Main Menu

FAQ on Obama’s Hidden Birth Certificate

Sometimes I thing there ought to be a law against cutting and pasting, and a prime example is what is claimed to be: The internet’s most comprehensive compilation of issues regarding the birth of Barack Obama : FAQ in Obama’s Hidden Birth Certificate. Certainly that web page and Obama Conspiracy Theories could not be farther apart in our philosophy. The FAQ is one huge long web page, while I believe in flattening things out, spreading information by topic and generally allowing the visitor to look at one page and get a high-level outline of what’s happening.

The site contains these whoppers (and I’ll get tired long before I get to the end of this seemingly endless page). It was painful to read the endless repetition of the same illogic and misinformation over and over and over and over. In the end, everything I saw has been refuted here, basically on 2 web pages here:

Barack Obama’s Birth Certificate Doesn’t Really Say He Was Born in Hawaii

The Great Mother of All Natural Born Citizen Quotation Pages

  1. Claim: Obama and Sun Yat-Sen have the same kind of birth certificate. False. Sun Yat Sen has a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth. Obama has a Certification of Live Birth.
  2. Claim: The “long form” birth certificate is the ” normal birth certificate that anybody presents when applying to school, for a passport, or for a school age group baseball league.” False. You can’t even order a long form using the standard birth certificate order form in Hawaii. The short form is is good for all those purposes.
  3. Claim: The legal probative value of this Short-Form is practically nil in the courts of law when the information on this document is challenged legally and the challenger demands the “best evidence” which is the LONG FORM. False/Misleading. The short form is prima facie evidence in court, and must be accepted on its face value unless there is evidence that it is invalid, and no such evidence exists related to Obama’s certificate.
  4. Claim: What’s complicating the issue is that even Barack’s Kenyan grandmother has admitting in a taped interview with an Anabaptist bishop that she witnessed the birth of Barack in Kenya, specifically in Mombasa, an island only 14 square km in size. False. The grandmother tape actually says he was born in Hawaii.
  5. Claim: Finally, since Barack Obama was a British subject or citizen at birth, this fact alone makes Barack a non-natural born citizen, according to the constitutional experts citing law and jurisprudence. False: Just the opposite is true. All constitutional scholars say that anyone born in the United States (except for children of Ambassadors) are natural born citizens. We’ve already had one President, Chester A. Arthur, with a British Father. Arthur turned out to be a pretty good president.
  6. Claim: Until this practice was stopped in 1972, a person born outside of Hawaii could obtain a “Certificate of Hawaiian Birth”. False. First a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth is for people born in Hawaii, and second it is for persons one year old or more (Obama was registered when he was 4 days old). Finally a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth says “Certificate of Hawaiian Birth” on it, not “Certificate of Live Birth”.
  7. Claim: Because of the absence of Obama’s Long-Form or Vault Birth Certificate only the courts can ascertain the citizenship of Obama. False. The short form says “Location of Birth: Honolulu”.
  8. Claim: Scenario One: Barack was born in Kenya to a US citizen mother who was less than 19 years old and a father who was not a US citizen. False: Obama’s birth certificate says he was born in Honolulu.
  9. Claim: The case of Donofrio vs. Wells is very interesting. False: It was dismissed by three separate courts.
  10. Claim: Hawaii Revised Statute 338-178 allows “registration” of birth in Hawaii for a child that was born outside of Hawaii to parents who, for a year preceding the child’s birth, claimed Hawaii as their place of residence. False. This law was not in effect in 1961.
  11. Claim: Under Hawaiian law in 1961, a child could be born anywhere in the world and have the birth registered in Hawaii by the mother after the birth, with true or false information, without any third party independent verification of said “facts” entered on the form by the mother, upon her returning to Hawaii using this law on the books in 1961. False. There is no such law.
  12. Claim: Fukino is NOT stating that the original birth certificate is a US birth certificate. False. Hawaii became a US State in 1959. Since Obama’s birth registration is according to regulation, it has to be a US birth certificate.
  13. Claim: Fukino is NOT stating that is not a Kenyan birth certificate. False. Honolulu is not in Kenya. Since Obama’s birth registration is according to regulation, it has to be a US birth certificate.
  14. Claim: Fukino is NOT saying that Obama’s record is not filed according to Hawaii Revised Statute 338-178 that allows “registration” of birth in Hawaii for a child that was born outside of Hawaii to parents who, for a year preceding the child’s birth, claimed Hawaii as their place of residence. False. Since that law did not exist in 1961, a birth filed under that law could not be according to regulation.
  15. Claim: Fukino’s statement, also does not rule out registration of birth of a child born outside the US but registered in Hawaii. False. There is no regulation which would have allowed such a registration in 1961.
  16. Claim: For births prior to 1972, a Certification of Live Birth was the result of the uncorroborated testimony of one witness and was not generated by a hospital. Such a Certificate could be obtained up to one year from the date of the child’s birth. For that reason, its value as prima facie evidence is limited and could be overcome if any of the allegations of substantial evidence of birth outside Hawaii can be obtained. Misleading. The Long and the Short form have the same evidentiary value and the same possibility of challenge by other evidence (none of which exists in this case).
  17. Claim. The vault (long Version) birth certificate, per Hawaiian Statute 883.176 allows the birth in another State or another country to be registered in Hawaii. Box 7C of the vault Certificate of Live Birth contains a question, whether the birth was in Hawaii or another State or Country. False. Block 7c is the mothers usual place of residence. Block 6a is the location of birth.
  18. Claim. Yes, it is true! A [Dr. Sun Yat-Sen] who was born outside of the USA could obtain a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth. Misleading. Sun Yat-Sen’s Certificate of Hawaiian Birth was obtained fraudulently through two false sworn statements. It was not obtained through any provision of Hawaiian law, but through fraud (and before Hawaii became a state).
  19. Claim. Sun Yat-sen was born on 12 November 1866, to a peasant family in the village of Cuiheng, Xiangshan county , Guangzhou prefecture, Guangdong province (26 km or 16 miles north of Macau). True but irrelevant. Obama did not present a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth and Sun Yat-Sen got his certificate before Hawaii became a State.
  20. Claim: That OBAMA is unfairly being singled out to present LONG FORM when others are not required to do so. True.
  21. Claim: That decision of the Virginia court needs to be reviewed by the Supreme Court… if indeed it treats short form as the same in probative value as long form…This case was a complete hoax. I never heard of the case.
  22. Claim: There is a conflict between the right to privacy and the proof of natural born citizenship. False. The short form has all the information necessary to verify age and place of birth.
  23. Claim: Supreme Court Case Perkins v. Elg proves a natural born citizen must have two US parents. False. It says the Elg, someone who as a child had dual US-Swedish citizenship was still a “natural born citizen.” Her parents were naturalized US citizens when she was born in the US, but court did not say that her parentage was a requirement to be “natural born”

