Main Menu

Orly still draws a crowd

Queen Birther, Lady Liberty or bat-**** crazy, Orly Taitz (pictured right) can still draw a crowd.

Her antics yesterday in Hawaii generated enough traffic at The Fogbow to take the site down, as well as spawn some brief outages here at Obama Conspiracy Theories. The number of visits here doubled from the day before, and what is more significant, “new visitors” achieved pre-long form levels of 50% of total traffic.

Local Honolulu TV station KHON2 even gave a short mention of Taitz on its web site under the “most popular story” section. The station quotes Taitz:

We were able to get to the bottom of Watergate and it’s time to get to the bottom of Obama forgery-gate, or Obama fraud-gate – it’s time,

and Hawaii Deputy Attorney General Jill Nagamine from a letter:

You are seeking disclosure of privileged or other protected matter, and there is no exception that applies to allow disclosure to you.

The article allows comments, and the birthers are **** all over it.

, ,

33 Responses to Orly still draws a crowd

  1. avatar
    obsolete August 9, 2011 at 7:58 pm #

    I love the birther rants in “ALL CAPS!” in the comments…

  2. avatar
    Daniel August 9, 2011 at 8:02 pm #

    All caps effectively increases truthiness

  3. avatar
    john August 9, 2011 at 8:09 pm #

    Orly should research privacy case law involving public record disclosure. In the event that we are to assume that Hawaii privacy statutes holds, Orly should hire a geneologist [sic]. Please observe the following provision in the privacy law that does allow disclosure:

    A person having a common ancestor with the registrant;

    All Orly needs to do is find is a birther who some relationship with Barack Obama – Perhaps a 4th or 5th cousin to Stanely [sic] Ann Dunham. I believe this idea has already been tried and Hawaii has chosen to still break their own laws to protect usurper Obama.
    [
    Hawaii considers common ancestor to mean parent or grandparent. The Biblical Adam has been rejected already. Doc.]

  4. avatar
    Joey August 9, 2011 at 8:28 pm #

    “Doc” you might want to add the word “Attorney” after “Deputy” for Jill Nagamine’s title.

  5. avatar
    Paul August 9, 2011 at 10:08 pm #

    probably draws flies too… that doesn’t make her newsworthy.

  6. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 9, 2011 at 10:54 pm #

    The Hawaii Reporter web site also carries an article about Orly Taitz. I left two comments there, one in response to the article and the other in response to another commenter. The comments are in moderation, and reproduced here:

    I disagree with the article’s characterization of Douglas Vogt and Paul Irey, the individuals who accompanied Orly Taitz on her expedition to Hawaii, as “experts.”

    Certainly they are not experts in the usual sense of the word. Paul Irey is a commercial printer whose career included a lot of “typing.” That doesn’t make him a general expert on typewriters, and certainly not qualified to understand electronic documents. Vogt runs a scanner company, but his technical analysis published on the Internet is naive and demonstrates no advanced technical knowledge of PDF documents (the form of the White House long form). Vogt made many assumptions which are contradicted directly by the Press Releases of the Department of Health. Neither of these two would ever make it into a court room except as a spectator.

    The only certified document analyst who has looked at the PDF, Ivan Zatkovich who has testified in federal civil and criminal cases, has said that the characteristics that Vogt claims are proof of forgery, are actually consistent with enhancement of the legibility of the document — and that no changes to the content could be identified.

    For those who are not immersed in this birther business on a daily basis as I am, it’s important to be aware that there is a cottage industry of crank self-proclaimed experts who claim Obama’s birth certificate is a fake. Unfortunately for them, the Hawaii Department of Health does not agree.

    and

    I must take strong exception to Dr. Conklin’s characterization of the Sun Yat-Sen birth registration, and what he insinuates about similarities between it and Obama’s registration, and in particular his comment: “it is quite plausible that the same policies which allowed a birth certificate to be issued by the Territory government based on sworn (but false) statements, might still have remained the policy of the new State of Hawaii.”

    There is no similarity whatever.

    Sun Yat-Sen’s fraudulent birth certificate was issued in 1904, which hardly is in close temporal proximity to the 1961 registration of Obama’s birth. The laws in force at the time of Obama’s registration were the code of 1957 revised in 1959.

    Sun Yat-Sen was registered under the Certificate of Hawaiian Birth program (a predecessor to a later program of the same name in effect from 1911 to 1972). Sun Yat-Sen received a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth, which is a certificate issued to someone whose birth was not registered within one year. It was primarily designed for older Hawaiians whose birth had not been registered as children. Obama received a Certificate of Live Birth not marked DELAYED, which is only given for timely registrations. It’s a different birth registration program, and a different type of certificate.

