Part Five: Fuddy Illegally Executes the Plan

In Part Four (25) we saw that Department of Health (DOH) Director Neal Palafox was forced to resign on Jan 26, 2011 – the same day as the story about Mike Evans’ conversation with Gov. Abercrombie went viral on the internet. Abercrombie had denied that he asked Palafox to resign, DOH Communications Director Janice Okubo had said he resigned for personal reasons, anonymous sources at the Attorney General’s (AG’s) office had said he was being investigated for patient billing fraud, and AG Louie refused to say whether he was or was not being investigated. Three days later, when Palafox told a news reporter that he had no idea why he resigned, the governor’s office admitted they had asked him to resign but wouldn’t say why. His duties were immediately taken over by Loretta Fuddy. Unlike Palafox, Fuddy did not resist Abercrombie and Louie’ plan to create a new birth certificate (BC) for Obama at the request of law enforcement, but was instead willing to break multiple laws in order to hide the problems with Obama’s documentation – which Abercrombie had openly admitted to his friend, Mike Evans.

According to Abercrombie’s statements to Evans, there was no hospital BC or other proof of a Hawaii birth for Obama in Hawaii but there was something “actually written down” in the State Archives. Having gone to the hospitals with a search warrant, he would have been allowed to see the labor room log in the archives at Kapiolani Hospital, which is open to the public but which Cold Case Posse Commander Mike Zullo was not allowed to see. (1 ) It would list Obama’s mother’s name if she had been admitted to deliver a baby there. Since Abercrombie said there was no proof of a Hawaii birth, her name was presumably not on that log. Her name on that log would have been discloseable to the public and convincing proof – exactly what he was looking for! Instead, he told Mike Evans there was no proof of a Hawaii birth to be found, even with a search warrant. Presumably her name was not on those lists. Obama did not have a hospital-generated BC as of January 2011.

And that made sense with previous disclosures. Former DOH Director, Chiyome Fukino, had made a public statement on Oct 31, 2008, confirming that Obama’s original birth record was on file in accordance with the rules and regulations (but she had illegally hidden those rules from the public until almost a year after Obama was elected) (2)(and Exhibit H). Later (July 27, 2009) she said she had seen the vital records (plural) verifying (swearing )that Obama was born in Hawaii. And still later she said that his birth record was half written and half typed (unlike the White House image, which is all typed). Open records requests effectively confirmed (3) that affidavits and/or other evidence had been submitted in support of the claims in the birth record (which is only necessary for late and/or amended BC’s and would not be necessary for a hospital BC) and that his BC was amended in late 2006 (4) .

Taken together, Abercrombie, Fukino, Office of Information Practices Director Paul Tsukiyama, and DOH Communications Director Janice Okubo all seemed to agree that Obama had a birth record based on affidavits rather than on a hospital birth certificate, and he had amended that birth record in late 2006. Late and altered BC’s are legally non-valid (they are not legally presumed to be accurate and have no legal evidentiary value unless a judicial or administrative official or body examines them under the rules of evidence and finds them to be probative). Around March of 2010 someone under the direction of Fukino had altered the 1960-64 birth index so it would include some (but not all) non-valid records (5) So Obama had a non-hospital BC (a reported home birth) that had to be amended with an affidavit in late 2006. As later effectively confirmed by registrar Alvin Onaka (28, 29) it was legally non-valid (see Exhibit I for documentation regarding amendments to records without an attendant’s signature) and Fukino had covered for him by adding his name to the 1960-64 birth index. (The next installment will

explore why the non-validity of the original record caused Onaka to confirm the non-validity of the newly-created record as well).

To give Obama a new BC (27) that appeared to show a routine Kapiolani Hospital birth and claimed all the right things, they had to give him a new BC# as well, according to the statute (HRS 138-17.7). Normally this would mean the next number after the last one used for 1961. But in order to protect Obama (by convincing “birthers” that Obama was born in Hawaii), as law enforcement claimed was necessary, they had to give Obama the BC# that was on the COLB he had already presented to the public . That BC# already belonged to the 3rd child born in Honolulu after Gretchen Nordyke – almost certainly Stig Waidelich.

WND later reported (6) ) that a credible source with contacts in the DOH told them in February 2011 that there was a birth certificate ready to be placed in the file but the snag was the BC#’s . If they used the BC# on the COLB, it would have the discrepancy of being a later number than the Nordykes’ BC#’s even though Obama was born before them. If they used a different number it would expose the COLB as a forgery – which would never do because the purpose of a new BC was to “protect” Obama from those who rightly believed his COLB was a forgery.

