Here is proof that Obama has not released his long form birth certificate yet

Very interesting site, no11 in a list of 50 reasons to examine Obama'selligibility - even Hawaii refuses to accept the short form BC as reliable evidence

11. Department of Hawaiian Native Homelands. The Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” was found to be so unreliable in clarifying the bearer’s legal and demographic identity that the State of Hawaii’s own Department of Native Homelands refused to accept it as a primary source of identification for its applicants seeking to purchase Hawaiian land reserved for genealogically native Hawaiians. Before 2010, the agency’s website stated:


“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…”


americangrandjury.org...

reply to post by JohhnyBGood




Wow, you birthers are too easy. Please go back and read your source fully. The short form is invalid to prove a certain level of Hawaiian native lineage going back generations. Amazing.

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

It is cute how your source edits and editorializes without offering a link to the department of hawaiian homelands but please do go look into it even further so we can all laugh together about this one. K?

But then they changed it,,,,,,,,,,,

Only after it was determined that the Department of Hawaiian Homeland’s policy against the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” conflicted with another Hawaiian state agency, the Department of Health’s, political endorsement of Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president, was the policy changed and the wording against the credibility of the document scrubbed from its website. This led many to accuse the State of Hawaii government of selling out to protect against exposing the ineligibility of Obama rather than upholding the eligibility of thousands of potential native land owners in Hawaii. Some actually accused Hawaii’s land management of selling out to a liar while native Hawaiians were at risk of being deprived of their right to purchase native lands because non-natives could now use a less credible version of identification when applying for a land purchase.

americangrandjury.org...

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
This is a non-issue for simple-minded partisans to latch onto because they haven't the ability or knowledge to do any real research and come up with reasonable criticisms of the current potus.

This is my biggest problem with this entire thing. It so occupies these simple minds that it is going to be their very downfall. I have these conversations with people I know and they go a little something like this.

How do you feel about Obama's economic policies?

He is driving this country so deep into debt and killing it for our children.

So when you talk to people about voting in 2012, what is your argument?

Well first of all, he was born in Kenya and he spent 2 million hiding his birth certificate and he was raised in Indonesia in a Madrassa and....

So about those econimic polices? You will find a better candidate because you are really thinking about that stuff, right?

I don't have to! He is a foreign born, Marxist usurper, wake up man!!!!!

Well good luck with all that. You and the other 23% of the entire country that think that keep preaching to yourselves about that. Let me know how it goes. I thought there were serious problems with what he was doing to this country but I don't have all day to wait for you to get to them to covince me and since it is this hard already, I want to vote for him now just because your only argument against him is a set of old internet lies.

edit on 10-4-2011 by Sinnthia because: (no reason given)

Maybe you're not asking the right question. The eligibility issue is an important issue - but more important is to get people to see this criminal mafia for what they are.

Originally posted by Sinnthia
reply to post by JohhnyBGood

 

Wow, you birthers are too easy. Please go back and read your source fully. The short form is invalid to prove a certain level of Hawaiian native lineage going back generations.

Amazing.

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

It is cute how your source edits and editorializes without offering a link to the department of hawaiian homelands but please do go look into it even further so we can all laugh together about this one. K?

edit on 10-4-2011 by Sinnthia because: (no reason given)

Would it be possible for you to discuss this without continually insulting 'birthers' - are you capable of that?

Ex-Hawaii official denounces 'ludicrous' birther claims

The Hawaiian state health official who personally reviewed Barack Obama's original birth certificate has affirmed again that the document is "real" and denounced "conspiracy theorists" in the so-called "birther" movement for continuing to spread bogus claims about the issue. ...

As the top Hawaiian official in charge of state health records in 2008, when the issue of Obama's birth first arose, Fukino said she thought she had put the matter to rest. Contacted by NBC, Fukino expanded on previous public statements and made two key points when asked about Trump's recent comments.

The first is that the original so-called "long form" birth certificate — described by Hawaiian officials as a "record of live birth" — absolutely exists, located in a bound volume in a file cabinet on the first floor of the state Department of Health. Fukimo said she has personally inspected it — twice. The first time was in late October 2008, during the closing days of the presidential campaign, when the communications director for the state's then Republican governor, Linda Lingle (who appointed Fukino) asked if she could make a public statement in response to claims then circulating on the Internet that Obama was actually born in Kenya.

Before she would do so, Fukino said, she wanted to inspect the files — and did so, taking with her the state official in charge of vital records. She found the original birth record, properly numbered, half typed and half handwritten, and signed by the doctor who delivered Obama, located in the files. She then put out a public statement asserting to the document's validity. She later put out another public statement in July 2009 — after reviewing the original birth record a second time.

