of the various CoLB's that I have seen, (and I did not keep copies of all of them) I was always under the impression that an ACCEPTED CoLB clearly showed folds, a stamp and a seal.
Posted on 07/30/2009 6:25:00 PM PDT by trueamerica
On the Decosta COLB (which no one alleges is a fake,) every field header matches that of the Obama COLB except for one. On hers it says : Date ACCEPTED By State Registrar. On Obamas it says Date FILED By Registrar (Notice not the state registrar, this would be the local one ). Two different things. Either that field header is forged in Obamas ( they are from the same form - OHSM 1.1 Revised (11/01) ) or it means his registration was FILED at that date BUT was not ACCEPTED. If you look at the long form copy of the birth certificate available online from 1963, Field 20 says : Date Accepted by Local Registrar. Field 22 says Date Accepted by Registrar General ( which is the State Registrar ).A change from accepted to filed are significant enough linguistic changes that a different form would have to be created. Legally, accepted and filed are two very different things. So both these phrase were used on the form depending on the circumstances.
This section of the Hawaii Revised Stautes explains why that would be used:
Sec 338-16 ( late registration defined ) d) When an applicant does not submit the minimum documentation required by the rules for late registration or “when the state registrar finds reasons to question the validity or adequacy of the certificate or the documentary evidence, the state registrar shall not register the late certificate and shall advise the applicant of the reason for this action.”
So, something entered on the long form was not verifiable and thus, it was not approved by the state. So assuming his online COLB is not fake ( or the forgers were just too incompetent to notice they put in the wrong field header ), all you have with his online COLB is a FILING, not an ACCEPTED certificate
Could this be what he is hiding?
Danae has already answered this question from me. Her form says FILED.
I guess someone should call that office..yet again..and ask about this.
NO, it reads ‘DATE FILED BY REGISTRAR’.
My guess would be that DeCosta got this copy of her birth certificate at a later time - certainly after Hawaii became a state. Can anyone read the seal information for “date of issuance of this COLB?.”
Interesting possibility.
You’re right, my cataract lens implants are giving me trouble reading the small letters.
Hawaii "Certification of Live Birth" - Date Accepted vs. Date Filed (Some clues)
.
Thanks, LucyT
Ping
I am sure that this COLB was issued fairly recently. It is computer generated. If it’s like NYC records the entire text, including section titles, is generated by computer. Still does not explain why the words state registrar appear. If done by program, once the date is entered the program should shift the title from state to territory. An official document should be 100% accurate. A documnt that claims evidence of birth was accepted by the Hawaii state registrar 29 years prior to Hawaiian statehood is not accurate. I’m still open to explanations.
Good job! Tell Orly and all the other lawywers.
Would be great if someone could identify the name of the local registrar whose signature appears on the Nordyke birth certificate.
For a time I thought the "CERTIFICATE NO." was blacked out.
of the various CoLB's that I have seen, (and I did not keep copies of all of them) I was always under the impression that an ACCEPTED CoLB clearly showed folds, a stamp and a seal.
DeCosta was born in Hawaii when a territory. A birth certificate is on file for DeCosta from 1930 when it was a territory (a long form) from which info for this form is generated. When it became a state they started issuing state forms so, Yes, this form we are looking at here is recent.
Do you want it to say “Born in the territory of Hawaii?” That was probably changed on statehood. But would be interesting to check out — think I will.
No, one states ‘date filed by’. the other states ‘date accept by’
lordy, lordy, we went through all this on The Long Thread a year ago ;) I’d given up- truly.
But there seem to be at least a few sane conservatives left- Rush, McCarthy and Steyn! (And WND)
Computer programs do exactly what they are programmed to do.
Hawaii is using a computerized system to generate legal documents.
1. The field “Date Accepted by State Registrar” is not part of the information. That is a field PROGRAMMED into the computer. The date is the information
2. For that FIELD to be different, means:
a. Either the Obama COLB is forgery, in which case the President is knowingly perpetuating a lie, or
b. There IS a difference between the nature of Obama’s filing and other filings. THe computer program thinks it is different. Why?
Both a) and b) require that the President clear up the information. Is he, or is he not, eligible to be president?
Another possibility:
obama was either obama at birth, or perhaps on the vault certificate Dunham, since obama senior was already married. The original birth doc could have listed father: unknown and race as white.
Adopted by Soetero and used Soetero’s last name so the birth registration from obama or Dunham would reflect a legal name change. The original would have been sealed and new document issued to change his name to Soetero.
When he chose to use obama, signifying another legal name change, the birth document would have to be changed again, Soetero sealed, and obama reissued, or perhaps issued for the first time since it might have been Dunham originally.
That is the doc we are seeing now. It would be the third COLB on file, but two previous would be sealed.
Each hospital is assigned a range of Certificate Numbers, i.e. all Kapiolani Hospital BC Numbers end with numbers such as 10xxx.
Susan Nordyke ends with 10637
Gretchen Nordyke ends with 10638
Barack Obama ends with 10641
Repubx.com reports ... “Here is number from a different hospital 6/20/1961.......... #151-61-07236 in Hawaii.”
http://216.221.102.26/blogger/post/Once-bitten-twice-shy-the-art-of-blackmail.aspx
If Obama was born at Kapiolani Hospital in 1961, then hospital staff would have prepared the documentation for filing the Certificate (Not a Certification) of Live Birth with a pre-assigned Certification Number traceable to Kapiolani Hospital.
Furthermore, it’s unlikely the hospital staff would have identified the father’s race as “African.” Hospital staff typed up the form of the Certificate of Life Birth with information gathered from the maternity ward and the parents. The typed form with a pre-assigned number for a particular hospital was then presented to the doctor, administrator and parent for original signature and date of signature.
Barack’s COLB was filed but not accepted. It is likely the Certificate number Fightthesmears.com and factcheck.org (151-1961-10641) is a number assigned to someone other than Barack born at Kapiolani Hospital shortly after the Nordyke twins were born.
“The different word “filed” in Obama’s may be indicative that a document other than a hospital-generated certificate of live birth was the basis of the birth registration, such as an affidavit of birth filed by a family member.
...
Not enough information to reach any conclusion on this.”
You are right, but it does raise the question (and I will bet not for the first time here on FR) of whether Stanley brought a BC home from Kenya. G’ma would not have risked her position at the bank by trying to fabricate hospital records.
Nor is it believable that an infant born to a G’ma of her standing in the community would have been a home birth with no immediate visit to a hospital.
The blanked out certificate # fits a couple of scenarios but would have been absolutely unnecessary in a straight up presentation.
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.