[Updated 3-27-2009.]

Print Friendly

, , , , , , ,

14 Responses to FAQ on Obama’s Hidden Birth Certificate

  1. avatar
    bogus info January 25, 2009 at 7:22 am #

    Thanks Dr. C.,

    Although I bet you really get tired of doing that. LOL

    Here is a statement off Berg’s blog by a blogger which is what makes this “conspiracy” keep going. No one even asks for verification of this claim. Amazing.

    “I have never posted before but know many FBI, Secret Service Agents, CIA and many other Federal Agents who have told me they are not to discuus this issue about Obama or they will be terminated from employment. We all need to take a step back and pray that something will come out on all of these lawsuits. I spoke to the Supreme Court Justice in my state who advised that the US Supreme Court have been ordered to throw out any case that deal with the fraud President elect. May God Hlep us All “

  2. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 25, 2009 at 8:25 am #

    Sounds a lot like your typical urban legend viral email. It has unverifiable claims of authority.

    I, on the other hand, DO know a few Secret Service agents (met them during a visit to the US by the Prime Minister of Dominica many years ago and we’ve kept touch) and they tell me that they have a surveillance photo of Ron Polarik set up in their break room (yes, they know who he is), and that they throw darts at it for fun. I also know someone in the FBI (I used to work in the same office building with the FBI field office) here who says they have an office pool going, trying to predict the date Orly Taitz is disbarred. And finally, I know one of the Saints personally (I won’t say which one because I am bound by an oath not to) who says God is extremely unhappy with all the lies being told by the conspiracy theorists. Jesus himself said just last week: “the Bible didn’t record all that I said about truth; not only did I say that the Truth would set you free, I also said that lies enslave the soul. I remember the lies spread about me saying my real father was a Roman crank named Philipus Bergus.”

