I find it very unlikely that they would publicly lie about a matter in which they could be categorically contradicted and therefore I add this to the list of reasons why the document is bogus.
Posted on 12/12/2009 12:28:23 AM PST by BorderRaven
"BC2. In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or midwife, then all that was required was that one of the parents send in a birth certificate to be filed. The birth certificate could be filed by mail. There appears to have been no requirement for the parent to actually physically appear before “the local registrar of the district.” It would have been very easy for a relative to forge an absent parent’s signature to a form and mail it in. In addition, if a claim was made that “neither parent of the newborn child whose birth is unattended as above provided is able to prepare a birth certificate, the local registrar shall secure the necessary information from any person having knowledge of the birth and prepare and file the certificate.” (Section 57-8&9) I asked the Dept of Health what they currently ask for (in 2008) to back up a parent’s claim that a child was born in Hawaii. I was told that all they required was a proof of residence in Hawaii (e.g. a driver’s license [We know from interviews with her friends on Mercer Island in Washington State that Ann Dunham had acquired a driver’s license by the summer of 1961 at the age of 17] or telephone bill) and pre-natal (statement or report that a woman was pregnant) and post-natal (statement or report that a new-born baby has been examined) certification by a physician. On further enquiry, the employee that I spoke to informed me that the pre-natal and post-natal certifications had probably not been in force in the ‘60s. Even if they had been, there is and was no requirement for a physician or midwife to witness, state or report that the baby was born in Hawaii."
(Excerpt) Read more at westernjournalism.com ...
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24001567/Obama-BC-GMom
Description
Obama Birth Certificate Submitted by GMom
In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or midwife, then all that was required was that one of the parents send in a birth certificate to be filed. The birth certificate could be filed by mail. There appears to have been no requirement for the parent to actually physically appear before “the local registrar of the district.” It would have been very easy for a relative to forge an absent parent’s signature to a form and mail it in. In addition, if a claim was made that “neither parent of the newborn child whose birth is unattended as above provided is able to prepare a birth certificate, the local registrar shall secure the necessary information from any person having knowledge of the birth and prepare and file the certificate.” (Section 57-8&9) I asked the Dept of Health what they currently ask for (in 2008) to back up a parent’s claim that a child was born in Hawaii. I was told that all they required was a proof of residence in Hawaii (e.g. a driver’s license [We know from interviews with her friends on Mercer Island in Washington State that Ann Dunham had acquired a driver’s license by the summer of 1961 at the age of 17] or telephone bill) and pre-natal (statement or report that a woman was pregnant) and post-natal (statement or report that a new-born baby has been examined) certification by a physician. On further enquiry, the employee that I spoke to informed me that the pre-natal and post-natal certifications had probably not been in force in the ‘60s. Even if they had been, there is and was no requirement for a physician or midwife to witness, state or report that the baby was born in Hawaii.
http://www.westernjournalism.com/?pa...
1 Page
Date Added 12/11/2009
whoops!
I duplicated the post.
His rise is downright unnatural..
“Somewhere in Kenya, a village is missing its idiot!”
RELATED POSTS:
Signed Certificate of Live Birth for BO
Posted on 10/20/2009 6:54:41 AM PDT by rocco55
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2366539/posts
Could this be the Birth Certificate submitted by Obama’s Grandmother?
Western Journalism ^ | 12/11/2009 | borderraven
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2405962/posts
I find it very unlikely that they would publicly lie about a matter in which they could be categorically contradicted and therefore I add this to the list of reasons why the document is bogus.
It's supposed to be a footnote to the information in block 23.
That's hilarious in itself. Registrars don't do "footnotes." They issue a changed certificate, prominently noting the specific change in the data, not some vague inference to a statute by footnote.
Whoever did this didn't really put much effort into it, apparently.
There aren't. The FOIA request was filed then. Click on the link and read the request and the dates the information is requested for.
Do you happen to have a source for this info? I’ve kept up with the eligibility issue but have not heard about this Thank You
Click on the link its right there.
Maybe I over-simplified the case but it is all such a tangle.
Has there been a confirmed falsification of the divorce?
Married seems the answer to that part of the question.
Natural born is the real question.
We get hung up in too many what if’s?
Just show us the BC and then we can decide if the Indonesian Citizenship and later passports mean anything.
I think the person who claims foreign student status for special university admission or scholarship money is guilty of a crime as well as divided allegiance. If this is fact, it would show duplicity and that is the real intent of the framers in using the natural born language.
This is such a can of worms! Time will find the truth crawling out of the squiggly mess.
IMHO nothing is going to happen legally right now. Why debate the fine points. Lets use our energy against the horrid policies we need to stop now?