The only way out of that boondoggle was to put out disinformation to keep people from knowing how the BC’s were really numbered. And they preferred to do it through computer printouts so they wouldn’t have to forge a bunch of long-form records.

On March 2, Fuddy was officially appointed Director (7). As of March 15th the Vital Records office was still issuing certified copies of long-forms (8) On March 23 Donald Trump said Obama should release his long-form (9) and on March 29 Trump disclosed his own long-form (10) There was suddenly a need to explain why Obama had been unwilling to do the same all this time. The following is what she appears to have done, based on the available evidence.

Sometime between the end of March and April 12th Fuddy quietly changed the request form for certified copies of a birth certificate – eliminating the option of getting a long-form (11) Little did she know that on April 7 Miki Booth would post an image of a long-form issued on March 15 th, which would expose as false her coming attempts to claim that copies of long-forms had not been issued since 2001. Also on April 7th Trump appeared on NBC’s “Today” show expressing doubts about Obama’s documentation (12)

In response, sometime between April 7-11 a “rare telephone interview” was arranged between CBS’s Michael Issikof and former DOH Director Chiyome Fukino, who described Obama’s “half-written, half typed”, “properly numbered” BIRTH RECORD (she cautiously stepped around the word “birth certificate” because the doctor’s signature that she mentioned was not on the birth certificate since it was not a hospital-issued BC; it was on the affidavit kept in a separate evidence file (see Exhibit I), which is also why she said that the record was placed in a “file”). This was the “birth record” that Obama had at the HDOH at the time Abercrombie said there was no birth certificate for Obama in Hawaii.

That article was published on April 11 (13) and included comments by Joshua Wisch, spokesman for the AG’s office, saying that the law does not allow photocopies to be made - a totally false claim as is seen clearly in both HRS 338-13 (see Exhibit A) and in the DOH Administrative Rules (see Exhibit B) which allows standard (non-abbreviated/abstracted) copies to be made ONLY by photo/microfilm, photocopy, or typing. The law does NOT give the Director discretion to make “policy” changes that directly contradict the Administrative Rules, which require a formal process and an official start date and must

be published for the public to see. The Rules specifically say when the Director has discretion to make policies that supplement the Rules, but nowhere gives the Director discretion in these cases. The law also says that neither a rule nor policy can be in effect until it has been published for the public to see. Chapter 8b lists those who are eligible to receive a STANDARD copy of their original birth record (including the confidential portion upon request) (see Exhibit B), and HRS 338-13 says that UPON REQUEST the DOH SHALL (mandatory) provide. (see Exhibit A). The standard for the disclosure of government records is that is an agency CAN disclose what is requested they MUST disclose it. (See Exhibit C)

So the Attorney General’s office is caught in a flat-out lie, as needed by Fuddy to unlawfully make her the sole gate-keeper over all the paper birth certificates, to decide what could be seen and what would only be disclosed on an easily-altered computer printout.

Within the next 10 days after Issikof’s article, the HDOH arranged a stunt with CNN’s Gary Tuchman, Monica Waidelich (living in Hawaii), and Stig Waidelich (flown in from Port Townsend, WA), to have CNN videotape Stig picking up his COLB (with altered BC#) at the HDOH office on April 22 – the SAME DAY as Obama requested his long-form, although Obama’s attorney, Judith Corley, spoke to Fuddy on April 21 to ask what needed to be done to get a long-form. The BC request from Corley (14) talks about the DOH’s “long-standing policy” to ONLY issue short-forms (apparently a month-long policy is “long-standing”, since a certified long-form was issued just a month earlier… In the press gaggle on April 27 (15), Bob Bauer claimed this policy had been in effect since the 1980’s:

“The policy in question, by the way, on non-release has been in effect since the mid-1980s, I understand.  So while I cannot tell you what the entire history of exceptions has been, it is a limited one.  This is one of

very few that I understand have been granted for the reasons set out in private counsel’s letter.”

I wonder what was so special about Miki Booth’s friend, that she got a long-form on March 15, 2011. Or the gal who was videotaped in July 2010 requesting a long-form and being told – without any Director being consulted – that she would receive it in about 2 weeks, according to the person who made the recording (16). ..

