Hawaii considering law to ignore Obama 'birthers'

first show me where I said I was against states right!

Dear mind numb fool, you scream for the acctual birth certificate to be outed, Hawaii has a state law protecting these documents for ALL people of the state. To the governor of Hawaii You scream that Obama doesnt have the right his state gave him and claim the governor of Hawaii is a LAIR.

You want Hawaii to do your bidding instead of maintaining their right to decide.
Fukino is breaking Hawaii's information laws which REQUIRE her to provide an uncertified copy of a vital document once the party of interest has already published it in non-redacted form (which was done by Obama). She does not provide the COHB because...it does not exist! She is also breaking Hawaii's laws which require her to provide a basis for her public statements, which she has refused to do. Privacy laws don’t apply when the cats out of the bag.
An attempt by the White House to post a bogus “Certification” shatters the privacy shield.

According to the UIPA Act everything regarding public meetings must be disclosed in a UIPA request.

State of Hawaii - Office of Information Practices

Shouldn't this be in the conspiracy theory nutter forum?
 
Dear mind numb fool, you scream for the acctual birth certificate to be outed, Hawaii has a state law protecting these documents for ALL people of the state. To the governor of Hawaii You scream that Obama doesnt have the right his state gave him and claim the governor of Hawaii is a LAIR.

You want Hawaii to do your bidding instead of maintaining their right to decide.
Fukino is breaking Hawaii's information laws which REQUIRE her to provide an uncertified copy of a vital document once the party of interest has already published it in non-redacted form (which was done by Obama). She does not provide the COHB because...it does not exist! She is also breaking Hawaii's laws which require her to provide a basis for her public statements, which she has refused to do. Privacy laws don’t apply when the cats out of the bag.
An attempt by the White House to post a bogus “Certification” shatters the privacy shield.

According to the UIPA Act everything regarding public meetings must be disclosed in a UIPA request.

State of Hawaii - Office of Information Practices


Where in the law does it say that?:eusa_eh:



http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/vol06_ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0014_0003.htm

[§338-14.3] Verification in lieu of a certified copy. (a) Subject to the requirements of section 338-18, the department of health, upon request, shall furnish to any applicant, in lieu of the issuance of a certified copy, a verification of the existence of a certificate and any other information that the applicant provides to be verified relating to the vital event that pertains to the certificate.

(b) A verification shall be considered for all purposes certification that the vital event did occur and that the facts of the event are as stated by the applicant.

(c) Verification may be made in written, electronic, or other form approved by the director of health.

(d) The fee for a verification in lieu of a certified copy shall be one half of the fee established in section 338-14.5 for the first certified copy of a certificate issued.

(e) Fees received for verifications in lieu of certified copies shall be remitted, and one half of the fee shall be deposited to the credit of the vital statistics improvement special fund in section 338-14.6 and the remainder of the fee shall be deposited to the credit of the state general fund. [L 2001, c 246, §1]
 
I love the birthers...

They keep reminding us of what loons belong to the Conservative movement
 
And now for something entertaining rather than sad:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zj1FifK3bbg]YouTube - I Love To Singa- Owl[/ame]
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: del
This is someone's private records, none of which you have a right to.

How would you like it if I wanted to see your private records uncensored? And all of my friends? And we just kept bombarding your local health office or whatever for said records?

This is similar to what the Birthers are doing.

For a group of people who supposedly are all for about following the law, they don't seem to know it very well.

I agree, however, I think it should be required by law that a candidate for the office of the presidency to show proof of eligibility to hold the office. Maybe he did and that should be fine, but it seems that this should simply be a requirement.

No one else has the right to review his personal records be they birth certificate, credit report or what have you.

Immie
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: del
This is someone's private records, none of which you have a right to.

How would you like it if I wanted to see your private records uncensored? And all of my friends? And we just kept bombarding your local health office or whatever for said records?

This is similar to what the Birthers are doing.

For a group of people who supposedly are all for about following the law, they don't seem to know it very well.

