Replies

I have resolved in recent months to not play guessing games with people here, or on any discussion fora.

You tell me what you think they “left out” or we have nothing to discuss.

I have no idea what your analogy is supposed to illustrate. Maybe I’m stupid, or blind on this issue. It’s quite possible; I’m not being facetious. All people in the course of their lives miss at least one obvious fact.

So explain it to me, as clearly I can’t see. What I DO see though is, two people who have the ability, Fukino and Onaka, have personally viewed the ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE, (which is what everyone, namely Ambassador Keyes these days is demanding to see for themselves) and not just a “certificate of live birth” or a “record of birth”.

See here: http://www.kitv.com/politics/17860890/detail.html?rss=hon&psp=news

So we have as a matter of fact (unless one believes that these two individuals are involved in some kind of “conspiracy”) that the state of Hawaii DOES have an “original birth certificate” and not just a “certificate of live birth” or a “record of birth” or any other document that just wouldn’t do.

They have an original birth certificate, which would mean he is a citizen of the US REGARDLESS of who gave birth to him.

What more relevant issue is there at this point?

You tell me.

I tell you are you are dishonest. How do you like those apples?

So explain it to me, as clearly I can’t see. What I DO see though is, two people who have the ability, Fukino and Onaka, have personally viewed the ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE, (which is what everyone, namely Ambassador Keyes these days is demanding to see for themselves) and not just a “certificate of live birth” or a “record of birth”.

According to the Hawaiian statues, NOBODY, except Hussein or family have access to look at the BC. If Fukino/Onaka DID, they would be law breakers, however, we saw what happened to Joe the Plumber, hmmm!!!

So, maybe this makes sense to you:

You apply for a job which requires that you be at least 18 - its the law for that job. If the employer(s) request to see valid proof of your birthdate, and you refuse, hire lawyers to tell them that they don't have any right to see the proof, and instead of providing a copy you have two workers say yep, we saw his birth certificate, so just take his word for it that it is OK. Do you think the employer(s) should say - aw heck, it must be fine since he said he was 18 and two others said he had a birth certificate - even though I may be sued and prosecuted for hiring this guy if he is under 18, I should take his word for it. Don't think so.
Wouldn't you think something was ‘fishy’ because he refuses to present the documentation?

OK, in this case, we have a case where obviously he had quadruple citizenship - British because British law says that the father bestows citizenship to his offspring. Kenyan because when Kenya became independent and British citizenship to Kenyans transferred automatically. Indonesian by adoption and maybe American, but only IF the birth was physically in Hawaii - however there is question as to even that as his underage teen mother was not old enough at his birth to bestow her citizenship, but all this would be documented in the vault copy of the original certificate that was filed - witnessed by the attending physician and recorded at the hospital.

Take a few minutes and read the Constitution - ask yourself why would the founders have grandfathered the status of those living at the time of the Constitution - it is because they had been British subjects and in some cases French until the founding of America having held more than one allegiance and citizenship - something they knew should not occur in the future as a safeguard to our Union.

So, WHY would he squander thousands and thousands of dollars to avoid showing the documentation? If the answer is not that he is hiding something, then we must accept that he is a lunatic spendthrift to whom money is just a toy. Does ANY of this make sense to you?