In June, 2009, The Daily Pen reported that the State of Hawaii had undergone "widespread" internal policy changes in response to the controversy over Barack Obama's covert natal history. In our piece, "The Questionable Legitimacy of the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’", we found that the State of Hawaii's Department of Health, under the direction of Obama sympathizer, Chiyome Fukino, was changing the format, disclosure process and appearance of its natal documentation forms, deviating from the federal NVSD "Certificate of Live Birth" published in America for the past century. At the time, we questioned top level administrative personnel at the Hawaiian agency requesting details on the decision process and the identity of those involved. Since then, we have discovered some shocking coincidences which coordinate with what can only be concluded as an effort on the part of the municipal authority of the State of Hawaii to synthetically conform their vital record forms and processes in order to stem the rising tide of inquisition into Obama's true natal identity.
Never have three letters confused more people in the history of American politics. Simply substituting ‘ion’ for ‘ate’ and, viola! Obama was afforded a “legitimate” birth record according to the rogue policies of an island state's apologist municipality. However, the document is only legitimate in the minds of those promoting his enthronement while denying the vastness of his covert natal identity.
Other states and federal agencies, both within and outside the State of Hawaii refuse to recognize the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ as a primary source of identification. Others only recognize it as a secondary source of a municipally issued documentation used for determining an individual’s identification, but not for determining natural born citizenship. Until June of 2009, this document was not officially accepted when obtaining a Driver’s License or getting a passport. Therefore, it is absurd to think it is acceptable for determining one’s natural born citizenship and certainly, for determining the constitutional eligibility of a candidate to assume the highest elected office, which is arguably, the most powerful position in the world. Right?
The Hawaiian "Certification of Live Birth" does not show the birthplace of the parents or their citizenship status, nor does it allow for the verification of the place of birth of the individual by way of providing a facility and/or an eyewitness to the birth.
Vital statistics were officially collected in the United States for the first time in1850. However, the national birth registration regions were officially created in 1915 as the national data collection structure for census, and demographics records was formalized. In 1961, as stated in the official Vital Statistic Report of the U.S., the standard ‘Certificate of Live Birth’ is the prescribed form of legal birth documentation issued through the U.S. Department of Health, National Vital Statistics Division. It evolved throughout 110 years of input from federal and state agencies seeking to improve the collection, accuracy and discernment of natal statistics in the United States. It was made in close collaboration with the Public Health Conference on Records and Statistics and was recommended to the States for adoption as of January 1, 1956. In Hawaii, however, the state’s Department of Health has gone astray from this federal standard.
HAWAII ISSUES NATIVE CERTIFICATES FOR CHILDREN BORN OUTSIDE OF THE UNITED STATES
State of Hawaii Revised Statute [§338-17.8] states the following:
(a) Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.
(b) Proof of legal residency shall be submitted to the director of health in any manner that the director shall deem appropriate. The director of health may also adopt any rules pursuant to chapter 91 that he or she may deem necessary or proper to prevent fraudulent applications for birth certificates and to require any further information or proof of events necessary for completion of a birth certificate..."
Therefore, the questions must be answered. Did the state of Hawaii issue Barack Obama a birth certificate after he provided the director of the Department of Health proof that his parents were residents of the state of Hawaii within one year previous to his birth? Does the state of Hawaii consider their form of birth certificate adequate for meeting the requirements of federal law as an original birth record?
According to this Hawaiian law, it is absolutely possible. According to HRS 338 and Administrative Rule 91, the state of Hawaii gives itself permission, through the autonomous authority of the director of the Department of Health, to issue native birth documentation to foreign-born children and, thereby doing so, declare those children as natural-born by proxy of the parent's declaration of Hawaiian residence. The actual location of the birth is irrelevent to the municipal authorities of the state of Hawaii, completely contradicting the authority of the U.S. Constitution's mandate that a candidate for the office of the President be a natural born citizen.
Even more shocking is the revelation that this can be done under the sole discretion of the director of the Department of Health. Therefore, in creating an independently published document called the ‘Certification of Live Birth’, the state of Hawaii has deviated from the original form and intended function of the federally issued record, as it was implemented by the U.S. Department of Health since the early 1900's. This fact is unarguable.