I agree, however, I think it should be required by law that a candidate for the office of the presidency to show proof of eligibility to hold the office. Maybe he did and that should be fine, but it seems that this should simply be a requirement.

No one else has the right to review his personal records be they birth certificate, credit report or what have you.

Immie
But Hawaii law says you can once a vital record has been made public which is what Hawaii did. I just posted it above.
 
Last edited:
Fukino is breaking Hawaii's information laws which REQUIRE her to provide an uncertified copy of a vital document once the party of interest has already published it in non-redacted form (which was done by Obama). She does not provide the COHB because...it does not exist! She is also breaking Hawaii's laws which require her to provide a basis for her public statements, which she has refused to do. Privacy laws don’t apply when the cats out of the bag.
An attempt by the White House to post a bogus “Certification” shatters the privacy shield.

According to the UIPA Act everything regarding public meetings must be disclosed in a UIPA request.

State of Hawaii - Office of Information Practices


Where in the law does it say that?:eusa_eh:



http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/vol06_ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0014_0003.htm

[§338-14.3] Verification in lieu of a certified copy. (a) Subject to the requirements of section 338-18, the department of health, upon request, shall furnish to any applicant, in lieu of the issuance of a certified copy,a verification of the existence of a certificate and any other information that the applicant provides to be verified relating to the vital event that pertains to the certificate.

(b) A verification shall be considered for all purposes certification that the vital event did occur and that the facts of the event are as stated by the applicant.

(c) Verification may be made in written, electronic, or other form approved by the director of health.

(d) The fee for a verification in lieu of a certified copy shall be one half of the fee established in section 338-14.5 for the first certified copy of a certificate issued.

(e) Fees received for verifications in lieu of certified copies shall be remitted, and one half of the fee shall be deposited to the credit of the vital statistics improvement special fund in section 338-14.6 and the remainder of the fee shall be deposited to the credit of the state general fund. [L 2001, c 246, §1]

There has to be a vital event related to the information.

There is none present.
 
Where in the law does it say that?:eusa_eh:



http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/vol06_ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0014_0003.htm

[§338-14.3] Verification in lieu of a certified copy. (a) Subject to the requirements of section 338-18, the department of health, upon request, shall furnish to any applicant, in lieu of the issuance of a certified copy,a verification of the existence of a certificate and any other information that the applicant provides to be verified relating to the vital event that pertains to the certificate.

(b) A verification shall be considered for all purposes certification that the vital event did occur and that the facts of the event are as stated by the applicant.

(c) Verification may be made in written, electronic, or other form approved by the director of health.

(d) The fee for a verification in lieu of a certified copy shall be one half of the fee established in section 338-14.5 for the first certified copy of a certificate issued.

(e) Fees received for verifications in lieu of certified copies shall be remitted, and one half of the fee shall be deposited to the credit of the vital statistics improvement special fund in section 338-14.6 and the remainder of the fee shall be deposited to the credit of the state general fund. [L 2001, c 246, §1]

There has to be a vital event related to the information.

There is none present.
When Fukino made the statement, that was a vital event along with the release of the COLB. Read these events that happened.

There is a cover-up.
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/02...ses-to-corroborate-that-obama-born-in-hawaii/
 
Fukino is breaking Hawaii's information laws which REQUIRE her to provide an uncertified copy of a vital document once the party of interest has already published it in non-redacted form (which was done by Obama). She does not provide the COHB because...it does not exist! She is also breaking Hawaii's laws which require her to provide a basis for her public statements, which she has refused to do. Privacy laws don’t apply when the cats out of the bag.
An attempt by the White House to post a bogus “Certification” shatters the privacy shield.

According to the UIPA Act everything regarding public meetings must be disclosed in a UIPA request.

State of Hawaii - Office of Information Practices


Where in the law does it say that?:eusa_eh:



http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/vol06_ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0014_0003.htm

[§338-14.3] Verification in lieu of a certified copy. (a) Subject to the requirements of section 338-18, the department of health, upon request, shall furnish to any applicant, in lieu of the issuance of a certified copy, a verification of the existence of a certificate and any other information that the applicant provides to be verified relating to the vital event that pertains to the certificate.

