Yes, a COLB does say where you were born. Obama's says Honalulu, Hawaii.
No, it says his birth was REGISTERED in Honalulu, not the same thing as being born there.
Do you not wonder why his sister gave 2 different hospitals as the place of his birth? Or why his Kenyan Grandmother who has never left Kenya claims to have been present at his birth?
You're wrong. Absolutely wrong. It says:
City, Town or location of Birth: Honolulu
Island of Birth: Oahu
County of Birth: Honolulu
You're a nut ball. YOu don't even know why you reject the certified copy. You just do. One of your reasons for rejecting it is just a plain lie. And we should expect that you would know, much less accept anything about the original when you obviously haven't takne the time to read the certified copy. You're a nut ball.
Also, his grandmother never said that she was at his birth. She was at his fathers birth. They have the same name, you know? How easy do you think it was to get her to say that she was at the birth of Barak Hussein Obama? I can tell you, it wasn't quite as easy of a trick as they though. The interpreter (she only speaks swahilli) caught onto the little gaff that was being fished for and clarified the question for her. She repeated and clarified that she was at his fathers birth and then laughs and says that Obama II was born in Hawaii.
Go fishing around and find the transcripts from the ENTIRE conversation.
She is exactly correct... The document to which you're referring is a Certificate of Live Birth... It is NOT A CERTIFICATION OF A LIVE BIRTH WHICH OCCURRED IN HAWAII...
"Generally, folks donÂ’t know that Hawaii law, even in 1961, provided for multiple kinds of birth records, most of which are not what people think of when they think of birth certificates. The following is a description of those, including certificates for people not born in Hawaii. Go figure!
1. In the State of Hawaii, back in 1961, there were three different birth certificates that were obtainable:
a. If the birth was attended by a physician or mid wife, the attending medical professional was required to certify to the Department of Health the facts of the birth date, location, parentsÂ’ identities and other information. (See Section 57-8 & 9 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).
b. In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or mid wife, then, up to the first birthday of the child, an adult could, upon testimony, file a “Delayed Certificate”, which required endorsement on the Delayed Certificate of a summary statement of the evidence submitted in support of the acceptance for delayed filing, which evidence must be kept in a special permanent file. The statute provided that the probative value of the Delayed Certificate must be determined by the judicial or administrative body or official before whom the certificate is offered as evidence. (See Section 57-18, 19 & 20 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).
c. If a child born in Hawaii, for whom no physician or mid wife filed a certificate of live birth, and for whom no Delayed Certificate was filed before the first birthday, then a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth could be issued upon testimony of an adult including the subject person) if the Lieutenant Governor was satisfied that a person was born in Hawaii, provided that the person had attained the age of one year. (See Section 57-40 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).
2. In 1982, the vital records law was amended to create a fourth kind of birth certificate for children born outside of the Territory or State of Hawaii. HRS Chapter 338 was amended to add a new section authorizing the Director of the Department of Health to issue a birth certificate for a person NOT born in Hawaii either as a Territory or State, upon sufficient proof that the legal parents of such individual had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth of such child.
3. The language of the statute clearly applies to births in the days of the Territory of Hawaii, so also births in 1961.
4. A press release concerning numerous questions raised across the country as to whether or not Obama was a natural born citizen was issued on October 31, 2008 by the Hawaii Department of Health by its Director, Dr. Chiyome Fukino.
5. In that very carefully worded press release, Dr. Fukino said that she had “personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.”
6. The intentional ambiguity of that statement raises more questions that it answered.
7. That statement failed to resolve any of the questions being raised by litigation across the country over the issue of ObamaÂ’s birth and qualifications for the office of the President of the United States, including:
a. The specific type of certificate was not identified. Could it be the certificate for someone born outside of the State of Hawaii?
b. Being “on record” could mean either that its contents are in the computer database of the department or an actual “vault” original. If the latter, those are the words used to describe what is there. The data base record could have been entered based on a birth record for someone born outside of Hawaii.
c. Therefore, the value as prima facie evidence is limited and easily overcome if any of the allegations of substantial evidence of birth outside Hawaii can be obtained and verified with a Court Order.
8. It should also be noted that in the face of all this litigation, the simple presentation of ObamaÂ’s vault birth records would put the questions to rest.
9. Obama has not taken this approach to a single one of the cases, but instead has hired legal counsel across the country at no small expense to defend the claims with motions to dismiss on standing and similar procedural grounds.
10. Such response to the request for proof that he is qualified to serve as President of the United States of America only serves to raise more questions about this election."
Obama – Birth Certificate – Robert Gibbs – FOX News – Larry Sinclair – The Globe – Gay Cover-Up – CitizenWells – Philip Berg – Dr. Orly Taitz « “The BOPAC Report” & Larry Sinclair̵
Now the Nation of Kenya, has ALSO sealed all records that exists on King Hussein... and he refuses to simply ask Kenya to release THOSE RECORDS... reporters who have gone to Kenya and made open request, challenging that seal, have been warned to get out of Kenya or face arrest; they've all opted to leave.
So we're left to conclude that the "TRANSPERANT PRESIDENT" simply feels that the location of his Birth IN HAWAII is PERSONAL... and THAT is simply not reasonable.
Meaning that there is simply no sound basis in reasoning wherein a reasonable person, who is who they calim they are; who is running and presently holds the highest office int he land, to give a damn if the world knows the name of the hospital and the Doctor that delivered him...
What IS reasonable, where someone takes such extreme, unreasonable measures to conceal such, is that they know that what those records which HAVE BEEN MADE AVAILABLE imply, will be readily discredited by what those records have recorded.
Now my guess is that Hussein was not born on US Soil... that his parent's desperately wanted to secure his US citizenship and secured one of the phoney baloney, plastic bananna 'certificates of LIVE BIRTH'... which Hawaii used to prop up its population figures for securing greater representation in the US Legislature.
Clearly these dubious Birth Certs are sufficient to determine citizenship... but NOT EVEN CLOSE, to satisfy the reasonable and never more essential threshold established by the US Constitution.