Hawaii is the only state in America which allows this. As early as 1906, the state of Hawaii began to adopt procedures which allowed its indigenous population to apply for and receive a certificate of Hawaiian birth, which was the pre-statehood form of birth documentation intended to account for anyone found living in Hawaii after the island nation became a territory of the United States. Vastly unmonitored immigration and permeable, marine accessible borders allowed virtually anyone to declare themselves Hawaiian born for more than 60 years prior to statehood, regardless of their actual place of birth. The "Certificate of Hawaiian Birth Program" was formally enacted from around 1906 to 1972, lasting a full 11 years after Obama was allegedly born. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to consider that Obama's parents could have taken advantage an extremely "loose" birth registration process. Records show that nearly 240,000 people received native birth documents from the state of Hawaii from 1959 to 1972 of which, as declared in the U.S. Report on Vital Statistics, were NOT natural born citizens of the United States. Most were expatriates fleeing political persecution from China, Siam, Japan and Korea. Many were communist sympathizers fleeing mainland America during Congressional investigations of "un-American activities."
Thus, the credibility of Hawaii’s form of birth documentation, in its formal capacity to conclusively define and clarify the natural born citizenship and authentic natal identity of a presidential candidate, is now highly suspect.
The Hawaiian Department of Health began a new policy some time around the Y2K (Year 2000) changeover when indexing and computer file systems underwent a revised dating format. At that time, Hawaii began to issue the ‘Certification of Live Birth’ and eventually stopped issuing copies of the federal ‘Certificate of Live Birth’, a time conveniently and conspicuously coinciding with the controversy over Obama's secret natal history sometime in early to mid 2007. It appears as though the state of Hawaii contrived new administrative rules governing the procedures for publishing, processing and issuing vital records, and it did this as a direct and obvious consequence of Obama's request for official birth documentation, under the guise of preventing identity theft.
COMPARISON OF HAWAIIAN BIRTH DOCUMENT TYPES
There are 55 Input Boxes Available on the Standard U.S. "Certificate Of Live Birth" Application vs. the mere 24 input boxes of Barack Obama's Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’. The number of boxes on the standard, federal U.S. "Certificate Of Live Birth" were reviewed and endorsed by the PUBLIC HEALTH CONFERENCE ON RECORDS AND STATISTICS as the best possible consortium of information providing for vital information on births in the United States. The following is a list of data required by the NVSD for the determination of Natural Born Status which is not available on Obama's Hawaiian "CertificATION of Live Birth".
Hospital or Facility of Birth
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Address of Facility of Birth
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Inside Corporate Limits of City?
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Married Name of Mother (Last)
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Birthplace of Mother
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Age of Mother
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Social Security Number of Mother
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Street Address of Mother
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Mother's birth inside Corporate limits?
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Resident City or Town ofNot Provided
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Resident County of Mother
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Resident State of Mother
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Birthplace of Father (State, Country)
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Age of Father
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Social Security Number of Father
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Occupation of Father
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Type of Industry or business
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Signature of Parent or Informant or Witness
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Date of Parent or Informant Signature
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Signature M.D. or Medical Attendant
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Date of Signature of M.D. or M.A.
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Residence of Physician
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Physician License Number
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Name of State/Provincial Registrar at Time of Birth
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Signature or Stamp of State Official at Time of Birth
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Date of Recording by State Official at Time of Birth
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Name of Local Registrar at Time of Birth
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Date of Regstrar's Credential Expiration
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Plural or Single Birth Check Box
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
If Plural, Which Child Is This?
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Legitimacy
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
Photo Image of Bearer (Optional)
Provided on the federal USDH, National Vital Statisics Division “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH”
Not Provided on Obama’s Hawaiian “CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH”
As indicated in the U.S. Report On Vital Statistics - Natality, Volume 1, this information indicates essential components which must be included for full transparency of Natural Born Citizenship. If any of this information is “not provided”, Natural Born Citizenship is in doubt.
FUKINO ORDERS THE HAWAIIAN DOCUMENT TITLE TO BE CHANGED TO MATCH THE FEDERAL VERSION
There is an indeterminable period of time during which a requester could get both the federal and state forms of birth documentation in the State of Hawaii. The state of Hawaii’s Department of Health refuses to cooperate with inquiry asking for details about its evolving file management system and the possible assistance it provided for the ‘processing and approval" of Obama’s birth records. But, most importantly, we are left to conclude that there are covert reasons why the state of Hawaii and its municipalities found it unimportant, unnecessary or insecure to provide the names of the facility and the names of the eyewitnesses of Obama’s birth. Complicating the matter, the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ is also issued for every other form of ‘Original (Vault) Birth Certificate’ previously mentioned, including a ‘Certificate of Hawaiian Birth’ which also does not provide the names of the eyewitnesses or the facility of birth.
