Hawaii's Non-Certification

5-23-12 | butterdezillion

[butterdezillion]

What the Hawaii AG forced Bennett to do to his request for verification:

1. Withdraw the whole form he submitted. Because the form had no special directions, HRS 338-14.3 would require the HDOH to verify the accurate, legally-probative facts, and HI can't do that for Obama because his birth record is late and amended - and thus not legally probative as per HRS 338-17.

2. Keep the request for verification that asked the HDOH to verify what is on Obama's birth record. The HDOH can do that without claiming that any of those CLAIMS on the BC are actuallly accurate or legally valid.

3. Change the request from asking for verification that what Obama posted online is a "true and accurate representation of the record on file" - to asking if the INFORMATION on what Obama posted matches what is on file. This is necessary because what Obama posted is an ABSTRACT or composite of what is typed (the incomplete BC) and what is "actually written down" (the affidavits to support the late and amended filing). And it lacks the notations that it was late and amended.

This is why they had to C&P the document. The stamps on the real thing (the non-forged version, if they have one, at the HDOh) would have filled the empty space toward the top of the BC, and the notation of what evidence was submitted to support the late filing and amendment were right in the area where the seal was supposed to go.

I'd post the article which shows the documentation, but I don't know how to post a PDF. And I'd try to get this as a blogger post that serves as a new article in the special category in News/Acivism as per the new policy, but I don't know how to do that either. I'll ask for help from the mods.

In the first comment I'll give a clickable link to the article showing the documentation.

[Miss Behave]

Butter, I thank God for you.

[Auntie Mame]

Is this of any help? This is a copy of the pdf you posted without the image on the last page.

Hawaii’s Non-Verification

In response to large volume of communications requesting that, in light of Sheriff Arpaio’s findings of probable cause for forgery and fraud involving Barack Obama’s posted long-form birth certificate and draft registration, Obama’s Presidential eligibility be investigated, Ken Bennett, the Arizona Secretary of State, requested a verification of Obama’s birth facts from the

Hawaii Dept of Health. According to the communications posted at

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/ken_bennett_birther_hawaii_arizona_ema ils.php?ref=fpnewsfeed , this is the content of Bennett’s original request (bold numbers added to show the 3 kinds of verification originally requested, in the order in which I will address them):

Enclosed please find a request for a verification in lieu of a certified copy for the birth record of Barack

Hussein Obama II. In addition to (1) the items to be verified in the attached form, please verify (2) the following items from the record of birth:

Department of Health File #151 61 10641 Time of birth: 7:24 p.m. Name of hospital: Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital Age of father: 25 Birthplace of Father: Kenya, East Africa Age of mother: 18 Birthplace of mother: Wichita, Kansas Date of signature of parent: 8-7-1961 Date of signature of attendant: 8-8-1961 Date accepted by local registrar: August-8 1961

Additionally, please verify (3) that the attached copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama is a true and accurate representation of the original record in your files.

After 8 weeks of delay and insisting that Bennett had not yet proven that he was eligible to receive a verification, the Hawaii Attorney General’s office spoke with Bennett and said that if Bennett “re-worded” his request they would consider responding to it. Shortly thereafter the following “verification” at the end of this

article was issued (found at http://www.azcentral.com/12news/Obama-Verification.pdf ). Bennett was quoted as saying that he received what he had asked for. So if we look at the difference between what he originally requested and what he received, we will know what he was required to change.

#1: The actual request form printed from the web was specifically withdrawn.

In addition to the items to be verified in the attached form, please verify the following items from the record of birth

In addition to this communication, Bennett copied a request form off the HDOH, filled it out, and sent it.The form to request a verification in lieu of a certified copy is the same form as to request a certified copy. The items on that form can be seen at http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/pdf/birth.pdf and include the date of birth, which is essential to Presidential eligibility.

Why was that specifically left out – apparently at the demand of the HI Attorney General’s office?

The key, I believe, is this: The original request for items other than on the form said, “please verify the following items from the record of birth”. This is a request to verify that those items are on the record of birth – NOT that those items are accurate.

Without that statement – for instance, if the form was just filled out, HRS 338-14.3 (found at http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0014_0003.htm ) says that:

(b) A verification shall be considered for all purposes certification that the vital event did occur and that the facts of the event are as stated by the applicant.

