Fukino & TerriK

Oct. 2, 2009 | MissTickly (aka TerriK)

[MissTickly]

President Obama's original birth certificate was "record in accordance with state policies and procedures," but his vital records were "maintained on file."

Oct,31, 2008: “...Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures..."

July 27, 2009: "“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‛i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”

July 27, 2009, I asked this question of the Hawaiian DoH: "Is the Director of Health for the State of Hawai'i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, able to state they have verified that the Hawai'i State Department of Health has President Barack Obama's AMENDED original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."

A careful parsing of words seems necessary because one COLB can say this: "Filed by Registrar" While another can say this: "Accepted by Registrar" Despite what you read online, or see presented by anonymous people that you've never met and you don't know-Hawaii must explain what this means. It's a procedural question that I cannot get an answer to. Why?

The last I communicated to Dr. Fukino, on October 1st, I wrote her the following, and she has not responded to correct any mischaracterizations. Please take note of that:

Dr. Fukino--

Per your press release statement on July 27, 2009, are you telling us that, in part, you saw "vital records" that include some kind of a representation of a stated "filed" and threfore pending application for an amended/corrected Birth Certificate (it was on file, not on record) and evidence filed to support an amendment/correction, but that evidence was still pending approval on July 27, 2009? I am sorry for the characterizations I give in lieu of knowing the legal jargon. Please correct me if I have mischaracterized anything.

I am finally realizing I really need to understand what 'on file' and 'filed with the registrar' means compared to "accepted by registrar" and "on record." Can you help me understand or direct me to one of your staff for explanation? If you don't already know--a woman has presented her own "filed with registrar" type COLB that she asserta represents a normal, indexed-at-birth, run of the mill Hawaiian birth certificate to natural parents with all information in pristine, original condition.

Is that possible? Should a record like I just described typically say "Accepted by Registrar?"

I have requested from the AG library archive, the opinion letter that I believe sets out the procedures for filing an application for an amended birth certificate. But I have not received it yet. If the DoH is able to provide a copy--please do.

If you meant for people to understand you in July, and if I am understanding things correctly without having the necessary AG letter. Woman, I seriously underestimated you. I want people like you working for government.

I don't know what you can answer that I just asked, if anything. But, if you can correct any mischaracterizations about policy and procedure--please do.

I am giving pause to all of this. You have been very candid, I believe. I just was too blind to see that you put it all out there for anyone paying attention. You've been as fair as can be to BOTH sides of this issue from what I can discern.

Thank you. T.

*

And I brought my question from July 27, 2009 full circle:

Aloha Dr. Fukino,

Please use THIS version of my questions. So very sorry--I am struggling with the difference between the words "on file" and "on record." I am going to go with "on record." I realize I might have to resubmit at some point with the "on file" language.

If you would please answer the following questions for me per your statement on July 27, 2009:

“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‛i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”

On July 27, 2009 per your issued statement, did you personally verify that the "vital records" you saw were NOT maintained on record in accordance with state policies and procedures?

On July 27, 2009 per your issued statement, did the Registrar of Vital Statistics personally see and verify that the "vital records" you saw were NOT maintained on record in accordance with state policies and procedures?

Thank you for your continued patience on this issue. If you would please answer the two questions above separately--that would be ideal. I am afraid that a blending of the answers will muddy your efforts to be forthcoming with the public. If you have already been forthcoming--that effort should be recognized and not distorted.

Sincerely, T.

*

CONCLUSIONS? Was the President's Natural Born Citizenship verified with a long form birth certificate, an application to amend his birth place and insufficient pending evidence of that amendment? On July 28th, did Congress sell us out with a Resolution that declared that President Obama was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961?

Did Congress provide the 'evidence' to amend the President's Birth Place.

Get answers from Hawaii. If need be, get answers from Congress.

Thanks for letting me post here FR.=)

[PA-RIVER]

If we look at the intent of the constitution, it is clear that securing pure and singular fidelity to nation was the intended objective to the “natural Born Citizen” clause. I think we can all agree to that supposition.

Unfortunately, we have a president that has maintained fidelity to a multitude of nations due to his circumstance of birth and his childhood adoption. His love of Kenya, understandable though it may be, was expressed by his trips to Kenya after being elected to the senate. It is his birth right to love his fathers country, and it is his obligation to love his fathers country.

The United states is not his Fathers country. It either comes second or first in his obligations of loyalty. Kenya dos not come second. Our constitution demands loyalty to no other nation. By that measure, he is not qualified.

When the constitution is amended to provide natural born status to people born with dual citizenship, then Obama will be qualified. With judicial fiat being the norm for amending the constitution, with all the disrespect that that entails for the constitution, it shouldn't be too hard.

[Sola Veritas]

“Requirements, parents 2 U.S. citizenS.
U.S. soil.”

I disagree with you. This is NOT the original intent of “Natural Born”....being to exclude persons with potentially divided loyalties. A child born to two U.S. Citizens overseas in the Service of the United States....there is NO question of divided loyalties.

It is actually moot since McCain lost. Whatever, McCain meets the INTENT of the NB requirement. POTUS Obama DOES NOT.

[MissTickly]

I started a blog today! Wish me luck!

http://misstickly.wordpress.com/

[El Gato]

Neither would having a parent as a non-citizen affect his citizenship IF he were born within the US. If “anchor” babies are citizens (and that is the current understanding unfortunately) then Barry is IF born within the US.

