Just because you like my links doesn't mean we'll be taking warm showers together
until the wee hours of the morning.
/lounge lizard
Posted on 07/23/2012 9:21:28 PM PDT by Fred Garvin-MP
Hello. My name is Fred Garvin-MP. I recently watched the Maricopa County Sheriff Department's press conference. It was intriguing to say the least. What caught my attention were the coding numbers on the document put on the White House server for all Americans to see. The code #9 was the essential 'nail in the coffin' that confirmed the PDF version of the birth certificate was a 'definite' forgery.
Now two pro Obama websites claim that lead Investigator Mike Zullo used the meaning of code #9 from a 1969 Vital Statistics Instruction Manual instead of a manual from 1961. Is this true? One meaning for code #9 is different that the other code #9 and that is giving Obama supporting websites ammunition to claim Sheriff Arpaio's Cold Case Posse got it wrong. To clear this up we need answers. I am sure most of you agree.
Here is the 1961 layout: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsus/vsus_1961_1.pdf
Here is the 1969 layout : http://www.nber.org/natality/1969/Nat1969-71doc.pdf
Fred Garvin-MP
So would Obama Sr. consider himself “African”.
Another question without a question mark?
He could consider himself to be a Leprechaun.
There is no "racial category" for Leprechaun either.
Zullo said in the press conference that ‘African’ didn’t come start being used until 1989.
Look at the 1968 tape instructions that you posted a link to earlier. Parents place of birth is not one of the fields. This is also true for the one obtained by FOIA for 1961.
“And what code key are you using to make that determination?”
Both the 1961 (FOIA obtained) and the 1968 tape instructions.
Yep.
The Foggers have similar threads up trying to obfuscate the coding as per CDC, etc.
Did he say African or African-American? I don't remember.
How about a video and a time mark, just to verify what he said?
bookmark
This is also true for the one obtained by FOIA for 1961.
Well how do you know that the FOIA wasn't only a partial release? If information wasn't specifically asked for in the FOIA it wouldn't be given out.
We sure need to get those 1961 codes out to the public. It makes no sense to keep them under wraps.
Now look at the WND BC that otherss posted earlier. It shows a “3” as the race of parents.
Which image are you talking about again, specifically? You're kind of vague there.
Mark @ 18:00-18:12
“He could consider himself to be a Leprechaun.
There is no “racial category” for Leprechaun either.’
The 1964 report you posted up thread says this:
“Also beginning with 1964 ill-defined or not clearly identifiable races are assigned to “race not stated. ” This includes such reports as “oriental” and “yellow, ” which in previous years were assigned to a specific category such as other nonwhite, Chinese, or Japanese.”
So according to the NIHS, they sometimes saw “yellow” reported as a race. Is that one of the race categories?
And before 1964 a term like “yellow” or “African” would be forced into one of the specific categories like “nonwhite, Chinese, or Japanese” But after 1964 a term like “yellow” or “African” would be coded as “race not stated.”
Just because you like my links doesn't mean we'll be taking warm showers together
until the wee hours of the morning.
/lounge lizard
“And both Race of Father and Race of Mother have a “size of Field” allocation as 1.”
I don’t dispute that the race of the parents was coded by the the Feds but did they code the parents place of birth? I don’t see any mention of the parents place of birth in the 1968 or 1961 tape instructions. Do you?
Why code something that was not required by the Feds?
“Well how do you know that the FOIA wasn’t only a partial release?”
I don’t. But what has been released, the tape instructions, is in the exact same format as the 1968 tape instructions used by the CCP.
“Which image are you talking about again, specifically? You’re kind of vague there.”
Sorry, I assumed you were familar with it.
Here’s the link to the WND August 23rd, 1961 BC.
http://www.wnd.com/2011/09/342937/
And before 1964 a term like “yellow” or “African” would be forced into one of the specific categories like “nonwhite, Chinese, or Japanese”
And even now, whether you realize it or not, you're admitting that there was no "specific category" of "African" for anything to be forced into.
Here ya go...what "specific category" would Caucasian go in?
Yea that might be the codes he would have used in Kenya to refer to himself as being called, but this is United States Federal/Hawaiian codes he would have been dealing with which was different than Kenya’s.
“you’re admitting that there was no “specific category” of “African” for anything to be forced into. “
There was the category “other nonwhite”, it is listed in the tape instructions (1961 and 1968) and in the Vital Statistic reprots for 1961 and 1968.
I point out the 1964 “yellow” reference to show that BCs can sometimes have weird or as they politely call them “ill-defined or not clearly identifiable races”. Ill defined entries are more likely the results of the parents self-reporting then the hospital staff screwing up.
Forcing “African” into a specific category means coding it using one of the predefined categories, not changing what the parents wrote down.
Why code something that was not required by the Feds?
Good question. Maybe you should ask Hawaii instead of me. Or maybe they were required and we're just not aware of it. You know, as in the requirement was carried over from one year to the next without the necessity of it being spelled out.
I don't have all the answers. As I've @said before I'm really only making educated guesses.
Sorry, I assumed you were familar with it.
Well you made an ass of u, not me, by not being specific.
It shows a “3” as the race of parents. By the Feds that means they were American Indians. And in parents place of birth they are both listed as “1”. Is that the code for Hawaii? Are they ethnic Hawaiians?
Well find the code and figure it out for yourself! And as soon as you do fill me in.
Hey, here's a thought...maybe it means 1 - "Residents" or 2 - "Nonresidents by place of residence"
Just an educated guess.
So if the father had been a former Nazi and had self-reported as "Master Race", the form would have reflected that?
They should have been asking the folks over at the NAACP. :=)
“The Feds did track Month of birth. August is the 8th month, yet on Obama’s Birth Certificate, you’ll see it was coded as a 1, meaning January in the time of birth slot.’
I don’t see “1” in the month box but there is “1” in the hour box. The Nordykes also have “1”s in the hour boxes. So does the August 23rd, 1961 BC. I think in this case “1” stands for “P” as in “P.M.”.
“Also, on the Nordyke twins Birth Certificates, their births are coded as 1-2 and 2-2 just like one would number boxes being shipped. Obama’s should have been coded as 1-1, but instead it says X - X. An X means “not stated”.”
The WND August 23rd, 1961 BC also has “X - X”
http://www.wnd.com/2011/09/342937/
Caucasian (@see Nordyke BC as well) instead of white I could understand, but African? At least Caucasian is a race.
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.