Hawaii governor can't find Obama birth certificate

reply to post by aptness
Yes you could say that, but I would look at it more in terms of the "transparency" campaign promise

But your point is well taken, about the only power voters seem to have, is their vote, in this case.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Yes you could say that, but I would look at it more in terms of the "transparency" campaign promise

It is true that Obama hasn’t, by far, lived up to the transparency promises he made, but there’s a distinction that needs to be made in respect to the birth certificate issue. Obama has presented a certificate and the competent authorities confirmed he was born in Hawaii, there is only an issue for some people that refuse to accept what was disclosed already as sufficient.

But your point is well taken, about the only power voters seem to have, is their vote, in this case.

That’s not necessarily what my comments imply. I think the people might have more power than their vote, they don’t, however, have a legal basis for the demands to see the President’s birth certificate. I can understand, though, that some people might have a difficulty in accepting that fact, but I never found personal indignation to be a persuading argument.

I’ve expressed before that if there’s anyone that can investigate or request this from the President it’s Congress. In that sense, and if they truly want to pursue this endeavor, people have that additional power. Admittedly, convincing Congress to do something, nowadays especially, is not an easy task, but it’s a possibility that remains nonetheless.

Obama story about Hawaii past and lost birth certificate

Abercrombie , says there is no birth-certificate, according to his friend, says his first memory of Obama was about 6 or seven years of age,

I thought he knew him since birth.

Radio interview



This is from the KQRS morning show from 1/20/2011. Their Hollywood reporter Mike Evans that knows Neil Abercrombie for Governor of Hawaii personally, gave an interesting story about the birth certificate situation.

Originally posted by aptness
Obama has presented a certificate

Correction: He provided a certification.

Fukino may be the only person in the world to ever see the certificate she referred to in her press release. Apparently neither governor Lingle nor governor Abercrombie ever saw it, though they both talked about it.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Correction: He provided a certification.

Doesn’t change the fact that a certification has to confirm what the original records represent, otherwise it wouldn’t be a certification now would it? The state can’t issue certification of knowingly false information.

reply to post by dolphinfan

Maybe the good governor could check with the president of Kenya.....just thinking aloud.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by aptness
Obama has presented a certificate

Correction: He provided a certification.

Correction: A certification is a certificate.

This is why I said that if any of you knew anything about the issue, you would go hide in shame for a bit.

Originally posted by aptness
Doesn’t change the fact that a certification has to confirm what the original records represent, otherwise it wouldn’t be a certification now would it? The state can’t issue certification of knowingly false information.

This from WND:

"Certifications of Live Birth were given to people who were born at home, or to people who were born overseas and whose parents brought them back to the islands. If his parents were U.S. citizens, or if one parent was a U.S. citizen, as was the case with Obama, the family would apply for a Hawaiian birth certificate when the parents came back from overseas. That's normally how you would have gotten on [a Certification of Live Birth] in the 1960s."

Read more: www.wnd.com...

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by aptness
Obama has presented a certificate

Correction: He provided a certification.

Correction: A certification is a certificate.

No, aptness is right in this follow-up statement:

Originally posted by aptness

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Correction: He provided a certification.

Doesn’t change the fact that a certification has to confirm what the original records represent, otherwise it wouldn’t be a certification now would it?

Aptness is right that it's a certification and that it's only saying that there's another record somewhere that proves what it's claiming, in this case a record that only Fukino has seen.

Originally posted by IamCorrect
Certifications of Live Birth were given to people who were born at home, or to people who were born overseas and whose parents brought them back to the islands.

Is there any evidence that those people on category 2 would get Hawaii listed as their birth place? Have any citations of Hawaiian statutes for that? Or am I supposed to take WND’s word for it?

My point about certification is that its purpose is to certify the information, regardless of what you call it. The entity, in this case the state, is affirming the information contained in that paper is genuine and represents true information. Or are you claiming that a “birth certificate” includes truthful information, and that states are allowed to lie if they call it something else (“certification of live birth”)?

A birth certificate, or a certification of live birth is, implicitly, a representation of what’s in the vital records, because that’s the source of the information.

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
Obama story about Hawaii past and lost birth certificate

Abercrombie , says there is no birth-certificate, according to his friend, says his first memory of Obama was about 6 or seven years of age, I thought he knew him since birth.

Radio interview

Thanks for posting that interview. While parts of it are consistent with public knowledge, other parts are hearsay and have to be treated accordingly, however, it does sound reasonably credible and has some interesting revelations which you mention.

If it's true then it would make Fukino a liar when she claimed she had "personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record". But as hearsay it falls far short of any kind of proof that she lied.

Since the entire credibility of the certification rests on Fukino's statement, it's a big responsibility for one person to hold with no other person on earth verifying it and now a governor who is a big Obama fan, supposedly failing to verify it.

The interview is very relevant to this thread, thanks again.

Originally posted by aptness

Originally posted by IamCorrect
Certifications of Live Birth were given to people who were born at home, or to people who were born overseas and whose parents brought them back to the islands.

Is there any evidence that those people on category 2 would get Hawaii listed as their birth place? Have any citations of Hawaiian statutes for that? Or am I supposed to take WND’s word for it?