Her second point — one she made repeatedly in the interview — is that the shorter, computer generated "certification of live birth" that was obtained by the Obama campaign in 2007 and has since been publicly released is the standard document that anybody requesting their birth certificate from the state of Hawaii would receive from the health department. ...

Hawaiian officials say that the certification is, in fact, only one piece of abundant evidence of Obama's birth in Hawaii. Joshua Wisch, a spokesman for the Hawaii attorney general's office, noted that a public index of vital records, available for inspection in a bound volume at the Health Department's Office of Health Status Monitoring, lists a male child named "Obama II, Barack Hussein" as having been born in the state.

But Wisch, the spokesman for the attorney general's office, said state law does not in fact permit the release of "vital records," including an original "record of live birth" — even to the individual whose birth it records.

"It's a Department of Health record and it can't be released to anybody," he said. Nor do state laws have any provision that authorizes such records to be photocopied, Wisch said. If Obama wanted to personally visit the state health department, he would be permitted to inspect his birth record, Wisch said.

But if he or anybody else wanted a copy of their birth records, they would be told to fill out the appropriate state form and receive back the same computer generated "certification of live birth" form that everybody else gets — which is exactly what Obama did four years ago.

I realize none of this will make a difference to the birthers, I’m only posting it because it was published today.

Originally posted by wcitizen
Would it be possible for you to discuss this without continually insulting 'birthers' - are you capable of that?

I am not totally certain what insult you are pointing to in that post but I will be more than happy to treat birthers like my grandmother if they will finally agree to stop posting old debunked lies and new made up lies, and well maybe just all lies. As soon as that happens, I will be so nice your head will explode! I promise.

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood

But then they changed it,,,,,,,,,,,

They changed it to say exactly what, why, and when? Try these sources instead of your homemade website.

Department of Hawaiian Homelands

Hawaii.gov

Use either of those sources to make your point and you might be able to convince me of whatever you are trying to say. They changed it and that means????? Remember your source this time. Thanks.

Originally posted by wcitizen
Maybe you're not asking the right question. The eligibility issue is an important issue - but more important is to get people to see this criminal mafia for what they are.

Obviously my asking for a valid complaint about Obama to be met with lies is my fault for using a faulty question. That makes way too much sense if you ask me. If it is that important, then that only furthers my point. Instead of eploiting them for the criminal syndicate you claim, you are here repeating lies about where he was born. You have those priorities all in line do ya?

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood

But then they changed it,,,,,,,,,,,

They changed it to say exactly what, why, and when? Try these sources instead of your homemade website.

Department of Hawaiian Homelands

Hawaii.gov

Use either of those sources to make your point and you might be able to convince me of whatever you are trying to say. They changed it and that means????? Remember your source this time. Thanks.

So.........which Hospital was Bazza born in then? - which one has got the plaque that proudly proclaims it as the messiahs birthplace?

17. Hawaii’s Rogue Document.

The standard, U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth” document template has been slightly revised by various states for the purpose of meeting identification and formatting needs, such as concealing the social security numbers of the parents. However, no state, except one, has ever reduced the overall quantity of information contained about the bearer’s natal identity, such that it is now impossible to determine their natural-born status, and then used that reduction of vital information in an endorsed document form. Only the State of Hawaii has created this form of independently published, digital documentation.

18. Hawaii Violates Federal Guidelines.

In the entire 110 year history of the standard, official, federal, U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth” document’s existence, only the state of Hawaii has gone astray from the standard version to such a degree that it actually conceals one’s full natal identity rather than reveals it. When comparing document forms, the use of the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” is an unauthorized reduction of content otherwise prescribed to confirm the bearer’s natal identity and, essential to verifying one’s eligibility to be a candidate for president, the bearer’s natural born status.

