Main Menu

Archive | October, 2014

Lax birth registration in Hawaii?

Where’s the evidence?

Despite Mike Zullo’s representations, citing Verna K. Lee, of a highly precise and error free operation of the Hawaii Health Bureau’s Vital Statistics division in 1961, when it suited his purposes in interpreting a race code on the President’s long form birth certificate, Zullo at the same time asserted that registration procedures were lax and that persons got birth certificates that shouldn’t have.

Larry Klayman in his recent petition to have Obama deported makes similar statements asserting the lax version of Hawaii Health Bureau operations, following in the footsteps of Mike Zullo, who stated in his “Alabama affidavit”:

…due to a loop holes in the state of Hawaii’s vital statistics reporting laws, there was the distinct evidence suggesting that Hawaii’s statutes appeared to be in conflict with federal immigration law and posed an independent threat to the national security of the United States.

Zullo later specifies what this loop hole is, citing HRS § 338-17.8 “Certificates for children born out of State” of which Zullo writes:

By statutory provision Hawaii has granted upon itself the unique power to confer citizenship to children not born in the United States, and to children not born to United States citizen parents, but to children actually born on foreign soil.

Zullo is lying. Nothing in HRS § 338-17.8 confers citizenship, and indeed no birth certificate of any kind by any state “confers” citizenship. A birth certificate is proof of the facts of birth, where, when and to whom. One need but look at any Hawaiian birth certificate to see that (1) it states where the birth occurred and (2) it says nothing about citizenship. Zullo also fails to disclose that HRS § 338-17.8 didn’t even exist when Barack Obama was born (it was passed in 1982).

Zullo goes on to assert lax procedures by citing statutes, which do not contain detailed procedures. What he does not show is the administrative procedures, regulations and policies in effect.

Klayman puts the story together in his petition, saying:

One of the main reasons that this entire topic is controversial and difficult is that Hawaii became a State on August 21, 1959, and as a very new State in the 1960’s was extremely lax in creating birth certificates for those not born in Hawaii or anywhere else in the United States of America. Hawaii not only had to work out procedure to operate as a new State but also had a culture of openness and relationship to nations throughout the Pacific Rim – recall that Kenya is a coastal nation along the Pacific Ocean / Indian Ocean – which allowed very loose concepts of Hawaii citizenship and immigration.

As a result, Hawaii routinely and by standard legal procedure issued birth certificates for children who were not born in Hawaii or anywhere in the United States. Furthermore, Hawaii allowed birth certificate to be issued based on the unverified claims of one or both parents – anyone signing for them (such as a grandparent).

People assume that the existence of a birth certificate from Hawaii proves a  birth in Hawaii, when Hawaii law at the time is explicit that a parent could lawfully request a birth certificate from Hawaii for a child born in a foreign country.

Searching over a several year period, various researchers have found repeated listings of birth to Japanese parents as being reported in the newspapers as Hawaiian births, even though the child was found to be born in Japan. In 1961, Hawaii Department of Health appears to have used local area offices outside Honolulu as reporting centers in which parents and other family members could present children born to the family as Hawaiian births, without submitting any proof that the child was actually born in Hawaii.

The problem is a so exacerbated by the more limited scope of medical care and government at the time. As a result, births outside of a hospital were not rare.

For the most part, Klayman is lying. The first lie is the suggestion that Hawaii had to scramble to put together vital records procedures when it became a state in 1959. In fact, Hawaii had been a US Territory since 1898, and the statutes for vital records in effect when President Obama was born in 1961 dated to 1955 (revised in 1959).

Klayman descends to the silly when he cites Kenya as a country of the “Pacific Rim” (see Pacific Rim map below). It may be that Klayman does not know where the Pacific Ocean is.

NotPacific Rim

Next, Klayman says: “Hawaii law at the time is explicit that a parent could lawfully request a birth certificate from Hawaii for a child born in a foreign country.” The statute for issuing out of state births was passed in 1982, not “at the time” when Barack Obama was born.

