It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Hawaii governor can't find Obama birth certificate

page: 10
69
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Maybe, but you would have to explain why, two years after releasing the short form, did the gov of Hawaii continue to investigate the birth certificate in an effort to put the issue to rest?




www.google.com...

Hawaii's governor wants to reveal Obama birth info
(AP) – Dec 28, 2010

HONOLULU (AP) — Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie wants to find a way to release more information about President Barack Obama's Hawaii birth and dispel conspiracy theories that he was born elsewhere.

Hawaii's health director said last year and in 2008 that she had seen and verified Obama's original vital records, and birth notices in two Honolulu newspapers were published within days of Obama's birth at Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu.



Further, and correct me if Im wrong, but in this context, "original vital records" would be the long form of his birth certificate, the one that contains the vital details of the birth, like the location, which are missing on the short form that was released.




posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
The subsequent statement made by Fukino interestingly dropped the "birth certificate" verbiage and instead replaced it with the verbiage "Vital Records":
Why the change from the words "birth certificate" to "original vital records"? Maybe original vital records means the same thing but why the change? Especially since the statement refers to the previous statement you cited.

Why the change? Because the birthers raised questions that the previous statement by Fukino didn’t confirm that the actual original vital records confirmed that Obama was born in Hawaii. They claimed the birth certificates were amendable and only the original records contained the ‘right’ information.

So, it doesn’t get more explicit than that statement. And yet here we are...



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 


Aggie, this is not true. We do not want a mystical document. There are plenty of examples of long-form Hawaiian birth certificates that were standard for every baby delivered in a hospital by a doctor. The short-form was just a way to help people get on the books when when they were born outside the hospital. The short-form would be plenty sufficient if there was a witness, a mid-wife, a doctor, or even a word from Obama that explained the situation.

Instead, we get a short-form, but the explanation doesn't match. They say he was born in a hospital, yet there is only a short-form BC. It doesn't jive.

Your definition is correct though, I don't want to see any afterbirth, just documentation.

By the way, I bet your BC either has a Doctor's name and a Hospital listed, OR if it doesn't have that listed, I bet your family has an interesting story about your home birth and who was present and what exactly happened down to the last detail.

Either the hospital and doctor are listed, or there is a detailed story known to the whole family. It has to be one way or the other.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 


You sure about that?




www.dshs.state.tx.us...

What formats of birth certificates are available online?
Four formats are available. For each copy of a birth certificate, you will need to specify the format you want. The four formats are:

Standard size (short form or abstract): The most commonly issued format because it satisfies most purposes, including registering a child for school or sports, obtaining a passport for a person born after 1963 if born in a hospital and obtaining a driver license in most states. If the birth record is not available in this format or if the state you live in requires the full size for a driver license, a full-size birth certificate will be issued instead.
Full size (long form): Used most often to obtain a passport for a person born at home and/or before 1964. It's also typically required for purposes of dual citizenship, Indian Registry and immigration. Because this format contains information that can facilitate identify theft, we recommend that you order this format only when it is required.
Heirloom birth certificate: A specially-designed certificate with an engraved intaglio border, heirloom-quality paper, background security features, and a gold embossed seal. State law prevents issuance of this certificate to persons whose births were established by court order or delayed record procedures.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I don't pretend to know all birther demands,


No you don't. You are not demanding Obama's original birth certificate from birth, birthers in general do.


I see something about wanting to know the city and hospital of birth,


The hospital of Obama's birth was already stated by health director Fukino, the city of Obama's birth is actually written in his birth certificate which Fukino and the previous Hawaiian governor verified. So, essentially, all you want is form them to type this on a piece of paper for you, and that will do? You can pretend this makes sense, but it really does not.


but I don't see the word "original" anywhere in that petition,


The what do they want again? What do you want again?


I'm pretty sure what the Hawaii department of Health officials offered to provide to the Obama campaign would be some kind of reproduction of either that original


Maybe and maybe not, but that is besides the point, he is not obligated. I get it, you want the president to stop and show you more evidence until you are satisfied. The world does not work that way, neither does the election process. Sorry.
edit on 19-1-2011 by Southern Guardian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Here is a shot for the other side. I had heard of this, but this is the first time I have seen it.

