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
Interesting from your link, I looked at the coding up until 1989, and it was All the same. Then in 1989’ the the codes changed slightly, but still no designation for “African” under race. Unstated or Unknown became a 99, instead of 9. There was also this notation “Race codes for 1989 differ from previous years”, which tells me that the codes had been the same up until then. I thought about this, and it occurred to me that they wouldn’t change them from year to year—especially when they were being done by hand.
The only race designation that had its own category with subsets was Hispanic.
Forgive any weird characters or capitalizations; I am still trying to get used to this iPad. Oy.
LOL!
Sorry. I wasn’t being thorough enough. I meant to use the hypothetical that Charlize was born to African white parents in Hawaii.
I meant to use the hypothetical that Charlize was born to African white parents in Hawaii.
You're killing me I'm laughing so hard!
Now you're making a distinction of both race and nationality as separate things.
Exactly!
(head, meet wall...) ;^)
You’re right. I was totally wrong (Or “That’s right, I’m wrong!” to paraphrase Kay Kaiser).
Thanks for setting me straight so I don’t go on repeating a falsehood. :)
So what do the detractors mean when they say the father could ‘self report’ their race when filling out a birth registration for their child back in 1961? They are saying since Obama Sr. considered himself African he would have never used the term ‘Negro or Black’ as describing himself on the birth certificate.
Also look at the codes on this August 23, 1961 birth certificate from Honolulu, Oahu WND published in a article back on 9/11/11. It has code 3 by fathers race, code 3 by ‘Kind of Business or Industry and Code 3 by mothers race.
http://www.wnd.com/2011/09/342937/
Let's see:
1) Signup one week before the CCP presser.
2) Single post on Ernest Borgnine vis a vis "Airwolf" and then. . .
3) Both feet first into a recent and fairly technical set of discussion points on bc coding.
Nah, no trollage here. Not like the good Dr. would throw up a cannon fodder handle to preserve his actual still active FR username.
Even though the actual Doc Conspiracy username was employed back in May to argue this same subject.
Trifecta
No I am not Dr Conspiracy. You are assuming to much. I have posted as Fred Garvin on several political message boards. I post at Political Hotwire. I was recently at DCJunkies Political Forum.
View my post threads here:
DCJunkies
http://www.dcjunkies.com/member.php?u=6301
Political Hotwire:
http://www.politicalhotwire.com/members/fred-garvin-mp.html
Yes they are saying it. Many are. One devoted Obama supporter I argued with on Citi Data Political Forums is adamant about it. He goes by the name HistorianDude, he claims Obama Sr at the hospital ‘self reported’ his race as African when the nurse or whoever was filling out the birth information so a birth certificate could be processed. They say Hawaii allowed them to do that, ‘self report’ that is.
Okay.
You are stuck in the weeds.
The Government BC is a document, and one product of a process to collect Birth Statistics.
“The US Standard Certificate of Live Birth, issued by the US Department of Health and Human Services, has served for many years as the principal means for attaining uniformity in the content of documents used to collect information on births in the United States”
-Hawaii, since it became a State, has gamed the BC system and issued BC’s to foreigners who already had a BC from a different Country.
-The registrar verified how the Job was performed in 1961.
-The word African was not permitted as a response. The accepted term was Negro. The data had to be collected in a uniform and standard manner.
-The newspaper reports are a by-product of the Government data collection process. They include BC’s given to foreigners.
Obama’s purported Government document is a forgery
What we do not have is the Hospital record of Live birth, nor evidence of a home birth.
-This Hospital record is a source document for the Government Statistics collection process.
-We also have now supporting records, such as Kindergarden records, other early grade school records etc.
In Summary, 0bama has a forged Government document, not proof he was born within the United State’s territories
Don’t bother, the BC cross reference tables are not in that pdf.
The pdf does discuss the importance of accurate information.
The pdf discusses how to select one of the accepted words for race, of which African was not acceptable. The proper term was Negro
0bama has not released that record of his Birth Record.
That is one piece of information Sheriff Joe has requested, since Day 1.
Your link provides codes for the race of the BABY.
The 9’s in Zullo’s presentation refer to details concerning the FATHER.
Yow are mixing up the data collected concerning two different people!
Your link provides codes only for the Fathers age.
Did your FOIA return all other code mapping for Father metrics?
Can you file a more specific and relevant FOIA and get back to we Freepers.
Then again, all could be resolved if 0bama simply released his records and opened his history!
Am I missing something here or is “University” a race as well?
The New York Times of that era invariably used "Negro" in its coverage of the civil rights movement as did President Lyndon Johnson in his speeches into the mid-1960s. The first common use of the term "black" in that context would have occurred in the late 1960s in phrases such as the radical organization "Black Panthers" and the slogan "Black Power!"
It would be at least a decade after that before "Afro-American" and "African-American" were in standard usage.
As for the designation "African" on an American birth document for "race" in 1961, that would sound far-fetched, if no other reason that there were just a handful of native Africans in the country at the time, not enough for the government numbers crunchers to adopt a separate category for that population.
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.