Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: butterdezillion

Looking at your blog, it appears you ‘know’ the certificate was amended because of a public statement referring to vital records. Since there is an s at the end of vital records, you deduce there must be multiple birth certificates, which would require an amended birth certificate.

You then asked about fees paid and dates, and were told they would not release info on transactions involving vital records. From that, you deduce that they MUST have copies of fees paid, since they did not deny their existence.

Is that an accurate summary of how you ‘know’ Obama’s birth certificate has been amended?


540 posted on 07/30/2010 4:41:35 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (When the ass brays, don't reply...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 534 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Rogers

Not exactly. I think I gave about 17 different legal documents (and I incidentally have another one that I could add but haven’t added yet) which show that a denial of access to a record is a statutory admission that the denied record exists.

When asked on 2 different occasions - and confirmed when asked about it later - the HDOH denied access to the records of Obama’s amendment.

There’s other corroborating information, some of which I haven’t shared yet, but that’s the main gist of it.

As was reported at http://www.myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com the birth index for 1961 didn’t have Obama’s name in it back in March so they apparently had no completed birth records for him back in 1961. They now have a fake copy of the 1960-64 birth index which they show to the public upon request; that copy has Obama’s name in it. That’s all I can say on that right now.

They say Obama doesn’t have a delayed birth certificate or Certificate of Hawaiian Birth, so the only way I know of for that to make sense with what’s been revealed is if there was a standard birth certificate that was submitted for him (rather than the delayed birth certificate, which is a specific form) within 90 days of his birth (which puts it within 1961) but that it was not completed until 2006. Since it wasn’t complete when the HDOH went through the various changes in terminology & definitions for late/delayed/Hawaiian BC’s, that terminology wouldn’t have applied to his BC. It wasn’t completed until 2006, when it would technically be called a “late birth certificate” rather than a “delayed birth certificate”.

So basically the only explanation I know of for the otherwise seemingly conflicting information I’ve seen is that Obama’s BC was submitted in 1961 but sat incomplete until he completed it via an amendment in 2006.

There’s more stuff, too, but it gets kind of complicated.


544 posted on 07/30/2010 5:13:54 PM PDT by butterdezillion (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 540 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson