Replies

Can you post a source for this? When did the State of Hawaii do this?

It never happened...to understand, you're gonna need this...

There's a birther legalese parsing algorithm that helps decipher the hidden message in Hawaiian Officials' public statements. It's like backwards masking...only more sciencey.

Notice that she never used the word “legally valid”. And she never says that SHE verifies anything - only that the record “verifies”, which means swears. Even a non-valid record swears that what’s on it is true. What she is telling us is that the record claims a Hawaii birth. Just like Onaka verified the existence of a record which “indicates” (claims) a Honolulu birth. That statement is just as true for a non-valid record as for a valid one.

So Fukino isn’t verifying anything there.

But even if she WAS, I’ll ask you the same question as I asked Lurker: Which are you going to believe, the unsworn comment of the same liar who had the birth index altered to include non-valid records, or the sworn certification of the official legally responsible to tell the truth? Which kind of statement generally has more weight in legal matters?

And why DO you suppose the HDOH altered their 1960-64 birth index to include non-valid records, AND switched at least 3 1961 BC#’s around?

For that matter, why do you suppose that Fukino had the HDOH Administrative Rules illegally hidden from the public until a new “unofficial copy” of them was *created* THE DAY THAT A RESPONSE TO MY UIPA REQUEST WAS DUE, a year after the 2008 election was over - even though OIP Director Cathy Takase claimed the HDOH had a version of those rules posted online for her access all along? Why did a new “copy” have to be created and posted the day my UIPA Request was due after I had contacted the lieutenant governor’s office about the illegality of the rules not being posted?

By the time this is done, there will be nobody at that HDOH office who has a shred of credibility, except perhaps Onaka, who I believe has put out the red flags to let the world know there’s a bunch of crap being done by the HDOH itself. The alteration of the birth index and at least 3 BC#’s is just one small part of the crookedness in that office.

conman, you're not helping yourself. The news release you quoted helps prove the point that you think you're disproving. In what you cited, former director Chiyome Fukino says she saw PLURAL "original vital records." Her October 2008 statement used the singular term "original birth certificate." She shouldn't need to change the terminology unless there's a difference in meanings. If the original birth certificate was valid (being the source of the information for the allged COLB and LFBC PDF), there should be no other records involved. By itself, it should be self-authenticating. She specifically changed her terminology in a way that means the COLB and the LFBC can't be legit because other documentation had to be filed before they could be accepted.

Second, Fukino has no statutory to declare anyone to be a "natural-born American citizen." It's a meaningless term anyway, because in this country, we are U.S. citizens, not "American" citizens. Thanks for helping to prove the point.