    It is possible at any time and in any jurisdiction for vital records fraud to be perpetrated. Sun Yat-Sen’s friends lied for him under oath, and the adult Sun-Yat Sen was registered under the Certificate of Hawaiian Birth program. Barack Obama, however, was not attested to by friends, but by physician Dr. David A. Sinclair who delivered him at the then Kapi’olani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu and whose birth was registered 50 years ago yesterday, precisely 4 days after his birth. This is attested by the certified copy of Obama’s birth certificate issued by the State of Hawaii, shown to the press and published on the White House web site.

    Any suggestion that there is any plausible similarity between the registration of Sun Yat-Sen and Barack Obama is, disingenuous.

    The birthers seem to think that Hawaiians are somehow a lower class of human being who are untrustworthy and not real Americans (two Hawaii Governors, and two Directors of Health — Democrat and Republican — have been called liars and traitors by the birthers). This is blatant racism against Hawaiians, and likely motivated by the same racism that underlies birther hatred of President Obama.

  7. avatar
    Paul August 9, 2011 at 10:59 pm #

    Dude, BRAVO on the racism angle in post one!

  8. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 9, 2011 at 11:13 pm #

    I’m the last one to label everything birther as “racist” but I can’t look the other way when birthers imply that somehow Hawaii is less diligent in registering births than other jurisdictions. The big cases of VR fraud have been in Texas, California and New Jersey.

    Paul: Dude, BRAVO on the racism angle in post one!

  9. avatar
    Horus August 10, 2011 at 9:12 am #

    john: All Orly needs to do is find is a birther who some relationship with Barack Obama – Perhaps a 4th or 5th cousin to Stanely [sic] Ann Dunham. I believe this idea has already been tried and Hawaii has chosen to still break their own laws to protect usurper Obama.
    [

    I was wrong, you’re not delusional, you’re completely insane.

  10. avatar
    Horus August 10, 2011 at 9:17 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: The birthers seem to think that Hawaiians are somehow a lower class of human being who are untrustworthy and not real Americans (two Hawaii Governors, and two Directors of Health — Democrat and Republican — have been called liars and traitors by the birthers). This is blatant racism against Hawaiians, and likely motivated by the same racism that underlies birther hatred of President Obama.

    That reminds me of Casino Jack, he referred to Native Americans as Monkeys and Troglodytes.

  11. avatar
    Dave August 10, 2011 at 10:26 am #

    I am disappointed that in the comments at KHON I could not find one single FOGBLOW!

  12. avatar
    john August 10, 2011 at 6:42 pm #

    “Hawaii considers common ancestor to mean parent or grandparent. The Biblical Adam has been rejected already”. Doc.

    Yes, the “Adam” claim is pretty ridiculous. But, I believe the statutes allow for cousins to be considered even distant ones. Clearly this provision under statute would allow thousands and thousands of people access to the birth records. Perhaps it is one of those loopholes in the law. If Orly were to find a distant cousin even one as distant to the 10th level, the statute would allow him or her access to the birth certificate.

  13. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 10, 2011 at 8:37 pm #

    What you believe is irrelevant (and usually wrong).

    john: But, I believe the statutes allow for cousins to be considered even distant ones.

  14. avatar
    Bovril August 10, 2011 at 9:35 pm #

    And yet “John”, not even Mad Old Orly has tried this one.

    It really says something about your thesis when even the nitrous addled “Queen of the Birfoons” won’t touch it with a bargepole.

  15. avatar
    GeorgetownJD August 11, 2011 at 8:19 am #

    john:
    “Hawaii considers common ancestor to mean parent or grandparent. The Biblical Adam has been rejected already”. Doc.

    Yes, the “Adam” claim is pretty ridiculous.But, I believe the statutes allow for cousins to be considered even distant ones.Clearly this provision under statute would allow thousands and thousands of people access to the birth records.Perhaps it is one of those loopholes in the law.If Orly were to find a distant cousin even one as distant to the 10th level, the statute would allow him or her access to the birth certificate.

    How about you back up your claim with a citation to the law — statute or case law or regulation — that you “believe” allows for cousins, even distant cousins, to receive a birth certificate under H.R.S. 338-18.

  16. avatar
    Stanislaw August 11, 2011 at 10:16 am #

    GeorgetownJD: How about you back up your claim with a citation to the law — statute or case law or regulation — that you “believe” allows for cousins, even distant cousins, to receive a birth certificate under H.R.S. 338-18.

    I doubt that’s going to happen. “John” suffers from a cripplingly delusional mindset that can only be found in the most hardcore, dyed-in-the-wool birthers. He is beyond redemption.