I cheer for those who legally fight his secrecy and hope they are successful. BC signs at rallies and tea parties keep the issue active. Maybe that is all a person can do.
Thanks!
I’m very interested in seeing what comes out of the Chrysler owners case that is just now being filed.
The good thing is the case isn’t a eligibility or birth certificate case but comes around to those issues. What it so good about this case is we have multiple victims that can show tangible damages, this will “solve” the standing issue. That it is filed in DC using Quo Warranto gives me hope something will come of it.
Keeping my fingers crossed in deep South Florida!!
Thanks for the positive thoughts...we need all we can get.
I can not imagine any court ruling in such a manner that the 20% hard core Democrats and minorities would see a need for an uprising against all authority.
When I got a letter from a senator saying that for the court to do so would overthrow the vote of the people...” They had spoken”!...
Well, I am glad to help fight but I no longer have an expectation that the Courts or Congress will act. They know the truth and will not act. Look how well they listen to the electorate on issues now!
Fingers crossed here in Central Florida too! I believe it is only a matter of time and the truth will be out for all to see. Have a super fun evening! :) :)
I actually think it’s great that the Dems are not listening to us and being so incredibly partisan. I was explaining how I feel abut this to Bob Ireland last night. I’m sure some Freepers will disagree with me but that’s what is great about this site.
We know how things for the last couple of decades have been passed, the Dems want something so the Repub’s give it to them so the Repub’s can get what they want; all in the name of bi-partisanship. All that has done is piled on more and more socialism. I can’t find a time in the congressional record where one side has absolutely shut out another side for this long. If we can get the right people in place, there will be hell to pay.
We can demand no more power sharing, no more “reaching across the aisle garbage” and no more you give up some of our rights to give up more of your rights that you “think” we want.
It also makes it easier to reverse or simply refuse to fund what the Dems have shoved through - with at least 50% (if not more) public support.
Now, we also have people who are not even really politically astute are asking “how can they pass this stuff with no Republican support?”. Those who generally not on the extremes of issues do not like this; I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard from normally non-political people say “what does this guy, or the Dem think he (or they) are, dictators?”
For so long many people sat around thinking while they didn’t approve of what the government was doing, someone else was complaining for them. Now people are getting pissed and instead of sitting on their sofas they are becomming active or at least waking up to what is going on; and polling shows they do not like what this government is doing.
If we play our cards right, and drag the GOP kicking and screaming behind us, we can use all of this to our advantage.
Just as a side note, I get a small amount of satisfaction knowing Obama and Gibbs will never admit the Tea Parties, Marches on DC etc are getting to them. But we know, inside the WH it’s eating Obama alive - “how dare those people protest me! I WON!” I can see him cracking up if we keep this up; and I want the video when it happens!!
I am sure they are well aware of the “rising tide”.
It may add to the hurry to get unpopular measures passed before we organize in even stronger numbers.
Thank you for all you do. I hope I can be more active in Florida events in the coming year.
Even if we can not get one Sec. of Elections to force candidates on the Presidential Ballot to prove eligibility we will need a lawyer or law firm that is willing to go to court against the state.
We should be able to force, through the courts, a state to uphold the constitution (you’d think) but the problem still remains that we have no legal decision from the Supremes of exactly what qualifies a person as a NBC. That would be the defense used by the states to justify not checking eligibility.
Obama’s side would argue most likely that he has already been proved eligible by having held office the previous term.
This eligibility issue is so new to the courts and to our laws, constitutional lawyers I’ve talked too are unsure what would need to come first, a eligibility check or a riling defining NBC.
We need to cover all our bases by 2012 and pray a determined lawyer is able to determine all loopholes, side doors or precedence someone could use to “legally” run or hold office as POTUS.
Now that would be a video that I would have the greatest pleasure sending to many who would be overjoyed to see it!
BO’s popularity along with Congress is dropping like a rock and will continue to cave! And it is Tea Party patriots waking up those around them to the truth about what is going on! We need to keep these patriot get togethers coming!
Right after New Year's Day I will be looking forward to attending every event I can and will spread the word far and wide about the Tea Party events!
If Obama’s grandmother submitted a Hawaii DOH birth certificate the document linked below might be that one.
***** http://www.scribd.com/doc/24001567/Obama-BC-GMom
By submitting a birth certificate attesting to a birth, all other actions i.e. newspaper birth announcements would be published.
Who provided this document? Where did it come from? When did it appear?
Whose signatures are shown?
Has anyone tried to verify the three signatures in any way?
Do we have the paper physically? Or just a scan or jpg???
Anywhere to go to to get more info???
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.