In other words, unless stated otherwise, the HDOH in a verification is actually certifying that the applicant’s claims on the birth certificate are true. But that is problematic for the HDOH when the birth record in question is late and/or amended, because HRS 338-17 (found at http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0017.htm ) says:

§338-17 Late or altered certificate as evidence. The probative value of a "late" or "altered" certificate shall be determined by the judicial or administrative body or official before whom the certificate is offered as evidence. [L 1949, c 327, §21; RL 1955, §57-20; HRS §338-17; am L 1997, c 305, §4]

The State of Hawaii does not vouch for the accuracy of the claims on a late or amended birth certificate. That’s why they have to be clearly marked as “LATE” or “ALTERED”. And the computer-generated abstracts (COLB’s) have a statement at the bottom: ANY ALTERATIONS INVALIDATE THIS CERTIFICATE. Late and

altered birth certificates are legally non-valid. The State of Hawaii CANNOT verify the truth of the facts on a legally non-valid birth certificate. The Hawaii Attorney General’s office would know that, and they would thus require that the request form itself be withdrawn.

But the way Bennett phrased his original non-form request indicates that he wants the HDOH to verify that those items are what is on the birth certificate – which is a different thing than verifying what the true, legally-probative facts are. And that is what the HDOH does. In his certifying statement Onaka says:

I certify that the information contained in the vital record on file with the Department of Health was used to verify the facts of the vital event.

He is certifying that the “verification” is based solely on the information contained in the vital record. Which is

all Bennett asked for on the NON-FORM request. He only wanted to verify that these are the claims that were on the birth certificate.

And nowhere does either Bennett or this “verification” specify that the vital record in question be legally valid. If

the form had been used, the facts would have to be verified by a legally-valid record. But the AG got rid of the requests on the form – even the birth date, which is critical to Presidential eligibility. The only way the birthdate even comes into the picture is by Onaka saying that the information on Obama’s posted long-form matches what is on what they have – without saying whether the record they have is legally valid.

#2: “the following items from the record of birth” were allowed to be requested

This was the only part of the original request that the HI Attorney General allowed to remain as it was, and the 12 points were verified verbatim – simply verifying that this is what the document claims, as explained above. Which is all the HDOH CAN verify for a legally non-valid record. They can verify that the record exists and that it makes these specific claims. And that’s what items 1-12 verify – and the certifying statement confirms that these are simply the claims as contained in the (legally non-valid. SSSSHHHH) record.

#3: The request for verification of Obama’s online BC as a “true and accurate representation of the record” was withdrawn.

Additionally, please verify that the attached copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama is a true and accurate representation of the original record in your files.

But the corresponding response on the “verification” is this:

The Hawaii Attorney General apparently told Ken Bennett not to ask for a verification that the birth certificate that Obama posted online is a true and accurate representation of the original record in the HDOH files. Onaka instead verified that the INFORMATION IN THAT COPY matches the original record in their files. IOW, Onaka is SPECIFICALLY NOT SAYING that what Obama posted accurately represents the actual birth certificate. They are refusing to verify that what Obama posted is a copy of the original. They are specifically making no comment on whether Obama posted what they sent him.

Probably because they know it was a forgery. Sheriff Arpaio’s posse uncovered ample evidence of that. Videos about that can be accessed at http://www.teapartypowerhour.com Another video that make the blatancy of the forgery clear: http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=7s9StxsFllY&feature=youtu.be

So if the information on the copy HI sent Obama was the same as what was on the forgery, then why make a forgery at all? Why did they have to manipulate the document to get a photo (with a very faint, nondescript seal, which is one of the red flags for a forgery) – as can be seen at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wa SHnBb220 ) ? If the information is the same, then what is different?

Onaka’s certification on that forgery gives the answer (emphasis mine):

“I certify this is a true copy or abstract of the record on file in the Hawaii State Department of Health.”

There is good reason to believe that Obama’s actual birth record is a compilation from different sources:

1. Previous official responses by the HDOH have indirectly confirmed that Obama’s birth certificate was amended around late-2006 (see

http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2011/03/03/amendment-confirmation-for-dummies/

), and official responses by former OIP Director Paul Tsukiyama indicated that there are affidavits to support the claims on his birth certificate, which would only be necessary for late and/or amended birth certificates.

2. Former HDOH Director Chiyome Fukino has said that Obama’s birth certificate is “half typed, half written”, which would make sense for an incomplete typed birth certificate

with supplemental affidavits to supply the information that was missing.