  17. avatar
    JD Reed August 11, 2011 at 12:34 pm #

    Orly Taitz is lucky she didn’t live in the time of Andy Jackson. Ol’ Hickory threatened to hang his first vice president, John C. Calhoun, so what do you suppose he would have done to somebody who got soldiers to refuse orders to a combat zone?
    And hey John, I’m an eighth cousin, twice removed, of the President. So if you can find somebody to pay for my trip to Hawaii — minimum stay three days — I’ll be glad to show up at the DoH to ask for his birth records. And I promise not to get my feelings hurt when they tell me to get lost.

  18. avatar
    mikeyes August 11, 2011 at 3:59 pm #

    John may have a point, the law reads:

    “(b) The department shall not permit inspection of public health statistics records, or issue a certified copy of any such record or part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant has a direct and tangible interest in the record. The following persons shall be considered to have a direct and tangible interest in a public health statistics record:

    (1) The registrant;

    (2) The spouse of the registrant;

    (3) A parent of the registrant;

    (4) A descendant of the registrant;

    (5) A person having a common ancestor with the registrant;”

    There are more qualifiers, but none are germane to this discussion. The term “direct and tangible interest” may be the point that stops giving a copy to JD Reed, however.

  19. avatar
    DCH August 11, 2011 at 4:13 pm #

    Simple way to do this would be for a hawaii birther go and asked for a private records from the Hawaii DoH for a distant living relative (not B. Obama) and report back to birther central what they learn. Or more simply they could read this blog and find out that this action wil fail.

    The OBOTS have a 99.99% accuracy rate in predicting upcoming court rulings in birther cases since 2008. I think our only miss was when a judge did not follow through and fine Mario A after he was warned about his behavior.

    The bithers have a 0.01% succes rate and have been 100% wrong in predicting the actions of courts.

  20. avatar
    Sef August 11, 2011 at 4:25 pm #

    mikeyes:
    John may have a point, the law reads:

    “(b)The department shall not permit inspection of public health statistics records, or issue a certified copy of any such record or part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant has a direct and tangible interest in the record.The following persons shall be considered to have a direct and tangible interest in a public health statistics record:

    (1)The registrant;

    (2)The spouse of the registrant;

    (3)A parent of the registrant;

    (4)A descendant of the registrant;

    (5)A person having a common ancestor with the registrant;”

    There are more qualifiers, but none are germane to this discussion.The term “direct and tangible interest” may be the point that stops giving a copy to JD Reed, however.

    If you look in the DOH rules which implement this law you will see that the common ancestor cuts off at grandparents. That means only aunts, uncles, 1st cousins (0-n removed), (g)parents and descendants.

  21. avatar
    Stanislaw August 11, 2011 at 6:39 pm #

    mikeyes:
    John may have a point, the law reads:

    (5)A person having a common ancestor with the registrant;”

    I think Doc addressed this earlier. If I remember correctly (I’m not sure if the comment was on this thread) the definition of ancestor is narrowly construed to mean grandparent. That would exclude a large portion of the population.

  22. avatar
    mikeyes August 11, 2011 at 7:00 pm #

    I’m sorry I missed that, but it makes sense especially the business about “direct and tangible interest” of which the birthers have none since they have no evidence whatsoever to back up the fantasy that the President is an alien.

  23. avatar
    Keith August 12, 2011 at 4:23 am #

    john: If Orly were to find a distant cousin even one as distant to the 10th level, the statute would allow him or her access to the birth certificate.

    Ever heard of “6 degrees of separation”?. Do you realize how many people are related to each other at the ’10th level’? The answer is “damn near everyone on the planet”.

    Geeze Louise!

  24. avatar
    John Reilly August 12, 2011 at 9:41 am #

    Assuming the cousin comes forward and satisfies the DOH that he or she is related and entitled to “inspect” the record under the statute as part of genealogical research, the Hawaii DOH would, at best, issue a certified short form birth certificate. Before arguing about the meaning of this section, John ought to tell us where we find the proof that the vaults of the DOH are crawling with researchers checking on their family history.

  25. avatar
    The Magic M August 12, 2011 at 11:34 am #

    john: Yes, the “Adam” claim is pretty ridiculous.

    It would’ve made quite some headlines if taken to court. After all, how often do courts get to decide on biblical issues?

    However I think that pointing to the Bible as proof of common ancestry would likely not prevail, not even before the most die-hard Christian judges.

    But it would’ve given the religious propagandists a lot of talking points, and, contrary to the birther issue, this might cause some long-term discussions between strong believers and rationalists.