This argument was apparently worked out between Corley, Fuddy, the AG’s office, and CNN by April 22 (see following paragraph). Tuchman’s segment was put together over the weekend and aired on Monday, April 25 (17)

CNN’s accompanying article (18) said that Obama could make a FOIA request to see his birth certificate and COULD make a copy but it would not convince the “birthers”. (This represents a shift in argument, with Hawaii no longer claiming that the law doesn’t ALLOW photocopies but instead saying the law allows Fuddy discretion to decide how certified“copies” will be made – never addressing whether she can censor what information can be received as well…)

By 6:17am the next morning (see Exhibit D) a poster attempted to post on my blog a comment asking whether I had seen the CNN segment and noticed that Stig Waidelich’s BC# didn’t fit my “theory” for the numbering. I approved the comment later in the morning and responded by saying that it was clearly a stunt orchestrated by CNN and the HDOH to put out disinformation trying to hide Obama’s BC# problem.(19) Three days later (2 days after Obama’s long-form image was released), Dr Conspiracy proposed the theory that the BC’s were collected for a while and then alphabetized (by last name only) before they were numbered. (20) This was the theory that Fuddy floated from then on, as we will see.

The same day as the Tuchman stunt aired, Fuddy witnessed the copying of 2 copies of Obama’s birth certificate and state registrar Alvin Onaka certified the copies, according to Abercrombie’s press release (21) (posted shortly after being created at 9:03am on April 27). Obama’s Seattle-based attorney, Judith Corley, arrived at the DOH office the next day and picked up the BC’s and Fuddy’s letter, and arrived with them in DC that evening.

But – considering that Alvin Onaka later refused to confirm to AZ SOS Ken Bennett the genuineness of the White House image (29) and refused to confirm to KS SOS Kris Kobach that the information in the White House image was identical to that in the HDOH record (30) – what she picked up had surprises in it that had to be “fixed” by the next morning so Obama could have a press conference disclosing the birth certificate in DC and then go immediately to Chicago to poke fun at “birthers” on a pre-scheduled Oprah appearance that the low-information voters would be sure to see. (The next article will be about the person who Abercrombie says “certified” the birth certificates – with 2 blatant red flags in his “certification”).

At 8:48am EDT on April 27 a press gaggle was begun, with Obama’s announcement following. At 9:26 the link to a White House PDF was linked at Free Republic (22) The link given (23) now has a creation time of 12:09pm. The PDF that was posted at 9:26 had not been “flattened” so the layers used to create the forgery were still available to be viewed. That was noticed immediately, by everybody including me, the computer moron, when I tried to copy the document into a Word file. Somebody flattened the file at 12:09pm and replaced the revealing PDF with the flattened version. At 12:50am a Freeper noticed the red-flag TXE instead of THE in Onaka’s certifying statement .(24) That was before the DOH office even opened in Hawaii.

Probably before even realizing that something was terribly wrong, Abercrombie created and posted a PDF telling about the fulfillment of Obama’s request for his “records” (again, that plural word) . At 10:27am someone at the DOH office created the PDF of the supposed 2001 “memo” saying they would only issue short-form birth certificates (see Exhibit E). This “policy” is not lawful, since it not only violates Chapter 8b of the Administrative Rules but also raises the cost of getting certification of ALL the birth facts for Department of Hawaiian Homelands purposes from $10 to $15 – which is more than a 10% increase and thus HAS to go through a rule change and not just a “policy” change. But even if it WAS lawful without the formal rule amendment procedures, it cannot go into effect until it is posted publicly (see Exhibit F)– which means this policy was put into effect by Loretta Fuddy on the very day that Obama’s forged birth certificate was made public.

Additional confirmation that this memo did not exist until the PDF was created on April 27 th is the DOH’s response that they had no such records, when I specifically asked for all such records that defined and described the procedures for “abbreviated and standard copies” (the short-form and the long-form).(See Exhibit G)

So Fuddy orchestrated the alteration of the BC#’s, the stunt with CNN to disclose Waidelich’s altered BC# in order to hide the BC numbering method, and the illegal refusal to allow personal records to be disclosed even though required by statute. She or someone under her orders forged a 2001 memo that contradicts video footage, a certified long-form, the requirements listed on the Department of Hawaiian Homelands website until early June of 2009, and the DOH response to my request for any documents like this memo).