Yes, there is evidence. In the first 65 seconds of the following clip, Dr. Jerome Corsi explains this, and even gives an example of a famous person who was not born in Hawaii and yet was given a short form birth certificate.

reply to post by IamCorrect


Yes, that's why the Long Form is so relevant..
In some cases a short form could of been issued regardless of where a person is born..
The Long Form would show the delivering Doctors name and signature..
Therefore be provable as true...

reply to post by IamCorrect
Yes basically the dispute here is that the state of Hawaii says the birth certificate wouldn't show Hawaii as the place of birth if someone was born elsewhere, which is true if nobody ever lied. What Corsi suggested is that some people thought it advantageous to state that their birthplace was the US even if they were born elsewhere, so that if the claim was a lie and the state of Hawaii DOH accepted the lie, then the records would show Hawaii as the birthplace even if it wasn't. Then you get into the standards of evidence aptnerss questioned in the other thread, like what would the state require to verify the claim wasn't a lie, like midwife signature, prenatal care records, etc.

But none of that should be a question if Obama was born at Kapiolani as governor Lingle claimed, since there would be a birth record from Kapiolani. Nobody knows if there is a Kapiolani birth record though, since Lingle's claim was never verified, and this episode with Abercrombie has cast some additional doubt on that claim over and above the doubts that already existed about why Fukino never followed the governor's instructions to confirm it.

Originally posted by IamCorrect
Yes, there is evidence. In the first 65 seconds of the following clip, Dr. Jerome Corsi explains this, and even gives an example of a famous person who was not born in Hawaii and yet was given a short form birth certificate.

He is apparently talking about Sun Yat-sen. The birth certificate, found here was issued in 1904, half a century before Hawaii was a state. And in any event, the document clearly states “Certificate of Hawaiian Birth.” That doesn’t really help your theory that certificate and certification are different and only the certificate has the ‘right’ information, does it?

For this "conspiracy" to be remotely true, it assumes that the government isn't capable of creating a fake birth certificate and planting it wherever they need to.

I guess all of the government resources are tied up on UFO reverse-engineering, chem-trials, mind control, 9/11 covering up, and the lizard overlords keeping their human shape? (I heard it takes a lot of concentration).

They must just not have enough left to forge a piece of paper.

Originally posted by aptness

Originally posted by IamCorrect
Yes, there is evidence. In the first 65 seconds of the following clip, Dr. Jerome Corsi explains this, and even gives an example of a famous person who was not born in Hawaii and yet was given a short form birth certificate.

He is apparently talking about Sun Yat-sen. The birth certificate, found here was issued in 1904, half a century before Hawaii was a state. And in any event, the document clearly states “Certificate of Hawaiian Birth.” That doesn’t really help your theory that certificate and certification are different and only the certificate has the ‘right’ information, does it?

First, you point out the document was from a different era.

Then you say it might not prove the birth location.

As you pointed out, it's from a different era, so it doesn't have the same information as a 1961 Kapiolani birth certificate would have, like doctor's signature. So while a 1904 birth certificate may not have a doctor's signature, a 1961 birth certificate should have one. I think in 1904, a lot of people weren't even born in hospitals.

Only 3 or 4 American presidents were born in hospitals, the reason we don't know if it's 3 or 4 is because we don't know where Obama was born.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
As you pointed out, it's from a different era, so it doesn't have the same information as a 1961 Kapiolani birth certificate would have, like doctor's signature.

I’m not even talking about a doctor’s signature. Yes I point out it’s from a different era because how reasonable it is that when Hawaii became a state its laws and statutes remained unaltered?

Further, this is from the Department of Health website, regarding the Certificate of Hawaiian Birth:

The Certificate of Hawaiian Birth program was established in 1911, during the territorial era, to register a person born in Hawaii who was one year old or older and whose birth had not been previously registered in Hawaii. The Certificate of Hawaiian Birth Program was terminated in 1972, during the statehood era.

So I guess you birthers should add the claim that Barack Obama is at least one year older than he says he is, huh?

Originally posted by aptness
So I guess you birthers should add the claim that Barack Obama is at least one year older than he says he is, huh?

No need to invoke that program. He could be less than a year old if they reported a home birth.

It really boils down to standards of evidence for a home birth. If they have the prenatal care records and midwife's report and signature and the state accepts that, then that's as close to an equivalent the doctor's signature as we're going to see for a home birth.

But Lingle claimed Obama was born at Kapiolani so all the home birth arguments should be moot, except that Fukino contradicted Lingle's claim by saying the governor never gave her any special instructions when the governor says she DID give special instructions to Fukino to include Kapiolani in the press release.

Originally posted by RestingInPieces
For this "conspiracy" to be remotely true, it assumes that the government isn't capable of creating a fake birth certificate and planting it wherever they need to.

I guess all of the government resources are tied up on UFO reverse-engineering, chem-trials, mind control, 9/11 covering up, and the lizard overlords keeping their human shape? (I heard it takes a lot of concentration).

They must just not have enough left to forge a piece of paper.

True, and yet Obama still doesn't want it shown..
Odd huh?