Hawaii governor can't find Obama birth certificate

Originally posted by getreadyalready
The problem is that for many government jobs that require security clearance, such as FBI or Secret Service, they require the more detailed "long-form" certificate.

Care to show a valid government site for that claim.... or is it just more birther crap!

reply to post by dereks


It is just my opinion from experience with those agencies.

Here is the typical phase I questionairre for FBI LINK

I think he would have plenty of trouble getting through Phase I, and it just gets harder from there.

On another note, can anyone go back and find where Obama was living September 4, 1980. There were plenty of rumors that he never registered with Selective Service, which makes him ineligible for any Federal Job, even Snopes could not debunk the claim, but "Pajamas Media" supposedly got this respons and a registration number:

Mr. Owens,

Barack Hussein Obama registered at a post office in Hawaii. The effective registration date was September 4, 1980.

His registration number is 61-1125539-1.

Daniel Amon
Public Affairs Specialist

Source

Can anyone confirm or dispute that he could have registered at a post office in Hawaii on that date?

[color= white] ***** [color= red] See 13:55 onward: [color= white] *****

How's this for irony?

My employer just contacted me and said they do not have proof of my registration for Selective Service. I had to go to the sss.gov website and print out my verification (I registered in 1992), and provide it to the department to be eligible for my current position.

I wonder if Obama got a similar email today?

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by dereks

 

It is just my opinion from experience with those agencies.

Here is the typical phase I questionairre for FBI LINK

I think he would have plenty of trouble getting through Phase I, and it just gets harder from there.

Same form that I filled out when I was tenatively selected for my current job. I had no problems using a BC very similar to what President Obama has. it's a form for "National Security Positions". I'm more than 95% sure that President Obama went through that process back when he was a Governor.

Okay. Im new here. Not too many people know about this information as the Hawaii media does not cover this topic in the news. BTW, this is now being taught at the University of Hawaii. So here we go.

To make a very long story short. Hawaii is not properly a State of the union. The internationally recognized Hawaiian Kingdom was occupied in 1893 with the illegal landing of the US marines. Pres. Grover Cleveland sent James Blount to investigate this act of war and he found that the US marines had conspired with Sugar Plantation Owners (children of the missionaries), to overthrow the government and to create a puppet government (Republic of Hawaii). The US president makes an agreement with Queen (Liliuokalani) to restore the Hawaiian Kingdom Government if she grants amnesty to the criminals who were a part of the conspiracy. This agreement, which has the power of a treaty, is called the "Liliuokalani Assignment" which binds each president after Grover Cleveland to the agreement of restoring the Hawaiian Kingdom back to power.

After Grover Cleveland left office, the puppet government (Republic of Hawaii), led by sugar plantation owner Sanford B. Dole, tried to have Hawaii annexed to the US, which failed in congress twice! On July 7, 1898, the United States unilaterally annexed the Hawaiian Islands for military purposes by enacting a joint resolution of annexation through its Congress over protests by the Queen. However, a joint resolution is NOT A TREATY, it is an American piece of legislation which should have no power in an independent sovereign country. America has been illegally occupying Hawaii till this day. Only in the early 1990's have Hawaiian researches found the true and accurate history of Hawaii from various government archives. The Hawaii public school system has been teaching a manipulated and twisted version of Hawaiian history since the illegal occupation.

How all of this relates to Barack Obama? Well, since Obama claims to have been born in Hawaii, that would mean that he would have been born in a foreign country under illegal occupation. Since there is NO TREATY of annexation between the Hawaiian Kingdom Government and the United States of America, Hawaii cannot be a state of the Union.

There is currently a case going on right now called "sai v. obama". There are lots of videos and scholarly research that has been done on the issue by a man named David Keanu Sai. Visit his website at

www.hawaiiankingdom.org

reply to post by SilentKillah


Obama was never a Governor. He was a sophomore Senator, but that was the highest position he had ever held.

