Hawaiian paper filing systemIt seems that the latest explanation going around for the fact that President Barry has not been able to produce a copy of his birth certificate is that the state of Hawaii discarded all paper records eight years ago, when they moved over to an electronic record keeping system.
This explanation is mentioned here by Right wing US Commentator Lou Dobbs at the beginning of a rather entertaining debate on the subject between Dobbs, Congressman Ted Poe, who is seeking to introduce legislation requiring Presidential election candidates to prove their Constitutional eligibly, and Roland Martin, an Obama supporting columnist, talk show host and author of "Speak Brother - A Black Man's View of America" who clearly believes that to win an argument one needs to shout louder than your opponent.
If what is being claimed is true, it would appear that Hawaii is claiming that it did not retain scanned or even microfilmed copies of the original documents, or official records of such fundamental information as hospital of birth, the occupations of a child's parents or the names of the attending doctor and midwife etc, who were present at (and witnessed) the birth. Information which would have appeared on any birth certificate issued to the parents of an American born child in the 1960's but missing from the "Certificate of Live Birth" produced by bodies friendly to Obama (albeit not by Obama himself, who has produced no paperwork whatsoever, other than cheques made payable to his lawyers).
Ignoring how devastating the loss of of such records would prove to future historians and genealogists, or indeed to those seeking the truth, it is not impossible to believe that a state would arbitrarily decide to shred such a vast historical archive, when so many electronic means of preserving it exist. However, the trouble is that, like so much in this Pantomime, the credibility of each new and improved story is undermined by the details of the one which came before it.
click view originalIn the statement Dr. Chiyome Fukino confirms that she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, had personally verified that the health department holds Obama’s original birth certificate. (Dr. Fukino continues that no state official, including Republican Gov. Linda Lingle, ever instructed that Obama’s certificate be handled differently fgrom any others.)
In a separate statement it was argued that state law bars release of a certified birth certificate to anyone who does not have a tangible interest. - Which, of course, ignores the fact that Barry has a tangible interest in his own certificate, and, as president could demand its publication at any stage, if it exists, that way we would not have to rely on a document stating that another document exists, together with some scans of some 1961, birth announcements in which the print announcing little Barry's arrival is just a tad clearer than anything else on the page. (when people start producing "supporting evidence" whilst withholding the main evidence, you know they are hiding something)
However, putting that aside, if the latest story is to be believed, it would seem that in her statement, the good Hawaiian doctor was claiming to have personally verified a document which Hawaii had destroyed seven and a half years previously.
"Oh what a tangled web", as they say.
This issue is but one of many which go to the heart of the credibility of the man holding to most powerful job on the planet, yet who's background has been subjected to such limited scrutiny. Even if, as the latest excuse suggests, the original birth certificate was shredded in 2001 (coincidentally at the same time that the Enron shredders were doing over-time) that does not explain why the American president, who makes such an issue of his commitment to openness is so reluctant to be open about his own history.
Among the key documents and information which Obama continues to shield from the public are the following:
Obama released just one brief document detailing his personal health. McCain, on the other hand, released what he said was his complete medical file, totaling more than 1,500 pages.
Obama refused to offer his official papers as a state legislator in Illinois. Nor did he produce correspondence, such as his schedules of appointments or letters from lobbyists, from his days in the Illinois state Senate.
Obama did not release his client list as an attorney or his billing records. He maintained that he performed only a few hours of legal work for a nonprofit organization with ties to Tony Rezko, the Chicago businessman convicted of fraud in June 2008 but did not release billing records that would prove this assertion.
Obama ignored requests for his records from Occidental College, where he studied for two years before transferring to Columbia University.
Obama’s campaign refused to give Columbia, where he earned an undergraduate degree in political science, permission to release his transcripts. Former President George W. Bush and presidential contenders Al Gore and John Kerry all released their college transcripts.
Obama did not agree to the release of his application to the Illinois State Bar, which would have cleared up intermittent allegations that his application may have been inaccurate.
