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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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”.
- 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”.
- 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.
- Claim: The case of Donofrio vs. Wells is very interesting. False: It was dismissed by three separate courts.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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).
- 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.
- 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).
- 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.
- Claim: That OBAMA is unfairly being singled out to present LONG FORM when others are not required to do so. True.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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”