Regardless of its content, the director of the Hawaiian Department of Health ordered the document header title to be changed to match the federal version of the NVSD's "Certificate of Live Birth". This was done in an attempt to further protect Obama with yet another layer of ambiguity and propoganda against the public, and create more opacity in the discrepencies between the two documents.
According to a report released by Western Journalism the state of Hawaii has now even attempted to camouflage the history of the HEADER TITLE of the “Certification of Live Birth” document’s identity by changing it to the exact same name as the federal document. The report states:
"On June 12, 2008 the title for this form was "Certification of Live Birth". The
title for the form that a family recently
received in the first week of June 2009 is "Certificate of Live Birth". I called
The Dept of Health and confirmed that the title of the form had been changed.
The bureaucrat that I spoke to said the change had been made “recently”, but
could not or would not tell me when. Sometime between June 12, 2008 and the
first week of June 2009 the Hawaiian Dept of Health changed the title of this
abbreviated form from “Certification of Live Birth” to “Certificate of Live
Birth“. Why?"
"The use of the word “Certificate” rather than “Certification” makes the form feel somewhat more like
a traditional birth certificate than the “Certification of Live Birth” that the
Daily Kos website and subsequently the Obama campaign posted on the Internet
even though, like the “Certification“, it also lacks any information about the
hospital, doctor, or midwife. This renaming of the document will be very
convenient for the Hawaiian Dept of Health in future stonewalling should any
legal pressure be brought against them to produce Obama’s “Certificate of Live
Birth”. Instead of producing the original “Certificate of Live Birth”, they will
produce the “Certification of Live Birth” form that the Dept of Health has now
renamed a “Certificate of Live Birth” and claim that they are doing so “in
accordance with state policies and procedures” in the words of the Dept’s
Director, Dr. Chiyome Fukino."
Above all, it must be noted, within the state of Hawaii, the federal "Certificate" form and the Hawaiian "Certification" form are vastly different in title, quantity of information, presentation, publication, content and source. Simply altering the HEADER TITLE of the document does not validate the document or endow it with any more authority to clarify the natural born status of Barack Obama or authenticate his actual identity unless, of course, it also is altered to include the same information presented on the federal, National Vital Statistics Division form of the "Certificate of Live Birth".
Altering the HEADER TITLE of the "Certification of Live Birth" to match the federal version of the "Certificate of Live Birth" is little more than a blatant attempt on the part of Obama sympathizers working within the municipality of the State of Hawaii to create an "appearance of authenticity" in its birth documentation process by associating their worthless, fallow, inadequate document with the U.S. Department of Health's federal version. The most troubling and divisive fact about the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ is that it can be issued by the State of Hawaii without the disclosure of the source documentation from which is was published. Even its name is insidious because it remains an evolving entity seemingly morphing into exactly what Barack Hussein Obama needs to continue this circumvention of the U.S. Constition. The final verdict is that the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ omits necessary biographical information which, therefore, prevents document from accurately conveying the natural born citizenship of the bearer. No effort on the part of any municipal official to change the HEADER TITLE is going to change this fact.
As it pertains to citizenship, whereas the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’’ provides a recognized date of birth, a name of the bearer along with the testimonial location of birth, as they are recognized and provided on the application form according to the statutes of the State of Hawaii, under the authority of the Director of the Department of Health, the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ does not provide corroborated biographical information such as social security numbers, addresses, facility of birth, parent’s birth place, parents occupations, name’s and signatures of attending officials, birth weight, birth length, or race of the child.
The Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’’ does not provide the type, origin or manner by which the original documentation from which the information in the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ was published. It does not indicate whether the ‘Original (Vault) Birth Certificate’ is a ‘Certificate of Live Birth’, a ‘Certificate of Hawaiian Birth’ or a ‘Certificate of Foreign Birth’. And, it certainly does not indicate if the ‘original birth record’ it could be published from was issued by the State of Hawaii through the statutory authority of the Director of the Department of Health, by way of legal hearing or by way of Hawaii’s Late Birth Registration policy. The Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ does not actually and conclusively provide fact-based information about the location of the birth. For most agencies and services requiring a legal form of identification, unlike eligibility for the office of the Presidency, the omission of this particular personal information is acceptable simply because the place of birth and natural born status are not pertinent to the acquisition of permission to drive or travel.
