RSSBirth Certificate Vs. Certification Of Live Birth
Carl Andrews | July 17, 2009
We just did a story bringing to light how the U.S. Army revoked the orders of a Major scheduled to deploy to Afghanistan after he filed a lawsuit claiming that the deployment would be illegal due to the fact that Barack Obama has failed to produce a birth certificate, therefore he has not proven his eligibility to be Commander-In-Chief.
To say that we started a firestorm would be putting it mildly.
We had our fair share of rational responses, as well as the usual off-topic comments, accusations of being right-wing nuts, etc.
As well as a few that were too obscene to put into print.
It turns out that our theory that the document presented by Obama appears to be homemade has some support, in that it seems that there is a difference between a “Certification of Live Birth” as opposed to a “Certificate of Live Birth.”
Our friend Pamela at Atlas Shrugs also presents a compelling case that the document presented as proof that Obama is a natural-born American citizen is indeed a forgery.
And for you Obamanites who claim that there is no difference between a Certification of Live Birth and a Birth Certificate, we, as well as the State of Hawaii, would have to disagree with you.
Pay close attention to the following Hawaiian legal statute:
“[§338-17.8] Certificates for children born out of State.
(a) Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.
(b) Proof of legal residency shall be submitted to the director of health in any manner that the director shall deem appropriate. The director of health may also adopt any rules pursuant to chapter 91 that he or she may deem necessary or proper to prevent fraudulent applications for birth certificates and to require any further information or proof of events necessary for completion of a birth certificate.
(c) The fee for each application for registration shall be established by rule adopted pursuant to chapter 91. [L 1982, c 182, §1]”
Everybody get that?
As long as an adult can walk into Hawaii’s version of the Department of Records and provide proof that they are a legal resident of Hawaii, the document is issued.
The child, on the other hand, could have been born in Hawaii, Kenya, or a back-alley in Budapest.
How much more proof do you disciples of the Messiah need before you will admit that there are legitimate reasons to demand answers on this issue?
Of course the fact that Obama may have been elected to our nation’s highest office in direct violation of the United States Constitution is not something that would greatly trouble a dedicated Kool-Aid drinker.
Contributor's website: http://freedomedium.com/
Content posted by users from other sites is posted for commentary and news purposes under fair use and each author is responsible for their own postings and a particular posting should not be construed as being endorsed by this site or its owner.
6 Responses to “Birth Certificate Vs. Certification Of Live Birth”
Leave a Reply
Loading ...Recommended Reading:
hasnt the department of health said that they have his certified birth certificate on file?
I suppose the newspaper notice issued on the day of his birth in a Hawaiian newspaper, which is a matter of record, was also fraudulent? 46 years in advance just in case he was going to run for President one day?
Kim,
You are incorrect. The birth announcement did not appear until August 13th. Obama was born on August 4th. There was no “newspaper notice issued on the day of his birth.”
Image of the actual document here. Announcement is in lower left. Date is in upper left.
US Army Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook refusing to deploy is nothing more than evidence that he is a coward.
I guess then we can also say that Obama’s refusal to release his birth certificate is nothing more than further evidence that he is a coward as well then.
FOrget the legitimacy of the the complaint right Bill?
What about his grandmother in Kenya stating that a boy born in Kenya is President of the U.S.?
If this is no big deal to some, what about Obama
having to become a citizen of Indonesia in order to attend school? That would nullify his US citizenship and then when he returned to the US, did he become a naturalized citizen?
He is still not in compliance with the Constitution.
If Obama is above board, why don’t he and his team submit the official documents to prove his eligibility? Doesn’t withholding info suggest there’s something afoot?