Want to see Obama's Birth Certificate? Ask Hawaii and you get barred from Gov. Documents for 2 year

news.yahoo.com...

"As the state continues to receive e-mails seeking Obama's birth certificate, the state House Judiciary Committee heard a bill Tuesday permitting government officials to ignore people who won't give up.

Hawaii Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino issued statements last year and in October 2008 saying that she's seen vital records that prove Obama is a natural-born American citizen.

But the state still gets between 10 and 20 e-mails seeking verification of Obama's birth each week, most of them from outside Hawaii, Kim said Tuesday.

A few of these requesters continue to pepper the Health Department with the same letters seeking the same information, even after they're told state law bars release of a certified birth certificate to anyone who does not have a tangible interest. Responding wastes time and money, Kim said.But the state still gets between 10 and 20 e-mails seeking verification of Obama's birth each week, most of them from outside Hawaii, Kim said Tuesday.

A few of these requesters continue to pepper the Health Department with the same letters seeking the same information, even after they're told state law bars release of a certified birth certificate to anyone who does not have a tangible interest. Responding wastes time and money, Kim said."



So... wanting to see the birth certificate of the President to verify eligibility isn't "tangible interest?



"Attorney Peter Fritz asked why the state would pass a law punishing repetitive requests for open records. Instead, the state could simply say it would only answer each person's question once."



Awesome right? Otherwise, they would be passing a bill that would allow Hawaiian officials to not answer requests as long as they ignored them long enough to elicit repeat requests. Not only that, but...



"If the measure passed, the state Office of Information Practices could declare an individual a "vexatious requester" and restrict rights to government records for two years."



So if this passes, and you want to request to see Obama's Birth Certifate, you can be denied government records for two years.

Is anyone here from Hawaii? I really haven't heard much from any politicians there. Are the citizens more inclined to vote and pay attention to what's really going on than the citizens of the continental United States?

Well, it actually makes sense.

Think about it, requesting to see another person's birth certificate is illegal in the state of Hawaii (and every other state, if I'm not mistaken). Birth certificates are confidential records.

Asking for the birth certificate once or twice and getting denied is one thing, but these people are basically just harassing the state at this point. They know they're not going to ever get the birth certificate, so now they are just trying to waste the other people's time.


Consider an example, a fellow walks into a restaurant that exclusively serves seafood. He sits down and orders a steak. The waitress tells him that they do not serve steak, so the customer becomes irate and storms out.

He then returns a week later, and does the exact same thing. Gets seated, orders a steak, is refused, and storms out angrily.

Then, he goes on to do the exact same thing every week for the next several months. Goes in, gets seated, orders steak, storms out angrily.

How long do you think it would be before that particular customer was barred from that establishment? After all, he's already been told several times that he cannot get what he's looking for, and at this point he is just wasting everyone's time (including his own).

reply to post by AliBruh


The whole birther issue is an abortion of a conspiracy. Even the half-crazies have realized that it has already been stillborn, whereas Obama was indeed born (in Hawaii).

Best,
Skunknuts


[edit on 3/17/2010 by skunknuts]

reply to post by skunknuts


The topic of this post isn't whether or not Obama was born on U.S. soil, but rather the law that Hawaii might pass that would get you banned from government records for two years if you repeatedly asked Hawaiian Officials questions. What if you questioned them over and over about information pertaining to Pearl Harbor and they just ignored you enough times until you got blacklisted?

And what if this somehow passes unanimously and other states, or worse, the federal government catches on and plays along. What if New York decided to inact this law and anyone who repeatedly asked questions about 9/11 got barred from government documents. Would this include police records? What if I was in a hit and run and I had the license plate number? To run it, I have to get a police report back. So I could be denied that simply because I wanted to know why the leaseholder of the World Trade Center had not only taken out death insurance on all employees through George W. Bush's brother's insurance company, but also had the same brother's communication systems company come rewire the whole place shortly before 9/11.

[edit on 17-3-2010 by AliBruh]

The problem here isn't information about Pearl Harbor, or even 9/11 - both of which fall under public records laws. It's that the birthers are repeatedly asking for information that the state of Hawaii would be breaking the law in order to furnish. It is ILLEGAL to give anyone outside the immediate family (or in some cases, inside the immediate family) someone's birth certificate. I was born in D.C. and all I'm entitled to is an official copy of my birth certificate.

At this point the birthers know this, so all the repeated requests are tantamount to spamming a state government's inbox. For one, I can understand why the've reacted in such a manner. If I was continuously being harrassed for information that is illegal for me to give out, I'd be a little irritated too, especially since dealing with such "spamming" costs money and resources to deal with.

[edit on 17-3-2010 by Legion2112]

just wondering why you would want to see obamas birth certificate

reply to post by Legion2112


Can you show me the Hawaiian law stating that it is illegal? In the article it says that they don't show people birth certificates without tangible interest. One would think that the President's eligibility would be tangibly interesting. Whether he was born in the US or not, asking to see the proof shouldn't get you barred from government records.

Yes, this is about the President's birth certificate, not Pearl Harbor or 9/11... yet. What happens when more Americans start waking up and asking questions like our founding fathers would want us to? This could spread rather quickly with recent growthspurt in the 9/11 truth movement.

