Posted on 02/07/2010 9:15:33 PM PST by butterdezillion
Here’s some new information – haven’t even added it to my blog yet.
According to http://uspolitics.about.com/od/senators/a/barack_obama.htm , Axelrod started videotaping Obama in 2003 for footage that he later used in Obama’s January 16, 2007 announcement that he would run for the presidency.
According to the UIPA responses received by Terri K and myself and the retention schedules for receipts, Obama’s amendment happened sometime between September of 2006 and January of 2007, since those records are to be retained for 3 years and receipts for fees to amend Obama’s vital records were denied to Terri K in September of 2006 and no longer existed when I requested them in January of 2010.
IOW, the DOH has revealed that in the last 6 months before Obama announced his run for the presidency he amended his birth record in Hawaii. That amendment was before the Factcheck COLB was printed in June of 2007 so if that COLB was legitimate it would definitely have had note of the amendment. So the Factcheck and Fight the Smears COLB’s are definitely forgeries and not just a COLB printed before the amendment was made.
Again, my conclusions are entirely based upon what the Hawaii Department of Health has stated in official responses to official UIPA requests and the laws, rules, and regulations which govern the records and statements they have made. If we take Hawaii at its word this is the natural conclusion we would make.
The certificate number and filing date that are mismatched according to the Nordyke certificate numbers and filing date confirm this also.
I haven’t checked this out yet, but the documentary requirements to amend a birth certificate 45 years after the birth would be hard to come by. What kind of evidence would be sufficient to prove that a record in existence for 45 years and never corrected before had been wrong all along? What would a person legitimately correct 45 years after the birth – after having used that birth certificate for 45 years whenever documentation was needed and never challenging the facts contained on it?
I think it’s very hard for people to believe we have actually used the law to our advantage. And, it didn’t take a lawyer hours in a courthouse to do it.
I might need it explained three or four times if I didn’t live it out in real time=)
Yeah, it took thousands of hours in front of a blurry computer screen. lol.
I spoke with one editor who thought I should write a book about this. I couldn’t find the words to tell him that all I want to do is be done with this and forget about it. If we could get to the bottom of this and I could feel like my country had somebody - anybody - in government who isn’t Al Capone I would like nothing better than to clean my house and never think again about administrative rules and disclosure exemptions.
Ahhhh. It felt good just to say that. I wish there was an end in sight.
Hi Butter!
John Charlton at Post & Email says that Janice Okubo appears to be resigning from Hawaii’s DOH. Possible CYA move.
Thought you would like to know.
Again, my conclusions are entirely based upon what the Hawaii Department of Health has stated in official responses to official UIPA requests and the laws, rules, and regulations which govern the records and statements they have made. If we take Hawaii at its word this is the natural conclusion we would make.
The certificate number and filing date that are mismatched according to the Nordyke certificate numbers and filing date confirm this also.
*******
Who is Obama's birth doctor? Is that such a hard question for the President of the United States to answer?
1. Right now, I would just be satisfied with Obama coming out and announcing to all the world the name of his 1961 birth doctor so that the good doctor and his family can rightfully enjoy all the public glory and public rewards that a doctor who delivered a president of the united States should receive.
2. But surprisingly, dear old Obama has been conspicuously silent when it comes to publicly giving us his 1961 birth doctor's name.
3. Why is dear old Obama denying his 1961 birth doctor and his family all the public praise and rewards that a doctor who delivered the sitting President of the United States should be entitled to?
4. For instance, the doctor and his family could appear all over the television on such shows as Larry King, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Beck.
5. The good doctor could write a best-selling book about his experiences as a doctor at Kapiolani Hospital, the hospital where Obama says that he was born.
6. The good doctor could have a TV-movie made of his life, and he and his family could become rich and famous from books and movies.
7. The good doctor's family could have members who are important or not so important people today, people who could use the financial rewards and publicity that would come to them when Obama publicly announced the name of his 1961 Hawaii birth doctor.
8. But poor Obama, he is so silent about the name of his birth doctor.
9. So, again, why is the President of the United States behaving in such a terrible way and setting such a poor example to the people of the United States?
10. Could this be the reason: There is NO doctor name or hospital name on Obama's 1961 long form birth certificate?
11. Yes, that is the reason, in my opinion.
Axelrod was a campaign consultant for 0bama back when he ran for the US Senate in 2004.
At one time, I looked up Illinois election law and found out that it is illegal to run for public office using a nickname or assumed name. You have to use your legal name. So I’m wondering exactly when he changed his name from Barry Soetoro to Barak 0bama. My theory is he started calling himself BO Jr. back when he went to Columbia, just because that was the kind of hip thing blacks were doing at the time, but maybe he didn’t actually change his legal name. So perhaps he didn’t use his legal name when he ran for the Illinois State Senate. Then, when he runs for the US Senate, he has to use the same name because that’s the name he was known by. But Axlerod knows when 0bama runs for the presidency, someone is going to find out about it if they see his old passport or BC, so they have to get a new amended COLB in June of 2007.
The only time I know of where a new birth record is given a different number than the certificate it replaces is when a new one is created because a law enforcement agency requests it for the protection of the person.
The DOH claims that after the records were all being done electronically they switched from reporting when the local registrars accepted and the state registrar accepted the BC’s to just having one date, the date the birth information was received at the DOH and given a certificate number. On the COLB’s they just call it “Date filed by registrar”. For this to work, all the COLB’s which say “Date ACCEPTED by state registrar” would have to have been printed before they switched the terminology.
Of course, only God knows when the DOH is telling the truth and when they are lying.
But the certificate number on Factcheck is so soon after the Nordykes’ numbers that whoever’s BC got to the DOH later that day or the next day would have been given that number. That wouldn’t leave that number available for a new certificate generated in the 1970’s.
There is no field for the race of the child on 1961 Hawaiian birth certificates. For each of the parents, yes. Remember the posted COLB image shows his father as "African", which is another of the "little oddities" of the COLB and the old birth thing.
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.