19. Exploitation of Hawaii’s Lost Culture.

Because of its remote, water-locked, geographic characteristics; its tumultuous indigenous history; and a vulnerable culture altered by a transference of sovereignty in the late 1800’s, the Hawaiian islands gained a reputation for maintaining a vague process for documenting immigration, vital events and indigenous population. Historical archives dating between 1890 and 1941 reveal that the Hawaiian Islands served as an unofficial, but widely pursued, sanctuary for thousands of foreign expatriates seeking protection from political persecution in China, Japan, Southeast Asiatic nations, the Middle East and, later, the United States. This multicultural instability resulted in the implementation of less than thorough procedures for recording and differentiating native born, immigrant and indigenous populations. One example of this surrogate nativity was granted to a Mr. Sun Yat Sen, a Chinese expatriate who received an official Certificate of Hawaiian Birth in 1904 stating that his birth had taken place in Hawaii in November, 1870. However, later evidence revealed that Mr. Sun’s birth had actually occurred in China in 1866. Archives reveal that the state of Hawaii has provided similar documentation to thousands of immigrants over the years without ever confirming their age, the birth place or their actual identity.This murky process was further complicated when Hawaii became a state of the U.S. which demanded that it begin implementing the federal documentation standards for U.S. citizens as well, in 1959. Vulnerabilities in Hawaii’s documentation process created passive conditions which allowed unidentified inhabitants to later proclaim any identity, or multiple identities, they desired to serve their individual interests.

20. Hawaii’s Communist Past.

Based on investigations in the 1950’s and 1960’s, a disproportionate concentration of pro-communist activity became a part of Hawaiian culture. This is substantiated by an increase in the population and activity of communist sympathizers identified by the House Committee on Un-American Activities hearings conducted after WWII, during the beginning of the cold war between the U.S. and communist Russia. Evidence of pro-communist presence in Hawaii can be found in publications like the Honolulu Record in which one of Obama’s communist mentors, Frank Marshal Davis was a columnist. Obama Sr. would later return to Kenya sometime in the mid 1960’s to promote his communist economic theories and work in government with his friend and leader of Kenya’s communist KANU party, Tom Mboya.

21. Hawaiian Document Proven Deficient.

In August, 2008, a former U.S. Department of Health, Office of Vital Statistics Registrar stated that the Hawaiian “Certification of Live Birth” cannot be considered an original birth certificate created at the time of occurrence of the birth because “…it does not contain the signature of the licensed medical professional qualified to determine the characteristics of a live birth in accordance with administrative requirements established by the U.S. Department of Health, National Vital Statistics Division, and it does not contain the name and location of the hospital which issued the original record, which would be a U.S. “Certificate of Live Birth” if the child was born in the United States.” Further investigation of Hawaii’s revised statutes reveal that the Hawaiian Department of Health not only contends with federal law, it also contradicts its own self-declared authority to issue falsified birth nativity under HRS 338-17.

22. Hawaii’s Permission To Violate Federal Law.

Hawaii Revised Statute HRS 338-17.8 states: “Certificates for children born out of State.(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.(c) The fee for each application for registration shall be established by rule adopted pursuant to chapter 91. [L 1982, c 182, §1]” The law permits anyone born to parents who claimed Hawaii as their residence within one year of their birth, at any time before or after the enactment of the law, regardless of the actual location of the birth, to receive an original birth record which states that the location of birth is Hawaii, and, therefore, occurred in the U.S. Hawaiian lawmakers have confirmed that the law is not constrained to the date of birth. It is applicable to the date of application for the certificate. This means this law would enable Obama, anytime after the age of 21 to apply for and receive a newly created original Hawaiian birth certificate after providing evidence that his mother or father merely resided in Hawaii for one year prior to his birth. He could have applied for this certificate any time since is parents are known to have resided in Hawaii since 1960. He could have been born outside of the U.S., however, the State of Hawaii is obligated by law to grant him an original birth certificate stating that Hawaii is his birth place simply because he was able to show that his parents claimed Hawaii as their residence. Moreover, the evidence provided with Obama’s application may not be reviewed by any third party under this law. Only the Director of the Department of Health is granted with the authority to determine the validity and deadlines required in providing such evidence. In essence, under Administrative Rule 91, the state of Hawaii has empowered a state-level, municipal employee to determine the federal, natural-born status and therefore, the Constitutional eligibility, of any individual, even a sworn enemy of the United States, seeking the most powerful office in the world.

americangrandjury.org...

round and round they go.

the point isnt to come to a conclusion, but merely to keep the meme alive.

anything other than substantive critique of the individual and the larger system.

Do you suppose this might be why the founders put the 'natural born' clause in there?

Obama's dangerous Islamist tilt

.....................The only consistent thread in this chain of events is this: Obama takes sides in the Islamic world only when the dissidents are hostile to U.S. interests or seeking to overthrow a U.S. ally, not when they support U.S. goals. This Islamist tilt is also seen in many of his appointments, particularly in the State Department and national-security staff.

We do not have to think Obama is a secret Muslim to call him out on his pro-Islamist foreign policy. Plenty of American leftists have been in that camp for decades. In fact, what seems to be happening in U.S. politics is a three-party merger of leftist ideology, one-world multiculturalism and Islamist interests. What is emerging is a strange stew of leftist sympathies for every policy tilt that is anti-capitalist and pro-Third World wealth transfers. Let's call it multicultural socialism until a better name comes along. Read more: Obama's dangerous Islamist tilt www.wnd.com...

www.wnd.com...