1. Fukino also said in a July 2009 press release that she had seen the vital records (plural) verifying (swearing) that Obama was born in Hawaii.
2. HI Governor Neil Abercrombie was quoted in a Star Advertiser column as saying there

was something about Obama’s birth “actually written down” (see

http://www.staradvertiser.com/editorials/20110118_This_is_a_collaborative_endeavor.ht ml ) but according to Mike Evans as recorded on radio interviews, Abercrombie said he

was not able to find a birth certificate for Obama, not able to find a record of Obama’s birth at any Hawaii hospital in spite of searching with a search warrant – and Abercrombie said he never even saw Obama in Hawaii until he was T-ball age. (see

http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2011/02/03/evans-abercrombie-hospital-search warrant/ and http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2011/02/14/evans-abercrombie-says no-proof-of-hi-birth/

5. The HDOH has apparently altered the BC#’s for both Stig Waidelich and Virginia Sunahara, according to HDOH spokesperson Janice Okubo’s official responses saying that Oahu BC#’s were almost always given by the HDOH on the “date filed”. The particular combination of a BC# being higher than BC’s filed 3 days later is a very peculiar “fingerprint” that doesn’t fit a normal hospital birth like either Obama’s or Stig

Waidelich, but does fit the extremely rare circumstances for Virginia Sunahara. And the database record for Virginia Sunahara had been changed to a different name at one point because a query for her birth record came up with no records. So the HDOH has been manipulating BC#’s on certified copies of COLB’s and has apparently temporarily changed Virginia Sunahara’s record. None of that would be necessary if Obama had a

valid 1961 BC#. (See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2885916/posts?page=214#214 , http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2885601/posts?page=72#72 , and http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2885916/posts?page=241#241

If Obama’s birth record was a combination of a birth certificate form that was initially filed by a local registrar (on the report of Obama’s grandmother, for instance) but was left incomplete and thus had to be amended in 2006 to add the missing information, it would explain everything we

see. The birth certificate would be required to have “LATE” and “ALTERED” stamped on the

front of it, and a note would have to be made on the bottom line, recording what amendment was made, when, and what supporting documentation is in the supplementary file.

This would explain why Obama couldn’t just post what the HDOH gave him, including the seal.

The seal is positioned right where the affidavits supporting a late filing or amendment would be listed.

SUMMARY: So what we’ve got here is Onaka certifying that the claims on Obama’s long-form match what they’ve got on the record in their office. But the Attorney General

required Bennett to remove every part of his request that would have required Onaka to

verify what’s actually TRUE according to Hawaii’s legal evidentiary standards. That’s because Onaka can’t legally verify the truth of anything claimed on a late, amended birth certificate like Obama’s.

Aside from supporting the theory that Obama’s record is late and amended, this “verification” is worthless, except to show

1. that the HDOH at that particular moment had 151-61-10641 as Obama’s file # (but that could be on his electronic file, which they can change back and forth whenever they want to, as demonstrated by the Virginia Sunahara situation.) AND
2. that the HDOH took special care to NOT SAY Obama’s posted long-form is a genuine copy.

[DoctorBulldog]

I feel your pain, butterdezillion.

I’ve pretty much given up any hope of getting to the bottom of the actual, physical Birth Certificate issue in my lifetime. The lies and coverups are just too numerous. And, many Conservatives have been brow beat and ridiculed into submission-—even going so far as to join the herd in denouncing anyone who questions any inconsistency with Obama’s birth narrative.

I realized years ago that the Birth Certificate issue would be too hard of a nut for any of us to crack open without the help of Congress and the Senate. After all, I was in the military and I know what an infinite roll of red tape looks like when I see it.

That’s why, early on in the debate, I attacked the problem from the other side: Obama is not a Natural Born citizen because he was born with dual citizenship and has consistently shown his allegiance to his Kenyan side.

Yet, it’s still very frustrating. We need to have a definitive definition/ruling given to us-—with all the legal weight attached-—of exactly what Natural Born, as was understood and intended by Our Founding Fathers, means. Along with that, we also need legislation defining what constitutes abdication of one’s natural born citizenship.

However, until the Libtards and Lefturds in government and the Justices on the SCOTUS kick the bucket, retire, or are voted out (and are somehow miraculously replaced by real Conservatives), I have no desires to leave it up to this current Congress and the SCOTUS to be the ones to fairly interpret Natural Born for us.