Obama did not release records from his time at Harvard Law School.
Many leaders before Obama have either promised change or have brought "change" to their countries, amongst them Hitler, Mau Zedong, Pol Pot and, of course Robert Muggabe., very little of which was the change which their besotted supporters were expecting. It seems that whatever changes Obama has planned for America, and I fear that they are significant, the ever changing excuses and cover stories are already coming thick and fast
Update:
From the "Comments" section:
-
It's as simple as asking why did "the One" block ALL of his records on his first day at office. Because if Hawaii "discarded" the original birth certificate, then all of the schools, colleges and universities he attended should have copies, am I right? It's so OBVIOUS what's happening here, it boggles the mind...
9 comments:
The Lou Pritchett Letter is most revealing.
And it is authentic.
America the new totalitarianism with anti_american ant-christ comrade controlled by the corporate NWO elite
America as lost American values, and certainly as lost democracy as the constitution as all been but sidelined
Alanorei, the Lou Prichett letter came out months ago. I have a feeling that Mr. Prichett is either in hiding by now, or has been picked up for "re-education" at an undisclosed location. Nothing has been heard from him, that I know about, since that letter came out.
It is extremely obvious that Zero is hiding much. No man goes to such extremes to erase his own past as this man has done without having great cause to do so. He is precipitating a Constitutional crisis that cannot be too far off now.
Many of you will be aware of his currently on-going efforts to strong-arm a Cambridge, MA, cop who arrested a black prof at Harvard who happens to be a friend of Zero. Zero is trying to put the Chicago arm on the cop right now, and everyone is waiting to see how that is going to play out. That could lead to violence right there, I think. In his initial statement about the matter, Zero opened with, "I don't know the facts, but ..." and then he proceeded to make a complete ass of himself. How very un-presidential!
Perhaps not undictatorial, though
I first saw the Lou Pritchett letter on Chuck Norris's WND column on June 15th. It is distressing if Mr Pritchett is being victimised as you say, Dr. D.
But at least the geni is out of the bottle.
Today is the first time I have ever seen the Pritchett letter, it impressed me, which is why I have posted it to the blog. I would not be surprised if Mr Prichett was now under house arrest and receiving forced re-education.
Yes, Dr D, I have been following the Professor Gates case, and Obama's biased and unpresidential reaction to it. To watch the President of America parroting that left wing rubbish about black men being "disproportionately targeted" by law enforcement exposed exactly what he really is.
It is frightening to see that sort of fanatic in the White House.
Alanorei, I did not mean to imply that I know with any certainty that any thing bad has happened to Mr Prichett. I just know that he wrote that letter quite a while ago, and has not spoken out since. I would have thought that someone who spoke out that clearly, that early, would have had much more to say by now with things so much worse, and yet he is silent. That is all I can say.
Thanks, Sarah
Those of us who profess Christian belief ought to keep Chuck Norris and his wife Gena in prayer. He is pretty forthright in his column and if his comments about BHO were translated into martial arts, the president would be noticeably blue as well as black by now.
Re: "disproportionately targeted" by law enforcement, maybe it's because the targets are disproportionately guilty. They are in the UK.
In fairness, one should always remember what I think I've mentioned before but it bears repeating, about the white liberal congressman who protested that most individuals who went to the chair or gas chamber are "poor, black and friendless." He was answered by a black congressman who said that "Most of the people they shot are poor, black, friendless and DEAD."
Which also tends to be the situation in the UK.
Point taken, Dr. D. I myself am certainly none the wiser.
Given the tenor of the letter, I can sympathise if Mr Pritchett, for whatever reason, is too scared to say any more.
I would be.
Which is why I admire columnists like Chuck Norris.
It's as simple as asking why did "the One" block ALL of his records on his first day at office. Because if Hawaii "discarded" the original birth certificate, then all of the schools, colleges and universities he attended should have copies, am I right? It's so OBVIOUS what's happening here, it boggles the mind...
Post a Comment