Klayman rambles on about registration procedures when a child is born, not attended by a doctor, while dishonestly failing to mention that Barack Obama was born in a Honolulu hospital with a birth certificate signed by a doctor. Klayman fails to provide any regulations or administrative procedure documentation whatever to back up his claim of lax requirements. He doesn’t know what the requirements were and just assumes there weren’t any.

Klayman mentions alleged Japanese children listed among births in Hawaiian newspapers. He cites “various researchers” studying “a several year period.” He doesn’t name the researchers, he doesn’t specify the period, and he doesn’t cite a single birth. In fact, to my knowledge, no birther has ever provided a specific instance, and no reason has been given to believe any of it. Klayman got it from Zullo, and Zullo, as we know, gets his facts from birther web sites.

One almost gets the impression that Klayman thinks Hawaii in 1961 was some kind of third world country with “limited scope of medical care,” and goes on to suggest that births outside of a hospital “were not rare.” Where did he get that notion? If Klayman had actually bothered to do minimal research he could have found that, according to the Vital Statistics of the Unites States for 1961, in the United States as a whole, 97 out of every 100 births were delivered in Hospitals (p. 1-13) and according to 1961 VSUS statistics for Hawaii, there were 17,578 births, of which 17,516 were in a hospital and attended by a physician, or more than 99 out of 100! Hawaii had a higher percentage of hospital births than the rest of the country. Indeed only 0.35% of Hawaiian births were not in a hospital attended by a physician! And this is what Klayman says is “not rare.” The guy is a first-class idiot.

If indeed vital records procedures in Hawaii were so lax, and all manner of abuses were prevalent, why is it that Klayman and his entire birther tribe have not been able to cite one single instance of vital records fraud in the history of the State of Hawaii, and only one example from the Territory of Hawaii, 110 years ago!

It’s a vicious circle. Zullo cribs from birther web sites. Klayman cribs from Zullo. The birthers then cite Zullo and Klayman as authorities.

Klayman petitions to have Obama deported

I had the opportunity once more yesterday to pass through US Immigration and the key document I presented to prove my right to enter the United States was my US  passport. To get a passport, I had to prove my citizenship by presenting a birth certificate. Barack Obama has a passport (and a birth certificate) too:

Larry Klayman, attorney and anti-Obama frequent filer, doesn’t find that good enough for him, and citing birther books, YouTube videos and affidavits from the likes of Mike Zullo, Joe Arpaio, Jerome Corsi and Lucas Daniel Smith1, Klayman has petitioned the U. S. Department of Homeland Security, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement to initiate an investigation leading to deportation proceedings against their boss, the President. The petition is quite detailed, and interested readers are encouraged to read the whole piece.

The petition even garnered a blog article in US News and World Report, who said:

Obama’s birth certificate, validated by the Hawaii state government and publicly released in April 2011, says he was born in Honolulu on Aug. 4, 1961. Birth announcements were printed in two local newspapers at the time. There has never been legitimate evidence presented showing Obama was born outside of the U.S.

Klayman is  once again using his notoriety to bring an essay into the theater of the absurd before the public.

image


1Curiously, the Freedom Watch petition web page has several of the exhibits from the petition, but not Exhibit E, the affidavit of Lucas Smith.

An open letter to Pastor Carl Gallups

In response to the September 26, 2014 Freedom Friday Show

by Brian Reilly

"If I find out Zullo’s lying to me, I’ll tell the world about that."

— Carl Gallups, Freedom Friday 9/26/2014

Pastor Gallups, I have listened to you on the radio, several times over the past few years and quite frankly, the information that you present, on occasion, does not match with my experience and training as a former, volunteer Cold Case Posse member who not only worked shoulder to shoulder with Mr. Mike Zullo, but I was also recruited for the Cold Case Posse by Mr. Mike Zullo. (I became a CCP member on April 17, 2012 and I resigned,  10 weeks later on June 30, 2012, after I saw the inner workings of the Cold Case Posse.)