And for the record, I believe Obama when he says he was born here. Has he given any indication that he would lie to the American People?

[edit on 17-3-2010 by AliBruh]

[edit on 17-3-2010 by AliBruh]

Originally posted by AliBruh
And for the record, I believe Obama when he says he was born here. Has he given any indication that he would lie to the American People?

He's a politician. They all lie.

Did anyone hear about Obama receiving a Fullbright scholarship (or whatever you call them). Something about a Fullbright only being available to foreign students?

Which means he's not a natural born citizen of the US, or he cheated to get aid.

There are many laws against harassment.

It is not the job of the public to verify the president's birthplace. It is the job of the Chairman of the Democratic Convention. And she has done so and signed official documents, certifying same.

Copy of Document Here

THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democrat Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado on August 25 though 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.

Originally posted by AliBruh
In the article it says that they don't show people birth certificates without tangible interest. One would think that the President's eligibility would be tangibly interesting.

One may think that, but one would be incorrect.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
It is not the job of the public to verify the president's birthplace. It is the job of the Chairman of the Democratic Convention. And she has done so and signed official documents, certifying same.

Eh, those are falsified. You know the real reason that his birth certificate hasn't come to light is because they are still waiting for the ink to dry (Ta da toom! Thank you, I'll be here all week. Try the veal!)

Pelosi has the signature of a 14 year old girl. I'm surprised she doesn't dot the "I" with a heart or smiley face.



[edit on 17-3-2010 by jerico65]

reply to post by jerico65


Yes, everything that proves that Obama is legit is falsified. I mean, his birth certificate, which is published on the Internet is falsified, right? Conversely, some 17-year-old claiming Obama has 67 SS numbers on a YouTube video is proof he's a usurper!

Get me a seat up front. You're a riot.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I mean, his birth certificate, which is published on the Internet is falsified, right?

Careful, BH. That comes dangerously close to the "if it's on the internet, it has to be true" statement.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Conversely, some 17-year-old claiming Obama has 67 SS numbers on a YouTube video is proof he's a usurper!

WTF? 67 Social Security numbers? I must have missed that one.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Get me a seat up front. You're a riot.

Just don't forget to tip your waitress!

Why do the birthers keep asking Hawaii for the birth certificates? Do they somehow think they will be the lucky one that gets the birth certificate. It's sort of like seeing a hundred people walk off a cliff in front of you, yet you walk off the cliff too thinking that perhaps you will be the lucky one that is able to fly.

It just boggles my mind. Hawaii has repeatedly said they won't give it out, yet they keep trying. It's not like they are going to break state law and give in to the repeated requests. Yet, they keep trying. Like the kid who keeps putting his finger on the hot burner.

Originally posted by jerico65
Careful, BH. That comes dangerously close to the "if it's on the internet, it has to be true" statement.

Not even. I have said repeatedly that NO ONE can verify it as either falsified OR credible from a jpg file on the Internet. Even a professional would have to have the actual document in hand to verify it either way.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
WTF? 67 Social Security numbers? I must have missed that one.

Sorry, the number was actually 39. I guess I got carried away with excitement. Here. See for yourself. Yeah, I know there's no proof or even evidence presented, but listen to the MUSIC!

reply to post by AliBruh


www.capitol.hawaii.gov...

At no point anywhere does it say that you or I have a legal right to his birth certificate. Unless we are family members or court-appointed or government related adjuncts, we are out of luck. I honestly didn't even think they'd let third parties have access, God knows you can't get mine that way, but there it is. Learn something new every day...

In any case, your argument about tangible interest just doesn't hold water. Tangible interest, according to this, means just that. You're filing a death certificate on behalf of, you're settling the estate of, you're clocking the life insurance policy of... and sadly, we don't foot the bill.

In other words, it would be ILLEGAL for them to give a copy of it to YOU.





[edit on 17-3-2010 by Legion2112]

"A person whose right to inspect or obtain a certified copy of the record is established by an order of a court of a competent jurisdiction;"

So as long as you can get a court to inquire about the BC then you are set. Competent jusidiction? As in a small town who questions authority is ignored?

I'm sorry but whether or not you believe he was born here, anyone who doesn't think proof of the President's eligibility is not tangible interest for any matter is either ignorant or unwilling to face reality.

[edit on 18-3-2010 by AliBruh]

reply to post by AliBruh


I'm not saying his eligibility isn't of tangible interest, it very much is. All I'm saying is that, in my opinion, the state government of Hawaii has every right to get a little litigious about continuous and non-stop email requests for documents that they themselves can't give out legally (read, executive and not judicial); moreso considering the resources it would take to purge their systems of the tens of thousands of requests they're being bombarded with, in many cases by people they've already said no to.

As far as your point about the courts, the courts themselves can only decide if you're a person with a "tangible" interest, which as I've outlined above (and the document clearly shows), doesn't really encompass anyone outside the immediate family or those the family has appointed to handle civil affairs, at least in the state of Hawaii. I guess in summation, unless a member of the Obama family wants to know if dear dad, husband or son is legally eligible to hold the office of the President, we're flat out of luck.