Requirements of an Agency of the State of Hawaii Contradict Officials Statements
Until sometime in 2009, the State of Hawaii required a “Certificate of Live Birth” to prove Hawaiian ancestry, supposedly unavailable since statements by DOH and Vital Statistics personnel declare only COLB available from 2001 forward. Certificates of Live Birth were not available since the mid 1980’s as well, according to a statement of Bob Bauer, White House counsel.
In order to process your application [to prove native Hawaiian ancestry], DHHL [Department of Hawaiian Homelands] utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL.
This statement was taken from an investigation performed on behalf of a retired CIA officer to look into Obama’s birth certificate. He produced evidence that the State of Hawaii, through their Department of Hawaiian Homelands Homestead and Ancestral lands program, needed the “Certificate of Live Birth” or more commonly known as the long-form birth certificate.
The Governor, the Director of the Department of Health, two spokespersons for the Health Department, and the State Attorney General’s office have all made duplicitous and misleading statements in this matter. Why?
These statements look like opening salvos in Operation Sideshow and could be the culmination of these efforts, and entail not only the president and his aides but officials of Hawaii as well.
Jerome Corsi’s article of February 25, 2011 is prophetic, or there actually was and is an active conspiracy to give credence to the now discredited and forged documents that reside on whitehouse.gov.
The only statements we have are Obama’s lame “no matter what we put out” and Dr. Fukino’s impeached remarks of April 11, 2011 to Michael Isikoff on what it is that is contained in Obama’s bona fides regarding his birth and the forged certificate placed on whitehouse.gov on April 27, 2011. None of these statements is from any State of Hawaii official, then or now!
The president’s stubborn refusal to submit his documentation to third party verification leaves gaps in the narrative, through which a semi truck can now be driven and makes Operation Sideshow appears to have spanned at least 2 ½ years in the making, with 3 ½ after execution.
Is There a Dirty Secret Behind Obama’s Birth Certificate, Making the Case for a Birth Certificate by Affidavit
The question we should be asking is: what type of birth certificate does our president have? Obama’s long-form birth certificate has been declared a forgery. We are wasting our time in spending any more effort on what is posted on whitehouse.gov and need to turn our attention elsewhere. The Territorial Public Health Statistics Act of 1955 and the revised laws of Hawaii allowed for the issuance of birth certificates by filing a sworn affidavit for any births that occurred in the Hawaiian Islands from 1911 to 1972.
The Birth Certificate was the same as any other issued by Hawaii Dept. of Health at that time.
Medical personnel or midwifes did not need to make any statements or physical examination of the child or mother for this type of application; a parent, grandparent, or anyone that had knowledge about the birth could submit the application. This type of birth certificate was filed by mail or in person and was mostly rubber stamped without any official of the State of Hawaii ever seeing the child or parents that filed the application.
Certificates were mailed to the parents of the child after being recorded.
Many locations in the Hawaiian Islands were extremely remote with few hospitals and clinics, so many Hawaiians were born at home; Hawaii needed a way to record these births.
The office of Health Statistics was required to announce all birth registrations in the local newspapers; the office would periodically release this information that they recorded. The much ballyhooed notification(s) Obama’s supporters point to as proof of his birth in Hawaii, as well as a hospital in the newspaper announcements of his birth, are now discredited.
The Sunday Advertiser and the Honolulu Star published Obama’s birth notification on Sunday August 13, 1961 nine days after his birth with his grandparents address in Honolulu as that of his parents.
It is possible that Obama could have been born anywhere in 1961 since all his mother had to do is call her parents in Honolulu to get the ball rolling. Having his birth registered in Hawaii would benefit little Barry and his 18 year old mother. A forged signature or even a pre-signed or signed application by her parents would have made the birth certificate a fait-accompli. Combine the application by affidavit with five other facts and it not only seems plausible, but most likely:
1. Obama’s mother was last known to be in Hawaii in January 1961. She went to Seattle in the fall of 1961 with baby Obama to attend the University of Washington thru spring of 1962. Where was she for these 6 ½ months, February thru September of 1961?
2. Stanley Ann Dunham Obama or early Soetoro passport records are missing from the State Departments archives. These records tell of her travels and Obama’s early years, as young children were placed on their mother’s passports in the 1950′s and 60‘s.
3. Extensive examination on Obama’s “Certification of Live Birth” (COLB), his one and only “Birth Certificate” in June 2008, was declared a forgery by Ron Polarik, PhD, and others.
4. Obama’s “Certificate of Live Birth” and his “Selective Service Registration” card were declared forgeries by Maricopa County Sherriff Joe Arpaio’s “Cold Case Posse” on March 1, 2012. What type of application does Obama have in Hawaii‘s document vault?
5. The sheriff’s investigators determined that the “microfiche records” of INS forms for Hawaii for the week of August 2nd thru 7th 1961 are missing from the National Archives in Washington D.C. New York records are still in play.
We know that his original birth registration application records exist because of the request to the Hawaii Director of Health (Ms. Fuddy) dated April 22, 2011 from Obama and his counsel. This resulted in her stating that she “released two copies” of his original “Certificate of Live Birth” in her letter of April 25 to president Obama. Ms. Judith Corley of the law firm Perkins Coie personally received these certificates on April 25 and verified in the press gaggle transcript on the morning of the 27th given to her on behalf of her client president Obama.
The questions are now: was Obama’s birth actually attended by Dr. David A. Sinclair (died in 2003) as shown on the forged birth certificate, or does he have another type of birth certificate, one by sworn affidavit? The forged certificate was switched with the real “certified” certificate received on April 26, 2011 and placed on the White House website. This forgery is purported to be the “genuine” article without any statements from anyone in the Obama administration about this documents authenticity (see Part 4 for this conclusion). Obama’s claim to citizenship and his entire birth narrative would cease to have any validity if it was proven that he had a birth certificate by affidavit.
Part Eight continues with making the case for a birth certificate by affidavit and specially looks at the statements of Hawaii’s Governor Neil Abercrombie on January 20, 2011 and his April 27th press release.
Photo credit: aaron_anderer (Creative Commons)
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.