It was secured in WTC tower 1.

Originally posted by UluaHuntah808
Okay. Im new here. Not too many people know about this information as the Hawaii media does not cover this topic in the news. BTW, this is now being taught at the University of Hawaii. So here we go.

To make a very long story short. Hawaii is not properly a State of the union. The internationally recognized Hawaiian Kingdom was occupied in 1893 with the illegal landing of the US marines. Pres. Grover Cleveland sent James Blount to investigate this act of war and he found that the US marines had conspired with Sugar Plantation Owners (children of the missionaries), to overthrow the government and to create a puppet government (Republic of Hawaii). The US president makes an agreement with Queen (Liliuokalani) to restore the Hawaiian Kingdom Government if she grants amnesty to the criminals who were a part of the conspiracy. This agreement, which has the power of a treaty, is called the "Liliuokalani Assignment" which binds each president after Grover Cleveland to the agreement of restoring the Hawaiian Kingdom back to power.

After Grover Cleveland left office, the puppet government (Republic of Hawaii), led by sugar plantation owner Sanford B. Dole, tried to have Hawaii annexed to the US, which failed in congress twice! On July 7, 1898, the United States unilaterally annexed the Hawaiian Islands for military purposes by enacting a joint resolution of annexation through its Congress over protests by the Queen. However, a joint resolution is NOT A TREATY, it is an American piece of legislation which should have no power in an independent sovereign country. America has been illegally occupying Hawaii till this day. Only in the early 1990's have Hawaiian researches found the true and accurate history of Hawaii from various government archives. The Hawaii public school system has been teaching a manipulated and twisted version of Hawaiian history since the illegal occupation.

How all of this relates to Barack Obama? Well, since Obama claims to have been born in Hawaii, that would mean that he would have been born in a foreign country under illegal occupation. Since there is NO TREATY of annexation between the Hawaiian Kingdom Government and the United States of America, Hawaii cannot be a state of the Union.

There is currently a case going on right now called "sai v. obama". There are lots of videos and scholarly research that has been done on the issue by a man named David Keanu Sai. Visit his website at

www.hawaiiankingdom.org

I don't want to do the research into all of this, but Hawaii citizens that work in the state pay federal taxes correct? Puerto Rico doesn't. Sounds like you're claiming that Hawaii is a US territory like Puerto Rico to me...

reply to post by UluaHuntah808



Hmmmm, you should start a topic on this subject.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by SilentKillah

 

Obama was never a Governor. He was a sophomore Senator, but that was the highest position he had ever held.

Senator... Governor... Sorry and not being rude at all... but I'm not too keen on the different positions of the Government. Seriously... I have no clue what the different between Congress and Senate is just to show how uneducated in that area I am.

Moreso the point that I was trying to make though is that the SF-86 is used for all investigations including a Secret security clearance. I'm not sure about a Confidential clearance, but I think it's the same. The number one reason that people are denied clearance is because of financial issues. If all of the people out there that have a clearance needed to show an "Original Birth Certificate"... there would be a lot less people without clearances and without jobs. As a Senator, I could imagine that Obama would have posessed at least a Secret clearance.

reply to post by SilentKillah


I think he is just claiming that some native Hawaiians never agreed to the U.S. takeover, but since it happened anyway, and the recognized state government has agreed to the whole thing, it is a moot point.

Kind of like our Seminoles here in Florida. They never surrendered to the US Govt, and their motto is still "Unconquered," but it is moot, because the state moved on without them.

reply to post by Stormdancer777


Agreed... I'd definitely like to know more about the subject.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by SilentKillah

 

I think he is just claiming that some native Hawaiians never agreed to the U.S. takeover, but since it happened anyway, and the recognized state government has agreed to the whole thing, it is a moot point.

Kind of like our Seminoles here in Florida. They never surrendered to the US Govt, and their motto is still "Unconquered," but it is moot, because the state moved on without them.