It is, as you say, “sickening to me,” too

And, with upper management at Free Republic turning away from the Constitutional importance of the issue to focus on the 2012 Presidential race, I don’t think we are going to get much support at this juncture...

Anyway, I’ll send you a private message later on in the day to address a couple items of concern. Too many Zotted friends and allies in the last kerfuffle on Free Republic have me feeling a little gun shy about actually speaking my mind.

Cheers

[DoctorBulldog]

Uploaded it for you:



Cheers

[opentalk]

Heard part of an radio interview with Corsi this morning. He is in Hawaii. Basically, said HI sent a carefully worded, lawyer-ed E-mail, Does not verify the White-house web birth PDF as valid. (paraphrase) sounds more like what HI Governor Abercrombie stated about something is there. Could of come from the grand parents

He said they will probably post the E-mail on WND.

[butterdezillion]

Yes, that helps (to both of you). At least that can be here for those who don’t want to click on an external link.

And if there’s a way to get the whole thing posted in a sidebar we could use the HTML coding you’ve got in there and somehow post the other images as jpg’s, or however you got the image posted here, DoctorBulldog. We’ve got the pieces on this thread now, and we could put them together if that would convince the mods to let the article be posted in a position of more visibility (the sidebar).

The whole idea of trying to “sell” the importance of what I’ve posted goes against my whole nature because I don’t believe in tooting my own horn. Maybe the moderator wouldn’t put it in the new category because it’s not understandable, or maybe they think it’s thinly-supported or unimportant.

I obviously believe the substance of it is very important. The revisions made to Bennett’s request are a smoking-gun refusal to verify the legally-probative facts of Obama’s birth., even though by verifying ANYTHING they have admitted that Bennett is qualified to receive the verification he asked for on the form he submitted. (In fact, this response having shown that the HI AG accepted his eligibility to receive verification, he should submit ANOTHER request - this time using the request form, which they would then have no excuse to fulfill for him.)

That rates right up there with Obama claiming in his bio that he was born in Hawaii, because it is dealing with the official records and indicates there’s something very problematic with them. Something that makes sense out of what both Fukino and Abercrombie have said.

[Bizhvywt]

“The fact enough American’s do not DEMAND Obama show absolute proof of his eligibility and other records is just tragic apathy!”

Obama did show proof of his ineligibility. Obama’s father was a Kenyan/British citizen which proves that Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen. Where he was actually born is irrelevant, although he is probably lying about that as well.

[DoctorBulldog]

I have been studying this photo, along with its various incarnations, on and off for about a year, now.

I have discovered that every single Kenyan version I can find on the net has all of the camera data stripped out. This suggests to me that it was manipulated in a photoshop type of program.

However, on the flip-side of that coin, the Wilayat Madha version has all of the original camera data still embedded in it.

Here’s the camera data from the image I posted:

---

- Primary Image
Image Description = OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA
Manufacturer = OLYMPUS OPTICAL CO.,LTD
Model = C100,D370
Orientation = The 0th row is at the visual top of the image and the 0th column is at the visual left-hand side
Y Resolution = 72
Resolution Unit = Inches
Software = v971u-76
Last Modification Time = 0000:00:00 00:00:00
YCbCr Positioning = Co-sited
- Exif Specific
Exposure Time = 1/800 sec [0.001]
F Number = 4
Exposure Program = Normal program
ISO Speed Ratings = 100
[...]
Exposure Bias Value = 0
Max. Aperture Value = 40/10
Metering mode = Pattern
Light Source = Unknown
Flash = Flash did not fire
Focal Length = 5.60 mm
[...]

---

To summarize my findings, the embedded camera data adds weight to the veracity of the Wilayat Madha photo; Whereas, the lack of any embedded camera data at all in the Kenyan version points me in the direction of photo manipulation.

Cheers

[butterdezillion]

Let me know if he posts something. My computer has two sites that it doesn’t like: my own blog, and WND. As soon as I click to go to either place, my computer has a jacked-up hum to it and I can watch my CPU usage go up to 100% and then the website shows “(Not responding)”.

So I really appreciate any pings people send me, especially if it’s to WND stuff, since I don’t regularly go there.

[Josephat]

Butter, I thank God for you.

Ditto!