The 14th amendment makes anyone born in the US a citizen. But not a necessarily a "natural born one" One understanding, from "Vattel's law of nations written somewhat before the American Revolution, indicates that you need two citizen parents, and in general, to be born in the country. The exceptions are the children of diplomats and military personnel serving the country, but outside of it at the time of the child's birth. Those exceptions also come from Vattel.

[El Gato]

I’m with you on that. He doesn’t resemble his siblings that are bi-racial.

He and his half sister Maya, have the same chin as their grandfather Dunham. Barry also has the ears, shape of the eyes, and even the same hairline. His nose is a little broader and his lips a little fuller than Grampa Stanley's.

Given how pale BHO's mother was, it's not surprising he isn't very dark, even if his father had been a Nigerian. (I knew a guy who was Nigerian when I was in college. that man wasn't merely black, he was obsidian. BHO Sr. was practically "high yellow" compared to that guy)

Barack is still darker than many Black Americans. The Reverand Wright for example.

[Netizen]

He and his half sister Maya, have the same chin as their grandfather Dunham. Barry also has the ears, shape of the eyes, and even the same hairline. His nose is a little broader and his lips a little fuller than Grampa Stanley's.

He looks more like his grandfather than his father.

[PA-RIVER]

“An honest man would have been HONORED to promptly provide **all** documentation regarding his natural born status.”

You got that right. We have a president who has no respect for the citizen. In due time it will become obvious to a majority.

[El Gato]

That is all well and good but NOTHING Britain or any other country can do can take away an American citizen’s citizenship. Said act is irrelevant to this issue.

I agree, it wouldn't matter if his father was a citizen of a country that did not make the offspring of it's citizens born abroad citizens in their own right. For purposes of "Natural Born citizenship", it's the father's lack of US citizenship, under US law, that matters. BHO Sr was not a US citizen, he wasn't even a permanent legal resident.

While it's true, the Constitution does not define "Natural Born Citizen" several works of the time do. Which one, or ones, drove the understanding of the founding generation, will be up to the Courts to decide.

[El Gato]

Apparently there is some record deeming them the "Bride" and the "Groom". Could be an unfulfilled marriage license, but why get a license you didn't intend to use?

The question of a valid marriage is something else again. But it's largely irrelevant if BHO Sr is the legal father listed on the BC.

[El Gato]

There are ONLY two ways to be a US citizen: one is NATURALIZED or one is NATURAL BORN. That is it. Nothing else grants citizenship.

One can be a citizen at birth, under the statutes, and not be natural born. One can also be a citizen at birth under the 14th amendment, and still not be natural born.

You do know that the constitution doesn't define "naturalization" either? That does not however mean that Congress is free to change that definition, although they have. The funny thing is, they did it under the very power they were granted to define an uniform rule of naturalization.

[El Gato]

I saw that, but there has never been a marriage certificate that has popped up.

But there has also not been a long form birth certificate. Birth and marriage records are treated much the same under Hawaiian law, in terms of who can access them.

Besides, it's probably a marriage license, which uses those terms. A marriage certificate would be more likely to use "Husband" and "Wife", since one is issued before the ceremony, the other after it.

[El Gato]

He looks more like his grandfather than his father.

My point exactly. Almost any "Black" guy, direct from Africa, or descendant of slaves brought to the US, or the Carribean, or Brazil, in the 17 th century, could be his father.

That's not suprising at all to me. One of our great nieces looks very much like my wife's sister, the girls grandmother. In spite of the grandmother being very pale, naturally blond with "Danish blue" eyes, while the granddaughter has jet black hair, and very olive complexition, courtsey of her grandfather and AFAIK, father as well. Some shape genes just seem be more dominate than others, while those for skin and hair color seem to favor dark over light, alhtough unlike some characteristics, one often gets a "mix" of shade. Some flowers work that way. Cross a red variety with a white one, and you get 1/4 white, 1/4 red and 1/2 pink in the next generation.

[MissTickly]

http://misstickly.wordpress.com/2009/10/04/our-worst-nightmare-confirmed/

My new blog. It’s long but SO very good to the end! Enjoy!

[machogirl]

it’s almost like he has 1/2 of his history. the other half is a mystery.

[machogirl]

he’s either stanley ann’s kid or her dad’s (because of the chin). his 1/2 white sibs on his dad’s side all are very dark pigmented and resemble barack sr.

he looks happy in that picture with gramps, before he soured on his country.

[Jude in WV]

Is there any way to find if there is an FS-240 report?

FS-240= Documentation of US Citizens Born Abroad Who Acquire Citizenship at Birth

[AmericanVictory]

My apologies. I thought you were defendaing him. I don’t understand your position, obviously, but if you are not defending the Ci-cago fraud I clarly misundersttod you. I thought you were defending him and the fraud that put him illegally in the Oval Office.

[El Gato]

he looks happy in that picture with gramps, before he soured on his country.

Makes me sad for that happy little guy. He probably had a lot of promise before his mother's wandering ways, and lack of ability to stick with a single husband, turned him into what he has become today.

[Jude in WV]

There are millions of foreign students here. Are you saying they can conceive children with US citizens while here and those children are “natural born” and can be President of the US? That doesn’t even seem to be good common sense to me much less to the founding fathers who were far more visionary than anyone I’ve heard from in many years.
I would think “natural born” would mean born as a citizen with no statutory requirements. If you are born of both citizen US parents (here or anywhere), you require nothing further in the law to be a citizen. All the situations I’ve seen discussed are dependent upon some statutory change which, in itself, would mean not natural born but requiring a statute.
Also, I thought Ann was born in 1942. If so, she was 18 at his birth.

[MacSuibhne]

His Parents filed for divorce in 1980. What name did he use for selective service registration? College applications?... Passport?