Because it’s too easy to manipulate a computer printout (so short-forms prove nothing) she had to turn to other long-forms to try to spread the alphabetization theory. Long-form BC’s had to be from before 2001 because there weren’t supposed to be any long-forms issued after 2001. So around September of 2011 she ordered a long-form birth certificate for Johanna Ah Nee to be forged with a fake way-too-early BC#, with forged certification as if it had been issued in 1995. But the worker forced to forge it put in red flags (overlapping BC# digits and a clearly forged signature for Onaka – someone trying too hard to make it look like the signature stamp on Peter Kema’s COLB) (see Exhibit J). Through Ah Nee, she fed it to World Net Daily who believed it to be genuine because the seal was from the HDOH.

Then when Duncan Sunahara wanted his deceased sister’s birth certificate they had to come up with something for her. The difficulty was that by then they were running out of people born within the relevant time period who were already dead and so wouldn’t have the risk of genuine 1961 BC’s showing up and exposing their fraud. They had to use either dead or complicit people, and they were running out of them. They gave Sunahara a BC# that didn’t work with the alphabetization theory. The HDOH forger went to extra trouble to deliberately put in the red flags of mismatched and misaligned fonts, a birth code on a death certificate, and Territory of Hawaii abbreviation on a State of Hawaii certificate – all on the same line as a handwritten BC# that should have belonged to someone born in Honolulu rather than in Wahiawa where she was born (26).

Summary: When Loretta Fuddy took over, after Palafox’s forced resignation, she had a new BC created for Obama at the request of law enforcement using Stig Waidelich’s BC#.

In order to hide that Obama’s BC# was illegally stolen from Waidelich, she altered at least 3 other BC#’s and fed them to the public via a stunt orchestrated with CNN and Stig and Monica Waidelich, a complicit Johanna Ah Nee, and a death certificate forgery - to try to hide how the BC’s were numbered.

After first conspiring with the AG’s office and Michael Issikof to lay a foundation of lies about what she can lawfully do, she violated the Administrative Rules and at least 3 statutes by instituting an illegal “policy” to keep people from being able to get photocopies/scans of original birth certificates, and at the same time forged and posted a 2001 memo to make it look like the policy had been in effect for a long time – to match the inaccurate statements given by Bob Bauer at the press gaggle. She illegally instituted that policy (by posting the forged memo) on the very day that Obama released his forged long-form image.

But she didn’t get away with it because others at the HDOH followed in the footsteps of the fired Neal Palafox, resisting the lawless deeds they were ordered to do, The clues they left are how we can know what really happened. The next article will be about one very prominent man at the HDOH and how he resisted.

Endnotes:

1) See http://www.scribd.com/doc/100808537/Unofficial-Transcript-of-the-MCCP-Press-Conference-July-17-2012

2) see http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2010/01/11/one-person%E2%80%99s-attempt-to-get-doh-administrative-rules/

3) see http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/tsukiyama-indirect-confirmation-of-evidence-submitte11.pdf

4) see http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2011/03/03/amendment-confirmation-for-dummies/5) see http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/birth-index-includes-nonvalid-records-

_documentation-included_.pdf6) at http://www.wnd.com/2011/05/303749/

7) see http://www.hawaiireporter.com/abercrombie-appoints-health-director/1238) see http://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2011/04/07/donald-can-miki-can-why-cant-obama/ 9) see http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/house-races/151625-donald-trump-demands-obamas-

birth-certificate 10) see http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/03/donald-trump-releases-official-birth-

certificate.html 11) see http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2703662/posts12) see http://www.today.com/id/42469703#.UWHOO6JO-E013) see http://www.nbcnews.com/id/42519951#.UVxxkaJO-E0 14) see http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-

correspondence.pdf )15) posted at http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-

secretary-jay-carney-4272011 ,16) see http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/some-tropical-truth/ 17) see http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/04/25/birthers.obama.hawaii/index.html 18) at http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/04/25/birthers.obama.hawaii/index.html )19) see http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2011/04/25/hawaii-open-records-law-thrown-

overboard/ ).20) see http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/04/obamas-birth-certificate-number/ 21) at http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/News_Release_Birth_Certificate_042711.pdf22) see post 72 at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2711155/posts?page=80#80 23) http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf 24) see post 811 at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2711155/posts?page=824#811 25) http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2013/04/05/part-four-three-bizarre-events/ 26) http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2013/03/24/clue-2-obama-apparently-given-stig-waidelichs-

bc/ 27) http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2013/03/28/part-three-the-law-enforcement-provision/ 28) http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/complete-klayman-letter-to-bauer.pdf 29) http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/wheel-of-fortune-v-family-feud-final.pdf 30) http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2012/09/27/hdoh-did-not-verify-what-kansas-requested/