[MileHi]

Thanks for all this info

[RichardMoore]

You’re exactly right, this whole mess seems like a lot of smoke being thrown up to confuse the masses. He’s not a NBC by his own admission. But everyone is too busy eating things that will eventually make them quite ill and watching the enemy sponsored TV to give a damn.

[Tex-Con-Man]

I was jus’ yankin’ yer chain.

It's a 100% photoshop prank...actually mine. Under “Welome to” the Arabic sorta says “Paul is dead”.

[Tex-Con-Man]

Sheesh...I meant “Welcome to”.

[butterdezillion]

Yep.

I presented to Nebraska’s legislative committee in favor of an eligibility bill that would have created a court case to go to SCOTUS so that SCOTUS would have to define “natural born citizen” once and for all. That bill got tabled and I’m told that with the particular chairman on that committee there is no hope of it ever seeing the light of day. Somebody else posted on my blog saying that their relative (wife? sister? I can’t remember) is a NE State Senator and that the measure would never get the time of day from the full unicameral. Makes me wonder what’s up with that - if it’s just political cowardice or if there is more behind that.

So I definitely want the courts to give us a ruling - ultimately SCOTUS. But after seeing what’s going on, I agree with DoctorBulldog that I’m afraid to have THIS PARTICULAR SCOTUS even attempt to address it, because I don’t think they can be trusted. I actually believe that Chief Justice Roberts hmay have been threatened and is compromised.

This sort of mirrors what retired military leaders were saying when they urged Lt Col Lakin to drop the whole eligibility issue, because if it was actually heard and decided, we’d be stuck with a really bad precedent, given the compromised situation in our whole system.

I don’t think we’re ever going to get the system cleaned out enough to get honest, Contitutional decisions unless we get some criminals put in jail over the fraud, forgery, perjury, obstruction of justice, and bribery/threats tha have been perpetrated to get us to this point.

I think Sheriff Joe is our last best hope, at this point. How I wish he had federal jurisdiction. But even just trying to cite Eric Holder for the obvious Contempt of Congress after he perjured himself in Congressional testimony.... it’s BOEHNER who is blocking that, for pete’s sake. Our own at-one-point-sorta-conservative leader. There’s GOT to be more to that story. And until there’s cleanup in whatever aisle is cowering Boehner and the like, we’re never going to get Constitutional governance - not on NBC nor any of the other infringements perpetrated while Obama was illegally occupying our White House.

[butterdezillion]

You’re welcome. The more people who understand it, the better. If there’s anything in there that’s confusing I hope somebody will tell me so I can make it as clear as possible.

This whole episode is a MAJOR blunder for the HDOH which reveals that there are big problems with Obama’s official birth record. And IMHO it shows that somebody at the HDOH - probably Onaka himself - is still hesitant to go whole-hog and just claim that a forged document in their office is actually genuine. I think having Mike Zullo in Hawaii while this was going down did send a message.

I was afraid the HDOH was just going to lie outright and verify what can’t legally be verified. They didn’t do that, though, although they did lie about the BC# if they were looking at an original paper record. But they could always claim that the “record” they looked at was the electronic database file rather than the paper copy - and the database probably DID have that BC# on it when they looked.

So it seems like the folks at the HDOH are not ready to totally fall on their swords for Obama. I hope and pray that means good things for Mike Zullo in Hawaii right now...

[DoctorBulldog]

Wow!

Finally I meet da’ man! LOL!

Now, I can put it to rest. Thank you for letting me know! I appreciate it.

I hate unsolved puzzles. As a matter of fact, that’s how I got the nickname “Bulldog”; I won’t let go of a problem without a fight until it is fully resolved.

Just a tip for the next one: Leave the camera data embedded in the file so that you can edit the date/time stamp to a date earlier than the one on your source photo. That way, you can have fun driving me absolutely bonkers! ;-)

Cheers

[Tex-Con-Man]

It was an impulsive act, there wasn’t any plan to it. It first appeared on a FR birther thread about forgeries, and I thought it would be ironic humor to post a fake sign. It didn’t take long to do, and I busted myself shortly after I posted it, never thinking anyone would take it seriously. It wasn’t until months later did I discover people were actually passing it around. WND did a story on it and actually contacted the guy whose photo I used. It was pretty funny. Snopes has a page on it, and they got it correct.

[MileHi]

It is a lot to absorb, but the late/altered idea is compelling.

[butterdezillion]

Is there too much stuff in there? Sometimes putting too much in is worse than not enough.