For example, I recall you stated on your program or read in your articles your reference to Mr. Zullo as a professional, law enforcement officer.  In one of your articles you refer to the combined 80 years of law enforcement experience that Sheriff Arpaio and Mr. Zullo have together. I’ve also heard you say or publish the titles, "Detective" and "Lieutenant" referring to Mr. Zullo’s rank within the Cold Case Posse.  Please, feel free to correct me if I’m inaccurate.

In Mike Zullo’s Alabama affidavit, he refers to himself as a "former" law enforcement officer. When my wife and I attended the March 1, 2012 Cold Case Posse press conference, Mr. Zullo was asked, by the press,  about how much law enforcement experience he had.  "Five years" was his response, and that was in New Jersey, not Arizona. Zullo volunteers in an unpaid Posse position. How does the word, "professional" apply?  Sheriff Arpaio, at the time of the 80 years comment made above, I believe had 50 or 51 years of law enforcement experience.  Were you suggesting that Mr. Zullo had 29-30 years of professional law enforcement experience? And, in the Posse, we had no military rank.  Former MCSO Deputy Chief, Brian Sands, with a reported 30 years of law enforcement experience, classified the Posse title "Commander" simply as a point of contact for the Posse in his book "Arpaio, Defacto Lawman." (Available on line at Barnes & Nobles.)

In your articles, I believe that I’ve read that you have a decade of previous professional law enforcement experience. I would assume that you were paid for your service as a professional.  I would assume to become a sworn law enforcement officer, you went through a state certification process.  I would assume that you had a title such as Police Officer,  Deputy Sheriff or Corrections Officer or the like.  I would assume that you carried a law enforcement commission card, that identified you as a state certified,  sworn law enforcement officer. I assume that you carried a badge that stated your law enforcement position and your department.  I assume that you had the authority to enforce the law, inherent with the position of a certified sworn law enforcement officer.  Pastor Gallups, have you asked Mike Zullo if his experience is the same as yours?  Posse members are not sworn, state certified, law enforcement officers.

In your Sharon Rondeau / Post & Email article, you are quoted as saying that you asked Sheriff Arpaio if Mike Zullo is really a law enforcement officer. To quote your question to Sheriff Arpaio, "Tell me, tell our audience: Does Mike Zullo really have law enforcement powers?  Is he [Zullo] a bona fide law enforcement officer with the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office? Does he [Zullo] have arrest authority?" Sheriff Arpaio’s response: "Yes, yes, yes, and yes.  He works for me, and he is a bona fide law enforcement officer with my authority." The key words, "with my authority."  Pastor Gallups, I would remind you that "bona fide" refers to "genuine." As Posse members we were told that we could only act if given a command by a sworn MCSO Deputy Sheriff, who was a state certified law enforcement officer.

Pastor Gallups, in your law enforcement position, could you be arrested for impersonating a law enforcement officer?  Did you know, according to our Posse training classes, we were told, never to carry our badges when not doing volunteer Posse work?  We were told to leave our badges at home so that we would not use the badges for identification, as volunteer Posse members  could be arrested for impersonating a law enforcement officer. I’m sure that you would agree, a bona fide, state certified law enforcement officer would not be arrested for showing his badge for identification.  Can you think of anytime that you would have been arrested as a real law enforcement officer for showing your badge?  I was told in our Ethics / Law & Legal training classes that Posse members have been prosecuted here in Arizona for impersonating law enforcement officers.

And finally, I communicated this week with Executive Director Lyle Mann of Arizona Peace Officers Standards and Training (AZ POST).  My question to him was: "Has Michael P. Zullo EVER been AZ POST certified as a law enforcement officer?"  Director Mann’s reply:  "No he has not." lylem@azpost.gov.

Pastor Gallups, I hope that you will consider the things that I have written in this letter, and seek the truth.
 
Regards,
Brian Reilly

First US Ebola case; Doc leaves country

A semicolon does not imply causality, and actually I left the US before the Ebola case was confirmed. All I’ll say is that I haven’t met Lucas Smith, and I haven’t found any new birth certificates for Barack Obama.

Normal blog operations will resume when I return in a few days.