Exhibit A: HRS 338-13(copied from http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-

0013.htm . Emphasis mine)

     §338-13  Certified copies.  (a)  Subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18, the department of health shall, upon request, furnish to any applicant a certified copy of any certificate, or the contents of any certificate, or any part thereof.     (b)  Copies of the contents of any certificate on file in the department, certified by the department shall be considered for all purposes the same as the original, subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18.     (c)  Copies may be made by photography, dry copy reproduction, typing, computer printout or other process approved

by the director of health. [L 1949, c 327, §17; RL 1955, §57-16; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-13; am L 1978, c 49, §1] 

Previous Vol06_Ch0321-0344 Next

Exhibit B: “Public Health Regulations”, Chapter 8b(pp. 19-20 of the PDF)

Exhibit C: OIP Booklet(found at http://hawaii.gov/oip/UIPA%20Manual%205aug08.pdf ,

Page 13:

General Rule of DisclosureAll government records are open to thepublic unless access is restrictedor closed by law.

page 15, emphasis mine)

Agencies must also disclose:(1) Any record for which the requester hasobtained the prior written consent of allindividuals to whom the record refers;(2) Records expressly authorized by federalor state law to be disclosed to the personrequesting access;(3) Records where compelling circumstances

Pp 23-24:

HAWAII’S OPEN RECORDS LAWThe UIPA has a separate section that deals with an individual’sright to access and correct his or her own “personal records.”A “personal record” is a government record that containsinformation “about” the individual who is requesting the record.This includes an individual’s educational, financial, or medicalrecords, or items that reference the individual by name orotherwise.

Because “personal records” are also “government records,”they may also be requested by others under part II of the UIPA,the general public access section.

An agency is only required to provide access under part III toan “accessible” personal record, which generally means onethat is filed by the person’s name or other identifyinginformation, or which the agency can otherwise readily find….

(p 26) An agency must provide an individual access to his or herpersonal record within 10 working days after receiving arequest unless an exception under part III allows the agencyto withhold the record from that requester.The agency may extend its response period for an additional20 working days if, within the initial 10 day period, the agency

provides the individual with a written explanation of “unusualcircumstances” causing the delay.

The Exemptions from Disclosure (§92F-22)The personal records section of the UIPA contains its own setof exceptions, which differ from those for general governmentrecords requests.Generally, these exceptions protect:(1) Criminal law enforcement agency records;(2) Confidential source records;(3) Government exam records;(4) Investigative materials; and(5) Records protected by law

Exhibit D: Gorefan Comment Re: CNN Stunt(posted at http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2011/05/19/hdoh-funny-business-regarding-virginia-

sunahara/ while I still had access to my emails)

butterdezillion says:

May 20, 2011 at 7:38 pm  (Edit)

—– Original Message —–

From: “WordPress.com”

To: A new comment on the post “Hawaii Open Records Law Thrown Overboard” is waiting for your

approval

>http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2011/04/25/hawaii-open-records-law-thrown-overboard/

>

> Author : gorefan (IP redacted)

> E-mail : (redacted)

> URL :

> Whois : http://whois. (redacted)

> Comment:

> I assume you saw the CNN piece with Stig Waidelich. He was born on 8/5/1961. His birth

announcement is in the same papers as President Obama. His COLB says “date filed” and was filed

on 8/8/1961. But his Certificate Number is 151 1961 010920.

>

> How does that fit into your Birth Certificate numbering theory?

>

V

Exhibit E: PDF Creation Date/Time for the 2001 “Memo”(photo of my screen when I checked the document properties at http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-

records/Policy_Memo_5_15_2001 )

Exhibit F: HRS 91-2(b)(found at http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol02_Ch0046-0115/HRS0091/HRS_0091-

0002.htm )

     §91-2  Public information.  (a)  In addition to other rulemaking requirements imposed by law, each agency shall:

(2) Adopt as a rule a description of the methods whereby the public may obtain information or make submittals or requests.

     (2)  Adopt rules of practice, setting forth the nature and requirements of all formal and informal procedures available, and including a description of all forms and instructions used by the agency.

     (3)  Make available for public inspection all rules and written statements of policy or interpretation formulated, adopted, or used by the agency in the discharge of its functions.

     (4)  Make available for public inspection all final opinions and orders.