  26. avatar
    Sef August 12, 2011 at 11:53 am #

    The Magic M: It would’ve made quite some headlines if taken to court. After all, how often do courts get to decide on biblical issues?

    However I think that pointing to the Bible as proof of common ancestry would likely not prevail, not even before the most die-hard Christian judges.

    But it would’ve given the religious propagandists a lot of talking points, and, contrary to the birther issue, this might cause some long-term discussions between strong believers and rationalists.

    But they could have dragged in some geneticists who could have talked about mtDNA Eve and Y-cromosomal Adam and the MRCA. At least that has scientific validity. It wouldn’t get them anywhere, however, as the DOH rules implementing the law cut off at grandparents.

  27. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny August 12, 2011 at 12:06 pm #

    Keith: Ever heard of “6 degrees of separation”?. Do you realize how many people are related to each other at the ’10th level’? The answer is “damn near everyone on the planet”.

    Geeze Louise!

    Although I once pleaded on wikipedia to delete an article on Obama’s distant cousins, I know this is often claimed, but not entirely correct.

    Taking two as the average numer of kids surviving into adult age to reproduce, you should have 4 first cousins only. However, you yourself also have a sister or brother who is going to produce cousins for your descendants. So, taking removeds into consideration, you are talking thousands and thousands of tenth cousins here not 2,048 as some genealogical sites claim erroneously.

    Take three (probably more correct for most of US history until, er, 1961) children per generation and you are getting into a few millions. Instead of 4+1 you now have 9+2 reproducers in the first generation.

    Meaning that the fact that Obama and Bush are 10th cousins is not very relevant.

  28. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny August 12, 2011 at 12:14 pm #

    John Reilly:
    Assuming the cousin comes forward and satisfies the DOH that he or she is related and entitled to “inspect” the record under the statute as part of genealogical research, the Hawaii DOH would, at best, issue a certified short form birth certificate.Before arguing about the meaning of this section, John ought to tell us where we find the proof that the vaults of the DOH are crawling with researchers checking on their family history.

    I wonder what any genealogical research about Obama would need to ascertain other than the exact names, birth places and birth dates of the parents.

    Since the Hawaii DOH has power of discretion, any cousin would simply be told to check the internet. Which, in the case of Obama’s father, would, if used diligently as any good genealogical researcher should be able to do, would actually give the correct date – unlike the birth certificate of his son.

    And any court asked to rule about the propriety of Hawaii’s use of discretion, would probably tell the “cousin” that (s)he was given the right answer.

  29. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 12, 2011 at 2:36 pm #

    Actually, the MRCA was mentioned along with Adam and Noah.

    Sef: But they could have dragged in some geneticists who could have talked about mtDNA Eve and Y-cromosomal Adam and the MRCA.

  30. avatar
    Bovril August 12, 2011 at 5:57 pm #

    Mad Ole Orly has reached unprecedented new truth and insight in her latest tome o’ cack she has filed in Hawai’i

    I particularly love where she fainally admits what we have all known for so long

    28. Knowing, that the certificate of live birth posted on WhiteHouse.govTaitz is a forgery according to experts, Taitz looked for a possible source of the serial number 10641 used on that birth certificate.

    Then to make it perfect…..it’s a duplicate finding number !!!!!!

    28. From the beginning of June, for a period of three month, there was no response to the
    request for the administrative appeal, which is tantamount to a denial of the request for the
    appeal.
    28. Knowing, that the certificate of live birth posted on WhiteHouse.govTaitz is a forgery
    according to experts,

  31. avatar
    Keith August 13, 2011 at 3:51 am #

    Paul Pieniezny: Meaning that the fact that Obama and Bush are 10th cousins is not very relevant.

    I’m not exactly clear what you are saying here, but I think you are agreeing with my sentiment but chastising me for hyperbolic inaccuracy.

    OK, I can live with that.

  32. avatar
    The Magic M August 13, 2011 at 7:57 am #

    Keith: Ever heard of “6 degrees of separation”?. Do you realize how many people are related to each other at the ’10th level’? The answer is “damn near everyone on the planet”.

    But 6 degrees only refers to “knowing someone”, not to “being related to someone”. I think for actual family relations, you’d have to go quite a bit beyond the 10th level.

  33. avatar
    HellT August 13, 2011 at 4:24 pm #

    Sef: If you look in the DOH rules which implement this law you will see that the common ancestor cuts off at grandparents. That means only aunts, uncles, 1st cousins (0-n removed), (g)parents and descendants.

    There’s another requirement: the department will only issue copies of birth certificates that are dated 75 years or more in the past. This is a fairly common (and fairly recent) requirement that most states have implemented, due to the dual concerns of privacy and identification theft.