The more we learn about the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’, how it is produced, and the ominous, secretive, ambiguous, covert circumstances and standards under which it is provided by the State of Hawaii, the more apparent it becomes that this document is disgracefully inadequate for determining the depth of identity required to confirm or disqualify a candidate for the U.S. presidency.
A Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’, now called a Hawaiian "Certificate of Live Birth", is not an ‘Original (Vault) Birth Certificate’, nor is it even a copy, of it. It is different than a ‘Certificate of Live Birth’ because it is not produced in the same way, under the same circumstances, verified by the same classification of personnel. A Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ is an independently published document summarizing the information on an ‘Original (Vault) Birth Certificate’ in a “short form” format. This means that a Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ is not the result of a copy from the original document. It is created by an individual working in the Hawaiian Department of Health’s Office of Vital Records office after accessing the ‘Original (Vault) Birth Certificate’, transcribing a limited amount of information from it, and then manually typing that information into the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ computer format. It is then printed and released to the requester.
A Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ contains fewer details and less information about the birth than a ‘Certificate of Live Birth’. As an independently published record, the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ is a document authenticated only by the Department of Health, Office of Vital Records personnel as opposed to a hospital that publishes the ‘Certificate of Live Birth’, or a ‘Certificate of Hawaiian Birth’ issuable by the authority of the Director of the Health Department.
Whenever possible the attending physician, midwife, nurse or deliverer of the child, not the mother, authenticates the ‘Original (Vault) Birth Certificate’. It is important to emphasize that the personnel at the State of Hawaii’s Office of Vital Records are only applying information from documents they are transcribing, they do not witness the vital event or verify the validity or the source information used for the contents of Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’, and they should never make judgments regarding citizenship by the contents of these vital records. This includes making conclusions about the relevance, affirmation or preponderance of evidence in the document’s ability to determine citizenship or the document’s capacity to determine eligibility to serve as an elected official. The Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ document does not legally do this, therefore, those creating or handling such documents shouldn’t either.
Theoretically, there is a valid justification to challenge the State of Hawaii’s use of the word “Live” in the header title of the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ document for two reasons. The state of Hawaii is not allowed by the U.S. Department of Health to represent the evidence of a "live birth" with an original document without the witness of the birth by a medical professional who actually delivered the live child. Hawaii not only issues the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ in the place of an original ‘Certificate of Live Birth’ (births witnessed by medical professional as exhibiting the characteristics of a "live" birth), it also issues it in place of ‘Certificates of Hawaiian birth’ which are not attested by any eyewitnesses to the live birth. The other reason is that no physician or medical professional qualified to determine a "live birth" has affixed a signature or professional identification such as a medical license number, on the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’.
Since the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ is an independently published document with substantially voided information than a federal ‘Certificate of Live Birth’, it does not provide an accurate visual concurrence with the ‘Original (Vault) Birth Certificate’s' more detailed information. A federal version of a ‘Certificate of Live Birth’ will give a better understanding of the ‘Original (Vault) Birth Certificate’ than a Hawaiian ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’. A Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ is merely a surrogate conveyance of truncated information provided through the Department of Health, Office of Vital Records in lieu of allowing public access or release of the ‘Original (Vault) Birth Certificate’ or a ‘Certificate of Live Birth’, a ‘Certificate of Hawaiian Birth’ or any support documentation.
The state of Hawaii has endowed an extraordinary amount of federal power to the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’. Every birth record, every process, every official involved, and every piece of personal information is impregnated and hidden within the authority, but never revealed, through this document. Never in the history of vital statistics has one document been so ambiguously empowered to conceal the natural born identity of its bearer. Statements from the State of Hawaii about their records processes and systems desperately beg for further clarification. If the State of Hawaii authenticates both the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ and the federal U.S. ‘Certificate of Live Birth’, why was there a necessity mandate that recipients receive only a Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’? And, when did the inception of this document occur in relation to Barack Obama’s need for it?
