Replies

Oh, and BTW — it is NOT a lie that a COLB doesn’t necessarily prove where someone was physically born (especially in Hawaii, but in all other states as well).

Anyone who has EVER been involved in the adoption records activism community would be able to tell you about literally thousands of people over the years who have discovered outright FRAUDULENT information on their Birth Certificates - and we’re not talking about names here. We’re talking about DATES of BIRTH, and the PLACES of Birth, too.

And, that has absolutely NOTHING to do with ANY of these cases against Obama, and is something I found out over 12 years ago when I worked on changing adoption records laws in various states. It’s plain and simply NOT a lie, and frankly I take offense to your calling it such. Hell, I could give you exact NAMES of people I know who “don’t exist” prior to an ILLEGAL BC after an ILLEGAL adoption was performed — don’t bother asking for the names though, I can’t violate people’s privacy except to tell you that I know these people PERSONALLY and they have gone to court to get access to their records held by the state. And I know TWO people PERSONALLY who don’t “exist” prior to their adoption. Stolen babies and forged BCs are nothing new. [And, no I’m NOT saying Obama was the victim of an illegal adoption, either]

forged BCs are nothing new.

Now don't get your bowels in an uproar! Of course there are forged documents, and if Obama's COLB is forged, someone is guilty of fraud and maybe more.

My point is simply that the "long form" arguments are red herrings. A COLB is legal proof of when and where someone was born -- unless it can be shown to be an invalid document. It is prima facie evidence, and the burden is on the challenger to show it is false.

Oh, and BTW — it is NOT a lie that a COLB doesn’t necessarily prove where someone was physically born (especially in Hawaii, but in all other states as well).

True.

Anyone who has EVER been involved in the adoption records activism community would be able to tell you about literally thousands of people over the years who have discovered outright FRAUDULENT information on their Birth Certificates - and we’re not talking about names here. We’re talking about DATES of BIRTH, and the PLACES of Birth, too.

Also true. I am aware of a case in my own family.

And, that has absolutely NOTHING to do with ANY of these cases against Obama, and is something I found out over 12 years ago when I worked on changing adoption records laws in various states. It’s plain and simply NOT a lie, and frankly I take offense to your calling it such. Hell, I could give you exact NAMES of people I know who “don’t exist” prior to an ILLEGAL BC after an ILLEGAL adoption was performed — don’t bother asking for the names though, I can’t violate people’s privacy except to tell you that I know these people PERSONALLY and they have gone to court to get access to their records held by the state. And I know TWO people PERSONALLY who don’t “exist” prior to their adoption. Stolen babies and forged BCs are nothing new. [And, no I’m NOT saying Obama was the victim of an illegal adoption, either]

I absolutely believe you.

My question is, since all that is true, what good will seeing Obama's long form do?

He's a middle aged man. His mother and father died long before he ran for office. His grandparents are gone. The sister he was raised with is younger than he is. There is very little chance, as several doctors here have attested, that anyone would specifically remembers his birth, assuming they are even still alive.

So: since official forms are sometimes forged/faked/filed with incorrect information, how will it be better to see the "long form" than the "short form"?

In light of what you said, what proof would satisfy you?

Assuming you mention documents such as school or childhood medical records, how would those help, since all of those would be based on the lie in the "long form"?