Fact Check

Toward the bottom of that page is a copy of a birth announcement from the paper shortly after his birth. So there, I threw the other side a bone!

But, to muddy the water right back up, Here is an intelligence officers investigative report that shows the multiple ways one could have received a Hawaiian Birth Certificate that year, and still not been born in Hawaii.

The only way to be sure would be if the certificate gave a hospital and attending physician's name, which it does not, or admit that he was born outside of a hospital and provide some corroborating evidence, which they will not. The whole problem here is the unwillingness of Obama to clarify the situation. He insists on referring back to the certificate instead of adding a little detail or corroboration.

Here is the excerpt showing the many possibilities for birth certificates in Hawaii at the time:

BC1. 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.

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)

BC3. In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or midwife, then, up to the first birthday of the child, a “Delayed Certificate” could be filed, which required that “a summary statement of the evidence submitted in support of the acceptance for delayed filing or the alteration [of a file] shall be endorsed on the certificates”, which “evidence shall be kept in a special permanent file.” The statute provided that “the probative value of a ‘delayed’ or ‘altered’ certificate shall be determined by the judicial or administrative body or official before whom the certificate is offered as evidence.” (See Section 57- 9, 18, 19 & 20 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).”

BC4. If a child is 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 [i.e. the birth child as an adult]) if the Office of 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.)


Source



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 07:44 PM
link   
What does President Obama have to gain politically by releasing any additional documents at the moment? To satisfy a bunch of conspiracy theorists and political opponents who wouldn't vote for him either way? The issue is mainly decisive within the GOP, since several Republicans have spoken out against the birther movement. That means that the next Republican nominee will have to make a choice: use the birther issue in the campaign or not. What if, and maybe I'm grossly overestimating these people, the Democrats are deliberately vague in order to bait the next nominee into using the birther argument, only to then release the actual long-form document? He has nothing to win by releasing it now, as the birthers would equally reject any other document he releases (it would be considered a forgery within seconds). But he might damage an opponent considerably by releasing it during the campaign.

But as I said, I may be overestimating these people.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by steve_montana
What does President Obama have to gain politically by releasing any additional documents at the moment? To satisfy a bunch of conspiracy theorists and political opponents who wouldn't vote for him either way?


He has nothing to gain really, infact he may actually push the conspiracy theory among the rightwing (as if it can go any further). No, birthers just consist of disgruntled voters who want Obama to stop and cater to their needs and thats bout it. He has nothing to gain, and no birther can seriously make that claim.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by steve_montana
 


Pretty ingenius......I'll buy it! Maybe you should be on his campaign staff.

You are correct, there is little to gain politically be releasing it, and it could be a red herring to keep attention off other administration issues. If and when it ever goes to impeachment or keeps him off a ballot, he can then produce whatever is required to clear his name.

That is a pretty good explanation.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 07:51 PM
link   
Why would the US government allow OBAMA to become president of the place we all know and love? he doesn't have a birth certificate! He probably is just a regular guy who the OMEGA AGENCY knew of or has been enlisted to be the next political puppet.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Thank you for posting that up. I think they should be brought up on charges, and if they cannot prove that they seen what they said, they should be guilty of a felony charge and locked up.


We will see how many will go to prison for this puppet. The last one got at least one to go for him and the penguin VP he had.
edit on 19-1-2011 by j2000 because: (no reason given)


The argument of this thread should be the possible fraud that was commited by the past director and govenour.
edit on 19-1-2011 by j2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
The hospital of Obama's birth was already stated by health director Fukino,
It was? Please refresh my memory with a source. Governor Lingle stated Kapiolani was cited in Fukino's 2008 press release, but it wasn't.


The what do they want again? What do you want again?
I want to see what Okubo has offered to provide to Obama's campaign:

the.honoluluadvertiser.com...


Okubo said, "If someone from Obama's campaign gave us permission in person and presented some kind of verification that he or she was Obama's designee, we could release the vital record."
I don't pretend to know what everyone else wants, but if it's an official record and shows the information like Kapiolani (or whatever), doctor's signature, it should be what people are asking for. If he really was born at Kapiolani, then their vital record might look something like this vital record of a 1961 Kapiolani birth, which is a long form birth certificate:

But if they've got something else, then let's see what they've got. Okubo says they have something and they're willing to make it available to Obama's campaign.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darkrunner
Just out of curiosity, is there a process regarding birth certificates and running for POTUS? That's a question I haven't really seen covered in the media.

