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?
Yep, the two folds you would expect for a document put into a standard envelope, and when I had mine, because that size wasn’t fitting in my purse, I folded that envelope sized document in half, which is the third fold you can see. I was dragging my butt from office to office to DMV in San Diego and looking for/applying for a rental hone in the area... it was not a happy time for me, it was pretty stressful.
THe computer program thinks it is different. Why?
I can think of several reasons:
If I were in your shoes, I would also be both confused and very angry. The fact that you have a date stamp of (IIRC) 2007 on a document that was supposedly sent to you several years before...is almost beyond comprehension.
However, maybe it’s worth the hurt if you can help to get to the bottom of this incredible situation. Your pain may be a part of the key that helps us to unlock what’s going on in Hawaii.
It seems to me most likely that for COLBs, the state agency used blank safety paper with all information laser-printed onto the form. There likely would have been a basic software template or templates for the form itself, with algorithms used for the information within each field drawn from the underlying database.
I would expect there to be slight differences in appearance depending on which laserprinter was used, even using the same software.
The question I am left with is, on what basis does the template spit out “accepted” versus “filed?” Something is triggering that difference. It may be a change in usage at different times, or it may be that the fields are adjusted based on the type of information available in the database for a particular COLB.
BTW, that little number in the lower left of Hawaiian CoLBs issued since 11/01 is the form data that that version of the material went into service, for leagl purposes if challenged in a law court for any reason.
Excellent post ! New and credible data is always welcome.
There could be three or four certificates with names on them: if Barry was brought to Hawaii shortly after being born in perhaps Canada, the name might have been Barry Dunham; when supposedly Obama and Satnley Ann married, the name might have been changed with an Obama adoption to Barack Obama; when Lolo married Stanley Ann and adopted Barack, the name might have been changed to Barry Soetoro; when Stanley Ann came back to Hawaii and divorced Lolo, she may have had Barry’s name changed back to Obama. But it is more likely that a name other than Obama was on the first filing. The Pres_ _ent’s actual legal name may still be Barry Soetoro and allowed him to game the systems of passports and college entry and financial assistance through that name. Only when he decided to ‘embrace his blackness’ when heading to New York to Columbia did he switch to using Barack Obama, perhaps, always ‘perhaps’.
It will remain a 'perhaps' until the records are made available!
The first was that you are mistaken as to the actual year you received the CoLB since 11/01 comes more than a year after you remeber having received the exhibit you posted.
The second possibility was that someone in Hawaii is mistaken as to when the forms could have been begun being circulated with the 11/01 revision dating.
But you want to pursue this foolishness some more, trying desperately to discredit Ron Polarik. Polarik's exhibits are far more believeable than you and the more you expose yourself the less credible you become.
Use the phone number (808 586 4539) to Hawaiian Vital Records that I posted on the thread and ask them in person for an explanation of the coding in the lower lefthand corner of the CoLBs.
The ONLY "Certifications of Live Birth" that I've seen displaying "DATE ACCEPTED BY REGISTRAR" are:
1) your COLB
2) an unidentified 1990 COLB (courtesy of Polarik's research)
3) and Obama's COLB:
So now we have three of you on this thread claiming Hawaiian officials are seriously incompetent. Are we getting the coming axelgrease talking point a little early?
That is very important.
As we know ... Words mean things.
Russian and Israeli intel has the goods on Obama and he's feeling the pinch of blackmail. That''s why this Birther story has erupted. Rahm is frantically trying to make the birth thing a non-issue so the public loses interest and, if outed, Obama will avoid having to step down. i don't think his strategy will work but it sure is fun watching Obama make a fool of himself as he frantically tries to hide whatever is on record. Must be good stuff....
Nope, ther was nothing unusual at all. I was born in “Kaiser Foundation Hospital” AKA Queens Hospital. I just posted my long form.
No, because any image that has been run through several kinds or types of hardware/software/peripherals is bound to have different attributes from one to another. I could a damn about whether Kos doctored or didn’t doctor anything. I don’t believe ANYTHING they say or post.
What I am trying, apparently without success, to say is it WAS NOT NECESSARY TO FORGE what could have been gotten legally. It wasn’t necessary to forge it because it doesn’t PROVE that obama was natural born in any way, shape, or form. That is why O’reilly was probably given permission to see the document, but even HE now says it was NOT a birth certificate.
As for it being accepted versus filed, I would think that is because it was NOT filed as an original but that it was altered by Hawaii with updated information and then certified and probably not handled in the same way or even by the same department. It IS proof of citizenship, but NOT proof that he was a citizen at birth.
The images of his doc were done in several ways. Scanning, which has its own artifacts, photogaphed by a digital camera, which has ITS own artifacts, and saved images which has ITS own artifacts depending on what software you are using. Comparing those imaging techniques is apples and oranges.
Paintshop, Photoshop, or any other imaging software changes the image from one to another. Direct uploads from a digital camera are completely different from an image that has been uploaded first and saved to something like what Danae did when she compressed her image using paint. Paint doesn’t DO digital.
It could just be a difference in the program at the time the COLB was generated. I think the DeCosta one was generated in 2002, whereas Obama's was allegedly generated in 2007.
IIRC, it's been determined that the entire document, save background, is printed at the time it's requested, not just the information "fields",but the whole form.
It would be useful to see another, or several other, 2007/2008 CoLBs to see what they say...
Polariks Final Report Shows several. The ones that come from 2007 and 2008 all seem to show "date filed by". Probably just a change in the wording sometime after 2002 but before 2007. What seems to count is not when the birth occurred but when the form was printed.
The forgery would have used one of the latter ones as it's "template".
TANKS,BP...
Don’t even go there. It doesn’t help at all to accuse anyone like that if you don’t have all of the facts at your disposal. I told you. I do research and analysis. I do it for a living. I have no more than abject and intense ..... for obama. I believe he is evil personified. I believe he is endangering this country to a degree I am not willing to accept.
Don’t accuse me of being an “enemy.” That is one of Polarik’s tricks and it won’t work with me. I have too much at stake to play that game with him OR you. I have a child. I have a home. I STILL have a country. I want it to stay that way.
DON’T EVEN!!!
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.