Originally posted by Animal
That supposes that the STATE of Hawai'i is complicit in the deceit of the people of the USA.
The State of Hawaii has said itself the the form provided by Obama is a legitimate copy of a birth certificate and that it is indeed true that he was
born in Hawai'i.
The truth is and has been in the public realm for quite some time.
Complicit, not necessarily. They are bound by laws to not release whatever "Long Form" information they may (or may not) have without explicit
permission from Barack Obama.
Confirmation that the original birth certificate is being held by the state is a far cry from confirming that what was offered to the public, by way
of a .jpg posted on the web (with editing proven by the exif files) contains the same information that the original birth record contains.
I admit to being a "birther" only because there is still so much to question.
1. In the State of Hawaii, back in 1961, there were three different birth certificates that were obtainable:
a. If the birth was attended by a physician or mid wife, the attending medical professional was required to certify to the Department of Health the
facts of the birth date, location, parents’ identities and other information. (See Section 57-8 & 9 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act
in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).
b. In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or mid wife, then, up to the first birthday of the child, an adult
could, upon testimony, file a “Delayed Certificate”, which required endorsement on the Delayed Certificate of a summary statement of the evidence
submitted in support of the acceptance for delayed filing, which evidence must be kept in a special permanent file. The statute provided that the
probative value of the Delayed Certificate must be determined by the judicial or administrative body or official before whom the certificate is
offered as evidence. (See Section 57-18, 19 & 20 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in
effect in 1961).
c. If a child born in Hawaii, for whom no physician or mid wife filed a certificate of live birth, and for whom no Delayed Certificate was filed
before the first birthday, then a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth could be issued upon testimony of an adult including the subject person) if the
Lieutenant Governor was satisfied that a person was born in Hawaii, provided that the person had attained the age of one year. (See Section 57-40 of
the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).
2. In 1982, the vital records law was amended to create a fourth kind of birth certificate for children born outside of the Territory or State of
Hawaii. HRS Chapter 338 was amended to add a new section authorizing the Director of the Department of Health to issue a birth certificate for a
person NOT born in Hawaii either as a Territory or State, upon sufficient proof that the legal parents of such individual had declared the Territory
or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth of such child.
This alone leaves much room for a parent to purposely manipulate the system to ensure that their child was granted US Citizen status through the State
of Hawaii. And I wouldn't fault a parent for such action.
But the question still looms, under which of these situations are the records that the State of Hawaii holds for Barack Obama defined under?
Originally posted by grover
Yes BUT based on the responses and attitudes of at least those posting here on ATS Obama could produce a birth certificate signed by God himself and
you guys would find something wrong with it.
He has produced enough to be certified by the board of elections or he would not have been able to run in the first place.
Well, maybe, but the board of elections didn't bother to stop Roger Calero
from running and
he was born in Nicaragua. Nine individual states remove Mr Calero from the Ballot, but 41 others and the board of elections did not.
For myself, while I have doubts about the eligibility of Barack Obama, this is more an issue of the rule of law being destroyed, the checks and
balances that are supposed to function in this country being declared null and void.
Seriously, we all see clearly how our Gov has gotten "way too big for it's britches" - The Patriot Act ALONE had us all screaming bloody murder.
But to go from the affront of The Patriot Act to an even (potentially) more damaging affront of an in-eligible person sitting in the Oval Office
running this country, well that one is just too much (not that many of the other affronts in the past were NOT too much at the time)
The potential repercussions of Barack Obama not being eligible to hold the office of President are so extreme and ultimately damning for the United
Staes as a Nation that this issue should NEVER have been allowed to be raised in the very first place.
The fact that it has been raised, and continues to be raised is making the US the laughing stock of the world, which is the very last thing we need to
have happen, especially with the economic problems we are currently dealing with.
We The People are *supposed* to be the final line in the checks and balances system. If We The People demand of our government documents that prove
(fill in the blank) then we should be presented with those documents.
Since it is only by our consent that any person in any elected position is *supposed* to be allowed to remain in that position.
But it seems that between NFL Football and American Idle & whatever other distractions are thrown at us, that we have forgotten that crucial fact.
So, speaking as a "birther," I will gladly be made to look like a complete and utter fool, if and when this issue is resolved with the presentation
of Barack Obama's Long Form Certificate of Hawaiian Birth, ESPECIALLY if the efforts of those like me & especially those more actively vocal in this
issue than I, raise the American Populaces realization that our Government answers TO US, and not we to them.
Originally posted by Witness2008
One would think that a birth certificate, newspaper announcements of such, the fact his parents were citizens along with the vetting of a political
run should answer this burning question of yours.
Just what will it take for you to admit his legitimacy?
Not so. I, myself, have a Long-Form Birth Certificate that has fraudulent information on it, including both parent's names, and Newspaper
Announcements for my birth were printed in Florida, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Ohio, Oregon and California. The whole family had them printed - go
My BC is from Florida, and I know exactly how it came to have so much fraudulent info & why.
I am no-one important (as far as anyone here knows) and if it can be done for me, it can be done for anyone.
What my BC does have that IS NOT Fraudulent is the name of the Hospital I was born in and the delivering doctor's name and signature.
That's all we "birthers" are asking to see from the Hawaiian Long Form BCC for Barack Obama
[edit on 7/24/09 by redhatty]