only explaintion. You discredit yourself with your inane assumption that there is some "original birth document" that needs to be "legally faked".
Furthermore you don't consider the enormity of the situation. Be it candidate Obama or President Obama, we're talking about the Office of the President and the crime associated with it. Now, would you or could you trust some HDOH clerk(s) and staff to whip up a fake BC for Obama and keep it quiet? Of course not. The fewer people who know of this crime, the better. That is just common sense. And those few are most certainly in Obama's inner circle.
Or let's try it your way if that helps. If it was a "legal fake", then who did it? Those involved have nothing to hide. I mean.... it was all legal right? So who did it? I'm sure they would be happy to justify their actions. It being legal and all.
We also have no way of knowing exactly how the BC made it to the WH website. Nobody has been put under oath... have they? Just people saying things like "I did not have sex with that woman...blah blah blah".
For all we know the fake birth certificate could have been on a flash drive in Valerie Jarrett's desk drawer for years until it was needed. I hope this helps.