Do all presidential candidates have to submit a birth certificate to some government agency before running?



No; one of the interesting things we've all learned about the presidential elections process is the national party leaders sign a form for each state declaring their parties candidate "constitutionally eligible".

I have been schooled (here) Congress has a step where objections to candidates can be raised ( kind of like any one objecting speak now or for ever hold your peace( "piece?").

canada free press otherwise most of ths stuff comes from wnd or wiki and I know how that makes dems heads burst into flames.





The Mistake, The Evidence, Obama is NOT a constitutional president
The Theory is Now a Conspiracy And Facts Don't Lie

By J.B. Williams

September 10, 2009
See: The Theory is Now a ConspiracyÑI
See: The Theory is Now a Conspiracy -- III

-Please read update at bottom of article

Though we live in an era when all undesirable facts are often blindly labeled "conspiracy theories" by political operatives with an agenda at risk, a very real conspiracy unfolds every now and then.

While it is indeed true that not all theories are actual conspiracies, like when Hillary Clinton developed an imaginary "right-wing conspiracy" out to get her husband, when in fact, the semen stained dress provided all the necessary (but unfriendly) facts and a perfectly logical explanation for all of those nasty rumors Ð it is also true that some conspiracies are much more than just crackpot theory.

To be a bonafide conspiracy, two or more individuals must knowingly conspire, plot or plan an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious act. In politics or law, an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act, is a "conspiracy." Not in theory, but in reality.

Such is the case today!

A political national committee, the Chair of the Party convention, the Secretary of the Party, Party offices in each of fifty states, and maybe many Ð many more, have knowingly and wantonly defrauded the American election system and more than 300 million American citizens.

They plotted and planned an act of evil, unlawful, treacherous fraud in a blind quest for unbridled political power, and they hoped that you would never catch it. They almost got away with it too...

They snuck it past fifty state election commissions, congress, the US Supreme Court and Justice Department, the Federal Elections Commission and countless members of the Electoral College nationwide. Not a single member of the, as Limbaugh says, "drive-by media" caught it either, or if they did, they decided to become complicit for their own political reasons.

But as is always the case with liars, cheats and thieves, they slip up Ð make a silly mistake Ð overplay their hand Ð leave evidence lying around that they had forgotten about. And as with all chronic liars, they eventually get caught in their own web of lies.

Then, one day, someone stumbles into that evidence, and the house of cards comes crashing down around them. It's almost poetic...
The Mistake

Aware of the fact that Barack Hussein Obama does NOT meet Article II Ð Section I constitutional requirements for the office of President, what well-seasoned professional politician would be stupid enough to sign their name and stake their personal career upon certifying Obama as eligible?

Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates are nominated at their respective Party Conventions.

Believe it or not, each Party is assigned the duty of vetting and certifying the legal eligibility of their own candidates. I know, like asking the fox to guard the henhouse, right. But hey, we are talking about a country which still thinks there is a separation of powers between the High Court and the Executive branch, which seats that court by way of political appointment, confirmed by congress, which wants a piece of the judge and expects a few political favors too.


The Evidence

In this case, the Democrat Party was responsible for vetting and certifying Barack Hussein Obama as legally eligible to seek the Oval Office. The U.S. Constitution has only three very specific requirements for the job. The proper legal text used on the DNC Party "Official Certification of Nomination" document reads as follows, and I quote;

"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."

image
Click to enlarge

Yes, I know.... there is a typo in there. Not my typo, it belongs to whoever prepared the official document at the DNC. Did you catch it?

The document is signed by Chair of the DNC Convention and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, DNC Secretary Alice Travis Germond and Colorado Notary of Public Shalifa A. Williamson. It is dated August 28, 2008.

However, this document was never delivered to a single state DNC Office for state certification, and it was therefore, never presented to any state Election Commission as certification of these candidates, although I do have a copy of this notarized document myself.