Originally posted by aptnessI didn’t lump you with anyone. If I have it was with the birthers, but from what you are arguing, this labeling on my part doesn’t seem inappropriate seeing as you’re arguing for the release or the right to inspect Obama’s vital records.

You, on the other hand, made this political and labeled me an Obama voter and supporter, an “Obama apologist” and ‘lemming,’ apparently, because I have been claiming I remain unpersuaded by the birthers’ claims and lack of credible evidence presented, and that they are not entitled to see Obama’s “long form” birth certificate under any existing law.

Why is someone who seeks answers derided with names that, while not really offensive, are meant to convey contempt, as if the question were so patently absurd that it was not worth asking? If people didn't ask questions, our species would never have lived.

And I'm SURE you are an Obama supporter - a diehard one - who is following the party line to the bitter end. I'd like for you to give me one good reason for Obama to not release his birth certificate. Assuming there is a long-form birth certificate, what reason could he possibly have for keeping it secret? Because his religion is listed as "Muslim?" Possibly. As the son of a Muslim father, he is automatically considered a Muslim at birth anyway. That issue was settled for me long ago, So at best, he's an apostate Muslim. Anyway, I can see how that could stir up a big can of worms, especially in the run up to the 2012 election.

But can you think of any other logical reason for him to not release the info, if only to put the issue to rest? What's he afraid of? What's he hiding? Barack Obama is not an ordinary citizen. He's the leader of the most powerful nation on the face of the Earth, and I think a little thing like an original birth certificate isn't very much to ask. I want a little truth from my Commander-in-Chief. I'm THROUGH taking orders from liars.

reply to post by OldCorp

But can you think of any other logical reason for him to not release the info, if only to put the issue to rest? What's he afraid of? What's he hiding? Barack Obama is not an ordinary citizen. He's the leader of the most powerful nation on the face of the Earth, and I think a little thing like an original birth certificate isn't very much to ask. I want a little truth from my Commander-in-Chief. I'm THROUGH taking orders from liars.

That's my point..
Many here are screaming that it's his right to privacy..
But what's private about any details on his Long Form ?
Everything that could be on it has already been stated by Obama..
There is no issue with privacy unless what he has stated to the public are not the same details listed on his Long Form..

Originally posted by OldCorp
Ever notice that most of these lawsuits are thrown out BEFORE they are even heard in court, and the reason given is invariably "the Plaintiff does not have 'standing' to file the suit?" What a crock of BS!

EVERY American has a vested interest in the eligibility of Obama as President. I think these judges have been paid off to keep the issue out of court, because if a plaintiff ever does present a discovery motion to the State of Hawaii it's GAME OVER for the Anointed One.

Not another one!

Why, oh why do we have to have this convo for the what seems to be like Umpteenth time. This has already been proven so since he was born in Hawaii the reason you and most are saying this is you do not consider Hawaii to be apart of The Great United States Of America. Recently there was little mention of a 150th Annivaersay item.

Hook, line, sinker, SUNK!

Originally posted by ThaLoccster

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1

For full citizenship one must be born in the US fully and cannot be born on foreign soil. Military and Diplomat families is the only exception.

Not according to this immigration law website...

What are the rules for people born between December 23, 1952 and November 13, 1986?

Again, children born abroad to two US citizen parents were US citizens at birth, as long as one of the parents resided in the US at some point before the birth of the child.

When one parent was a US citizen and the other a foreign national, the US citizen parent must have resided in the US for a total of 10 years prior to the birth of the child, with five of the years after the age of 14. An exception for people serving in the military was created by considering time spent outside the US on military duty as time spent in the US.

While there were initially rules regarding what the child must do to retain citizenship, amendments since 1952 have eliminated these requirements.

Children born out of wedlock to a US citizen mother were US citizens if the mother was resident in the US for a period of one year prior to the birth of the child. Children born out of wedlock to a US citizen father acquired US citizenship only if legitimated before turning 21.

The ABC’s of Immigration: Citizenship Rules for People Born Outside the United States



So according to that, even if Obama were born in Kenya he would be eligible for President since as far as I've heard his mother never left the US before he was born, she would have fulfilled the 10 year requirement.

So, if this is the case, and even if he were born in Kenya he would be eligible, does it still matter?

And...it also doesn't imply the years have to be consecutive, so in any event I think the birther argument is moot. And a tool to divide the country.

