It now seems almost certain that in 1961, the penciled codes on Hawaiian Certificates of Live birth were unique to that department and did not follow any federal standard.
In the wee hours of this morning John Woodman published a remarkable article on his blog: Exclusive! “New Girl” Confirms Her Parents’ Race — and I Crack the Actual Entries, Confirming that Arpaio’s Codes Don’t Match the Hawaii Codes, Either, in which he documents that Hawaiian race code “3” designates “part Hawaiian” (not “Indian” as claimed by the Cold Case Posse).
I had disclosed that a few of us knew the identity of the person whose birth certificate Jerome Corsi redacted (inadequately) and published in WorldNetDaily. Mr. Woodman actually contacted the holder of that certificate, who had loaned it to Corsi at the request of a “friend.” She confirmed that her father and mother are of mixed ancestry including Hawaiian. Mr. Corsi, if you are reading this, SHE WANTS HER CERTIFICATE BACK! It was a loan and the only one she has.
Now, thanks to the discovery of another new certificate registered in April of 1961 (signed by none other than Verna K. Lee herself), we have another code:
Code 2 is “Hawaiian.” This certificate also confirms Woodman’s result that code “3” is “part Hawaiian.”
For the benefit of those not familiar with the coder’s handwriting, here’s another example of the “2” from the same form.
So here are the codes so far:
|What “African” was called||9|
Let me remind you of the faux code table that the Cold Case Posse presented:
This table that the Cold Case Posse tried to foist on the nation as the codes used to code authentic birth certificates from Hawaii, claims that Code 2 was “Negro” and code 3 is “Indian.” Verna K. Lee states that no mistakes were made on her watch and so this proves beyond any doubt that Corsi, Zullo and company lied both about having ANY 1961 race code table, federal or Hawaiian.
In addition to presenting a false code table (actually one from 1968), the Cold Case Posse also played another trick. They made the false assertion that using their table, there was an inconsistency in Obama’s birth certificate because according to them “9” means “not stated” and Obama’s father’s race was stated. However, code “9” (even it were listed correctly in the table) does not mean “not stated” but “unknown or not stated.” African is an ambiguous race (there are black, white, Arab and Asians in Kenya). It is a perfectly normal response to code “unknown” when the racial designation doesn’t tell the coder what race to use.
Based on my experience with race codes in health data systems that goes back to 1974, I have never seen a race table where Hawaiian appeared near the top. White was always first, followed by black and then other stuff. Only a uniquely-Hawaiian code set would be structured like this. The last code in the table is usually the catch all for what doesn’t fit the preceding codes. On some items, code “0” is used for “not stated” such as the “Date Last Worked” item under mother. I have also seen “0” on death certificates when the occupation is not stated.
So what is code “9?” If I had to guess, it’s “other” but we really don’t know; however, there is no evidence of internal inconsistency in Barack Obama’s birth certificate and the codes on it.
Thanks to the individual who pointed me to the certificate featured in this article.