Instead, a very similar document was delivered to fifty state DNC offices, which those offices certified to each of fifty state Election Commissions, who then date-stamped the document and stuck it in a file cabinet, and proceeded to place these "certified" candidates on the ballot.

The "Official Certification of Nomination" that was presented by the DNC in all fifty states for the 2008 Presidential election, in which Barack Hussein Obama became the new President of the United States, was almost identical, and it too was signed by Chair of the DNC Convention and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, DNC Secretary Alice Travis Germond and Notary of Public Shalifa A. Williamson, dated August 28, 2008.

But this version of the document was missing the following text, and I quote;

"- 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."

The legal certification text on the DNC certified nomination document used for the DNC ticket was limited to, and I quote;

"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:




www.canadafreepress.com...


edit on 19-1-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   
I wonder where I was born? I don't have a clue except a scrap of paper, it could be written by anyone, or it could a true statement from an individual of the corporation, but I don't know.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Governor Lingle stated Kapiolani was cited in Fukino's 2008 press release, but it wasn't.

Than what does Fukino have to do with it? The second statement by Fukino is as explicit as it’s gonna get.

This just proves that nothing will convince the birthers. If the governor comes out with a statement that he has seen the original records and confirms Obama was born in Hawaii the birthers will say he is in on the conspiracy. He is a Democrat after all.

Even if the Department of Health of Hawaii posted a copy of the original records on their website birthers would claim it is fake.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:29 PM
link   
I think this was soooo funny! Thanks for posting.

Come on all you new world order minions that troll ATS, tell us how he already showed his birth certificate. I'm so sick of the trolls on here that are paid to keep telling the lies that Obama was born in Hawaii. He's a FRAUD, a LIAR and I have no respect for this man whatsoever. He bowed down to BP and let them ruin our Gulf of Mexico this past summer and it's still LEAKING and being sprayed with Corexit that is killing sea life and humans along the coast.

Keep spreading the word and getting more friends out there on all other websites!


peace



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by 46ACE
 

That article is complete nonsense, but couldn’t one argue that the Republican party leaders could be guilty of the same? Were they sure McCain is a natural born citizen? Are you sure?



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:34 PM
link   
As I implied in one of my earlier posts in this thread:
(Quoted From one of my favorite70'smovies



" Strange game...
the only way to win:
is not to play."



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by aptness

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Governor Lingle stated Kapiolani was cited in Fukino's 2008 press release, but it wasn't.

Than what does Fukino have to do with it? The second statement by Fukino is as explicit as it’s gonna get.
What this proves is that either governor Lingle, or Fukino is a liar. There can be no doubt at least one of them is a liar because they contradict each other! Lingle says Fukino's press release mentions Kapiolani. Fukino's press release doesn't mention Kapiolani. Watch the video:

Hawaii Officials Lie For Obama


Now the video claims that both Lingle and Fukino are liars, I'm not sure it proves both of them are lying, but it definitely proves at least one of them is lying.

Fukino may be telling the truth for all I know, but obviously the governor lied (or was mistaken if you want to be more charitable about it).

And what does it have to do with Fukino? The anti-birther arguments all hinge on Fukino's credibility since Fukino has personally seen the vital records that nobody else has seen. So if Fukino isn't credible, you don't see the issue with that?

It would help if Lingle and Fukino could at least tell the same story, but it's another example of the "tangled web" syndrome.
edit on 19-1-2011 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by aptness
reply to post by 46ACE
 

That article is complete nonsense,


Hello Aptness:
So you say...Have you "FOIA'd" the eligibility documents filed?

I haven't either.Which is why I'm not spending my life trying to prove there's smoke here to anyone who doesn't want to hear anymore.


Originally posted by aptness
but couldn’t one argue that the Republican party leaders could be guilty of the same?

One could if there was a discrepancy found in them.( did anybody look? I don't know For all Mcains lack of stellar presidential abilities he was a retired American military officer.

Originally posted by aptness
Were they sure McCain is a natural born citizen? Are you sure?


changing the subject...avoid, obstruct, obfuscate,fall back on the old standards


"Strange game: the only way to "win" is not to play".



goodnight aptness...



new topics

top topics



 
69
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join