The Department of Hawaiian Homelands agency advises against using the Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ as a primary source of identification for those applying for native land rights. In fact, it mysteriously changed the content of its website to coincide with the alteration of the HEADER TITLE of the Certification of Live Birth. The Department of Hawaiian Homelands website now states the following:
“The ‘Certificate of Live Birth’ (federal U.S. version) has more information which is useful for genealogical purposes as compared to the ‘Certification of Live Birth’ (state Hawaiian version), which is a computer-generated printout that provides specific details of a person’s birth.”
“Although ‘Original (Vault) Birth Certificate’s (Certificates of Live Birth) are preferred for their greater detail, the State Department of Health (DOH) no longer issues Certificates of Live Birth. When a request is made for a copy of a birth certificate, the DOH issues a ‘Certification of Live Birth’’.
First of all, the Department of Hawaiian Homelands describes the ‘Certification of Live Birth’ as a document that “provides specific details of a person’s birth.” This is an underwhelming endorsement of the document which Obama has pushed, and an indication that it actually does not provide details at all, but rather general information in far less detail than what is actually presented in the Certificate of Live Birth on record.
Apparently, the government of the State of Hawaii feels a stronger priority to establish Hawaiian’s genealogical right to purchase native lands than it feels about all of America’s genealogical right to elect a constitutionally eligible President.
If the decision to issue ‘Certifications of Live Birth’ is for the enhancement of identity protection, an explanation is warranted in Obama’s case. By what standards does the State of Hawaii determine which personal data is vulnerable to identity theft, and which is not? Most importantly, with regard to the establishment of authority in this matter, just because the State Of Hawaii issued both documents, this does not obligate the U.S. Constitution to agree. The President belongs to all American’s, not just those in Hawaii to be approved only by municipal standards in Hawaii. Isn't this the exact argument put forth by those opposing the Arizona Immigration law of 2010? The people of America, not the government of Hawaii, determine the standard of birth record acceptable for determining a candidate’s eligibility to be President.
Until June of 2009, the Department of Hawaiian Homelands website stated the following:
"In order to process your application for identification as a native Hawaiian, the Department of Hawaiian Homelands utilizes information that is found only on the Original (Long Form) Vault Birth Certificate (‘Certificate of Live Birth’, not ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’), which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of birth than the ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’ (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Long Form Birth Certificate will save you time and money since the computer-generated ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’ requires additional verification…"
In the state of Hawaii, as in most states, the federal ‘Certificate of Live Birth’ is irrefutable and is never rejected when applying for jobs, passports, Hawaiian land purchase, citizenship or registration as a student, as long as the information provided is attested to by three licensed officials which, in virtually all cases, are a licensed medical professional qualified to the determine the characteristics of a “live birth” under the state’s revised statutes; a licensed professional given oversight responsibility for the creation, maintenance and storage of vital records within the state’s Department of Health and a licensed professional qualified to prepare and issue such records to the public. The ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’ on the other hand, requires more extensive verification and other forms of back up identification for completing these applications.
Therefore, in terms of defining constitutional eligibility for a candidate to be elected as President of the United States, there is no other document more important than an official, authenticated Original (Vault), federal template of an NVSD originated "Certificate of Live Birth" issued in the form prescribed by the U.S. Department of Health, National Vital Statistics Division through the medical verification process of an attending licensed medical or natalogical professional who witnessed the birth, or who examined the records of the birth at the time of the vital event and approved their authenticity. Any other form of birth documentation is insufficient for resolving the essential questions which have been constitutionally determined as the qualifications needed to be President.
To date, Barack Obama has failed to meet this standard. Not only has he failed to produce proper documentation supporting his eligibility, the State of Hawaii has never actually confirmed that they issued the ‘‘Certification of Live Birth’’ to him, which was posted to his website and displayed to members of the press. These are just more reasons to doubt the natal history and natural born identity of Obama. By this reason alone, his eligibility to be President of the United States is suspect and egregiously disreputable, if not outright illegitimate.
Obama is hiding something about his natal information. This is obvious and undeniable. But, what exactly is he hiding? Regardless of the facts he is concealing, one truth remains steadfastly undeniable. He will never attain the level of legitimacy required to be recognized by history as a formidable leader, within the roster of Presidents who came before him, until he comes clean with the American people. Under the weight of this ambiguous authenticity, Barack Obama will only be remembered as a pretend, shadow figure in the history of American politics. Nothing he accomplishes can be actual. Nothing he says can be believed and nothing he becomes can be considered real.
No comments:
Post a Comment