Ah... got it. Thanks for the clarifying for me.

reply to post by SilentKillah


No problem, a Governor would have made him much more qualified, because running a state is a lot like running a country, but being a fairly new Senator didn't really add much to his resume.

As for your birth certificate, I bet it lists a hospital and an attending physician. If it doesn't list such a thing, I bet your family can tell the story of your birth down to the detail.

Obama has neither one, the certificate is incomplete, and there is no backstory to verify it.

reply to post by getreadyalready


You're right that my BC does list DC General hospital, but it does not list any Physician/Doctor on it. It only has my mother and father's information. In Obama's record they could have seen whatever notes on record indicating his birth at whatever hospital and taken that as face value. The record that the Governor is indicating could be a paper similar to what I have on my daughter (her name, parents names, and footprints) but not an official BC as people are looking for. That's my thought on what he's indicating that they have found.

If the Original BC doesn't exist, who is to say that it wasn't a mistake from whomever creates the document that his didn't get created? Some record is on file, and that's enough for him to obtain a BC like mine, register with SSS, and obtain a security clearance. Three different areas/agencies that people have looked into his records and seen fit for what he needed. Still seems clear that everything looks good to me.

reply to post by SilentKillah


Everything you are saying is logical, and it would put a stop to the whole debate.

If there is some hospital notes, documents, footprints, or surviving witnesses, then the debate is over. The document just needs some corroboration because of "mistakes" that have caused it to come into question.

Sure, some birthers are fanatics and will never be satisfied, but most are probably like me, and we just don't like being treated like dummies. Show us a little bit more evidence or effort and we will go away, but we're not going to just take their word for it, and we don't care if it damages their fragile ego that a mere word is not enough.

If they could produce anything similiar to what you say Killah, then I believe it would stop 95% of the debate, but the longer they refuse to produce it, the more doubt it casts on the whole situation!

reply to post by getreadyalready


I truly hope that they do produce something to satisfy most of those peoples' needs then. I believe that they will soon... but it will only quite some. This debate will never end for others, but I can only hope for the best.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
Sure, some birthers are fanatics and will never be satisfied, but most are probably like me, and we just don't like being treated like dummies. Show us a little bit more evidence or effort and we will go away, but we're not going to just take their word for it, and we don't care if it damages their fragile ego that a mere word is not enough.

Exactly. I'll go away if I see the evidence too.

But it's not even a case of taking their word for it. Two senior state officials and a senior elections clerk have commented on it, and their claims are contradictory. So who's word do we take? Former governor Lingle, who said he was born at Kapiolani and who directed Fukino to put that in the press release? Or Fukino who denies this and apparently refused to put Kapiolani in the press release? Or Adams who says Kapiolani has no record of him being born there? In the video posted a few posts up, Dr Corsi said he hired some private investigators (PIs) in 2008 who reported that neither Queens nor Kapiolani had any record of Obama's birth, however I'm not sure how the PIs could find that out since I'm not sure the hospitals would tell them anything, or whether they would actually still have things like admission records, etc. from 1961. I suppose a PI could pretend to be looking for an admission of a relative for 1961 and may get to see the admission records that way, if they exist, but Corsi didn't give any details on how the PIs determined that.

I don't think even Fukino has been entirely consistent with her own statements, like the way her later press release dropped the birth certificate claim that was in her earlier press release. I know some people may not agree with this but words mean something and when she changes her verbiage, I notice that. Some people disregard it. Specifically, the difference as I understand it is, all birth certificates are vital records, but not all vital records are birth certificates, but instead could be something along the lines of what the current governor stated, perhaps a written notation of some sort.

Originally posted by SilentKillah
I truly hope that they do produce something to satisfy most of those peoples' needs then. I believe that they will soon... but it will only quite some. This debate will never end for others, but I can only hope for the best.

Me too, the current governor does seem sincere and maybe he can straighten this whole mess out. That's apparently his intention and I hope he succeeds.