(b) A verification shall be considered for all purposes certification that the vital event did occur and that the facts of the event are as stated by the applicant.

(c) Verification may be made in written, electronic, or other form approved by the director of health.

(d) The fee for a verification in lieu of a certified copy shall be one half of the fee established in section 338-14.5 for the first certified copy of a certificate issued.

(e) Fees received for verifications in lieu of certified copies shall be remitted, and one half of the fee shall be deposited to the credit of the vital statistics improvement special fund in section 338-14.6 and the remainder of the fee shall be deposited to the credit of the state general fund. [L 2001, c 246, §1]

Did you read 338-18?:eusa_eh:
 
A verification of the existence of a certificate was provided by Hawaii at the first inquiry. They verified they had one. That is all that is required by that law.
 
that was my FAVORITE cartoon as a kid... I had that whole song memorized and my sister and I would singa it for our family!

THANKS!

No problem. I mean who doesn't love to singa, about the moon-a and the June-a, and the spring-a? :cool:
 
I also can't find anything in State of Hawaii - Office of Information Practices where it says that once a record, like a personal birth certificate, is made public - anyone can have access to it other than what is made public.

Try this:

State of Hawaii - Office of Information Practices

§92F-12 Disclosure required. (a) Any other provision in this chapter to the contrary notwithstanding, each agency shall make available for public inspection and duplication during regular business hours:

(1) Rules of procedure, substantive rules of general applicability, statements of general policy, and interpretations of general applicability adopted by the agency;

(2) Final opinions, including concurring and dissenting opinions, as well as orders made in the adjudication of cases, except to the extent protected by section 92F-13(1);

The specifc information I am requesting is the following:

1. All Rules of procedure, substantive rules of general applicability, statements of general policy, and interpretations of general applicability adopted by the your agency, which regard the maintenance and disclosure, or non-disclosure, of original vital records, and index data for the same.

2. All final opinions, including concurring and dissenting opinions, given by any officer, employee or by the responsible decision making entity, in your department, regarding divulging of information regarding original vital records, regarding press inquiries pertaining to original vital records, and regarding public statements made by the Director or Communications director regarding any original vital record or requests for its release made by those adjudged by the Director not to have direct personal interest in the records.

3. All Rules of procedure, substantive rules of general applicability, statements of general policy, and interpretations of general applicability adopted by your agency, which regard the request for any opinion sought by your office from the Hawaii Attorney General’s office regarding the observance of Hawaiian Law, and/or the observance of Federal Law, and/or the observance of the Constitutional requirements of office for those candidates on the ballot for federal offices, in Hawaii, and/or which regard any particular matter for which you might request counsel from the Hawaii Attorney General’s office.

4. All final opinions, including concurring and dissenting opinions, given by any employee or officer, or by the responsible decision making entity, in your department, which regard the public identification of the citizenship status (whether natural born, native, statutory, or naturalized, American or foreign or otherwise), which any employee or officer in your department might make publicly or privately, in their official capacity, about anyone whose vital record is maintained by your department.
 
Link?

I'd like to see where all the Liberals demanded to see John McCain's records.

go find it for yourself dogshit.

You know that isn't how it works. YOU make a claim, YOU have to back it up. Otherwise you're just trying to blow smoke up people's asses.

NO, WT doesn't get it, fucking loser troll that's all. another dipshit on ignore list cause nothing they ever say is worthy of being read
 
Looks like there is still an effort to block people from seeing Obama's real birth certificate...

My Way News - Hawaii considering law to ignore Obama 'birthers'

Hawaii Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino issued statements last year and in October 2008 saying that she's seen vital records that prove Obama is a natural-born American citizen.

:thup: We can certainly trust a government official! :thup:

trustme.jpg
 

Forum List

Back
Top