  3. avatar
    bogus info January 25, 2009 at 8:57 am #

    Dr. C.,

    I’d bet money if I went on that blog and asked the person who made the Statement which State he lived in or the name of the State Supreme Court Justice who made that statement, I would be immediately labeled a O-bot and banned from the blog.

  4. avatar
    Scroller January 25, 2009 at 11:27 pm #

    A previously unknown new poster on Berg’s site named “Anonymous”with secret information of unnamed people in high places who know the truth of Berg’s allegations? Hmm. Sounds similar to this from Berg himself on the Alex Jonesradio program Oct. 16, 2008:

    “world leaders at this point–because I’ve talked to people over in England, over in Europe, they’re aware of the situation, they say 100% he was born in Kenya, therefore they’re not going to want to deal with him as president … world leaders know he’s not qualified.” [Berg, Part I at 6:03; Part II at 1:09 at link below]

    Needless to say, Berg never identified these peopleconnected to leaders in England and Europewho 100% secretly know the truth of Berg’s allegations.

    http://obambi.wordpress.com/2008/10/16/alex-jones-interviews-phil-berg/

  5. avatar
    bogus info January 29, 2009 at 8:53 am #

    Dr. C.,

    You would think that this statement by Linda Starr would trigger something in the “common sense” section of their brains:

    Linda Star wrote re: Fitzgerald:

    written by Linda Starr, January 29, 2009
    “Under the Patriot Act, Fitzgerald does not need a subpeona to look at his records. All he has to do is send the FBI to get a copy of the original.”

  6. avatar
    Frank August 11, 2009 at 3:30 pm #

    Can you (or any other commenters) expand upon #16, or offer up a link for further reference? This is one of the claims that some of the more rational “birthers” (is that an oxymoron?) are touting. They continue to claim that parents (or a midwife, or whatever) could have gotten the State to fill in the birthplace on the Certification without any actual proof. If this claim is easily refuted, then any help on how to refute it would be appreciated.

    Thanks!

  7. avatar
    Bob August 11, 2009 at 3:40 pm #

    They continue to claim that parents (or a midwife, or whatever) could have gotten the State to fill in the birthplace on the Certification without any actual proof.

    Where’s the evidence that actually occurred in Obama’s case?

    The possibility of fraud is not evidence of fraud. Such musings are conjecture, speculation.

    Also, what is their proof regarding the state of Hawaiian law in 1961? A statute not enacted until 1983? A law passed in 1911?

  8. avatar
    Bob August 11, 2009 at 4:05 pm #

    And, yes, Sun Yat-sen committed document fraud. So?

    Does that mean Sun Yat-sen’s certificate was fraudulent, or every certificate issued by Hawaii is fraudulent? There’s no rationale basis for concluding that Sun Yat-sen’s certificate proves that Obama’s (and only Obama’s) is also fraudulent.

  9. avatar
    Welsh Dragon August 11, 2009 at 4:14 pm #

    Ask them ‘ and this is different from every other president how?’. Fraud isn’t new and not confined to Hawaii.

  10. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 11, 2009 at 5:17 pm #

    I think the implication that Hawaiians are bunch of morons (based on the misrepresentations made about them, their government officials, and their regulations), is decidedly racist.

  11. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 11, 2009 at 5:22 pm #

    Bob says: “The possibility of fraud is not evidence of fraud. Such musings are conjecture, speculation.”

    It is important to remember that it is not my job or your job to prove that Obama’s birth elsewhere is impossible beyond any conceivable twist of history. It is their job to prove that it happened. And they have to reach some reasonable standard before they get to paw through somebody’s private documents.

    What the NoBamas are doing is trying to shift the burden of proof onto the other side.

  12. avatar
    Bob August 11, 2009 at 5:53 pm #

    While I generally disagree with the doctor here, I do admit I have seen a few postings that exactly (and explicitly) express that sentiment.

  13. avatar
    Bob August 11, 2009 at 5:58 pm #

    What the NoBamas are doing is trying to shift the burden of proof onto the other side.

    Very true. Many birfer claims can be reduced to “prove [some wild assertion] false!” I can’t disprove that some midwife lied because you can’t prove that there ever was a midwife to begin with.

  14. avatar
    AXJ September 4, 2009 at 4:13 am #

    We have a member of the Spanish CNI in AXJ…

333333 44444
5555555
6666666