It seems to have worked quite well.

edit on 4/10/2011 by ThaLoccster because: forgot link

More racist driven rhetoric, do y'all ever stop? Like little kids throwing a tempur tantrum when you don't get your way.

7 POTUS' have had at least 1 parent born outside of The US and if it did not matter to them it does not matter nor apply to Obama.

That is the only thing that matters.

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by OldCorp

 

But can you think of any other logical reason for him to not release the info, if only to put the issue to rest? What's he afraid of? What's he hiding? Barack Obama is not an ordinary citizen. He's the leader of the most powerful nation on the face of the Earth, and I think a little thing like an original birth certificate isn't very much to ask. I want a little truth from my Commander-in-Chief. I'm THROUGH taking orders from liars.

That's my point..
Many here are screaming that it's his right to privacy..
But what's private about any details on his Long Form ?
Everything that could be on it has already been stated by Obama..
There is no issue with privacy unless what he has stated to the public are not the same details listed on his Long Form..

There is no long form bc requirement to show birth or residency. Your short form enables you to get your state issued id renewed and a copy of that same version is permissable and acceptable to prove full citizenship status when applying to run for public office.

The WH knows that he was born in Hawaii in 1961, that is all that matters.

BTW, Obama like every other politician out there has no absolute right to privacy as they are our elected officials and we demand to know everything about them. You hate privacy become a celebrity or politician and if you want and like your privacy get a cozy 9-5 office gig and what you did last night will not appear on the cover of your local paper this morning.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1


There is no long form bc requirement to show birth or residency.

You're ignoring the premise of this thread, I didn't say whether or not the long form is necessary to be president, I am saying that there still is a long form birth certificate in the vault, proven by this recent court case, so now you can no longer say that he showed the birth certificate and that people are just ignoring it. He only showed a short form birth certificate, whether that is all he needs is really another topic altogether, anyone with half a brain can see Obama is a horrible president and should be impeached for any number of reasons even if it was proved he was born on the white house lawn.

Originally posted by OldCorp
And I'm SURE you are an Obama supporter - a diehard one - who is following the party line to the bitter end.

Our discussion was regarding a lawsuit, one that you claimed was dismissed on lack of standing and I told you it wasn’t. It seems you have now accepted the explanations I’ve given you so you’re back to partisan accusations.

If I was an Obama supporter, even “a diehard one” as you claim, would that change the outcome of the lawsuit we were talking about? No. So the relevance of my alleged political affiliation to the discussion we are having is what exactly?

You object to being called a birther, saying it “conveys contempt,” but you have no problem accusing me of being “a diehard” Obama supporter because I disagreed with you and I’m skeptical of the information and arguments presented by the birthers. Excuse me, the “group of people who demand to see Obama’s ‘long form’ birth certificate, despite never have asked it from previous Presidents.”

I'd like for you to give me one good reason for Obama to not release his birth certificate.

Obama has released his birth certificate. If you don’t accept the one that was released, or the statements of the Department of Health, that’s your prerogative, but don’t expect everyone to be convinced by the hearsay you accepted as proof from WND and chain emails.

You don’t have a problem with McCain not releasing his long form birth certificate? Does this demand to release long form birth certificates apply only to people you don’t feel ‘comfortable’ with? That you ‘feel,’ as you indicate, they might be Muslim?

But can you think of any other logical reason for him to not release the info, if only to put the issue to rest?

I don’t have to imagine “a logical reason” for McCain to not release his birth certificate, since he — or any other candidate, or even President — wasn’t required to release it, he doesn’t have to. My argument regarding Obama is the same.

I'm THROUGH taking orders from liars.

Don’t vote for him. That’s what the electoral process is about. You have doubts, ‘feelings,’ about a candidate, you don’t vote for him.

Originally posted by filosophia
You're ignoring the premise of this thread

Your premise was flawed to begin with.

You asked “why wouldn't the court say the copy was already released if they only had the internet version on file.” That’s not the court’s job. The court analyzes legal arguments and rules based on what was presented to it and the applicable laws.

The plaintiff argued he should be able to inspect Obama’s vital records, based on Hawaii’s state law, and the the court ruled the plaintiff wasn’t a person entitled to inspect Obama’s vital records, based on that state law. The court’s job ends there.

so now you can no longer say that he showed the birth certificate and that people are just ignoring it.

Obama has released a birth certificate, and the authorities of Hawaii have stated, numerous times, what Obama presented is what everyone who requests a copy of their birth certificate get.

You don’t accept that birth certificate, that’s fine, but that doesn’t change the fact that Obama has presented a valid birth certificate that the competent authorities have vouched for.