YOU ARE SO WRONG !!!!!
From the article you reference:
Before the election, Fukino issued a statement saying that she and the registrar of vital statistics had personally examined the birth certificate and found it to be valid.
That was a stement she made before the case, NOT a statement she made in court. Ans they Advertiser got the statement wrong. Notice they are not quoting her.This is where they got the statement from and this is what she actually said :
When the birth certificate arrived from the Obama campaign it confirmed his name as the other documents already showed it. Still, we took an extra step: We e-mailed it to the Hawaii Department of Health, which maintains such records, to ask if it was real. “It’s a valid Hawaii state birth certificate,” spokesman Janice Okubo told us.
They conveniently left out what she went on to say :
“When we looked at that image you guys sent us, our registrar, he thought he could see pieces of the embossed image through it.” Still, she acknowledges: “I don’t know that it’s possible for us to even say beyond a doubt what the image on the site represents.”
So they can't confirm that the copy posted on the site is a legitimate copy.It may resemble one, but it can't be authenticated .
I suggest next time when you make staements you look at the original source of the staement and not a second-hand comment about it
It's not that I don't believe you; in fact I'm guessing that you have the source at your disposal. Beyond that, I think you need to acknowledge that it is a bit of a leap to say that because a document cannot be finally authenticated from an on-line image, that it is not in fact genuine.
So I'll go back to my original point, which was that I have yet to see proof one way or the other, and that we need to be cautious about making claims regarding the falsehood of a document which under other circumstances would be given at the very least a presumption of legitimacy.