     (b)  No agency rule, order, or opinion shall be valid or effective against any person or party, nor may it be invoked by the agency for any purpose, until it has been published or made available for public inspection as herein required, except where a person has actual knowledge thereof.     I  Nothing in this section shall affect the confidentiality of records as provided by statute. [L 1961, c 103, §2; Supp, §6C-2; HRS §91-2] 

Case Notes   “Actual knowledge” referred to in section cannot give effect to rules not adopted in conformity with §91-3 and §91-4.  55 H. 478, 522 P.2d 1255.  Planning and permitting department’s policy of refusing to publicly disclose developer’s engineering reports prior to their approval constituted a “rule”; as this policy was not “published or made available for public inspection” nor did plaintiff have actual knowledge of the policy prior to its initial request for the reports, department did not comply with this chapter and was proscribed from invoking this policy; thus, department violated this chapter by refusing to publicly disclose any unaccepted engineering reports and written comments, and all of its files, including developer’s file, were public records that could be examined upon request.  119 H. 90, 194 P.3d 531.  Cited:  904 F. Supp. 1098.  

Previous Vol02_Ch0046-0115 Next

Exhibit G: No Records Defining Long-form and Short-form BC’s or the procedures involved

Don’t Have Documents Required by HRS 91-2bMy request: 

From: Nellie (redacted) Sent: Monday, December 21, 2009 2:03 PMTo: Okubo, Janice S.Subject: UIPA Request for Forms 12-21-09 Aloha, Ms. Okubo “Public Health Regulations, Chapter 8b, 2.4 B (2), I and (d) give the director of the DOH the discretion to decide what is to be contained on abbreviated copies, but abbreviated copies may only be issued when ALL the information required on the abbreviated form is included on a person’s original birth certificate on file. Pursuant to UIPA, I request either the department documents which describe what information is required to be included on an abbreviated copy of a birth certificate OR a blank, voided copy of the form for an abbreviated birth certificate. I also request any documents defining  “standard birth certificate”, “abbreviated copy of a birth certificate”, “Certificate of Live Birth”, and  “Certification of Live Birth” as well as listing the the required information for each. I also request any documents clarifying the difference between a verification and a Certification of Live Birth. I prefer to receive these as electronic copies, e-mailed to (redacted )  . As always, I will continue sending this request until I receive confirmation that you have received it. Thank you.Nellie

 

Their response:----- Original Message -----From: Okubo, Janice S.To: Nellie (redacted)Cc: linden.h.joesting@hawaii.govSent: Monday, January 04, 2010 2:47 PMSubject: RE: UIPA Request for Forms Aloha Ms. (redacted), The agency does not have records responsive to your request.

 My reply:

 ----- Original Message -----From: Nellie (redacted)To: Okubo, Janice S.Cc: linden.h.joesting@hawaii.govSent: Monday, January 04, 2010 7:00 PMSubject: Re: UIPA Request for Forms Aloha, Ms. Okubo. HRS 91-2(b) requires all departments to: (2)  Adopt rules of practice, setting forth the nature and requirements of all formal and informal procedures available, and including a description of all forms and instructions used by the agency. Formal procedures available, according to Chapter 8b of “Public Health Regulations” include the issuance of abbreviated certificates and verifications. Requirements and a description of the forms and instructions used by the agency in carrying out that procedure are required to be adopted and made publicly available. A description of forms such as the Certificate of Live Birth, Certification of Live Birth, abbreviated copy, and standard copy birth certificates are required to be made public. If you do not have these required rules of practice I will have to report it to the Ombudsman’s Office. Thank you.Nellie Their response: ----- Original Message -----From: Okubo, Janice S.To: Nellie (redacted)Cc: linden.h.joesting@hawaii.govSent: Monday, January 04, 2010 7:56 PMSubject: RE: UIPA Request for Forms Aloha Ms. (redacted), The department has already responded to your UIPA request below.  Please refer to the response provided on Dec. 21 at 5:28 pm.  

Exhibit H: Chapter 8b PDF Created Oct 29, 2009

Exhibit I: Retention Schedule Showing Special Evidentiary File for BC’s lacking a Doctor’s Signature

PHR-14

Lori Starfelt claimed that somebody at the HDOH had told her that the Director DID require a doctor’s examination and signature:

“… Hi, I’ve talked to the Department of Vital Records…At the time, if a child was born outside a hospital, the family would have 30 days to apply for a birth certificate and Vital Records would expect to see prenatal care records, or pediatrician records of the first check up, etc. They’d also want the notarized statement from the mid-wife. Of course, they can apply later but that would noted as a different kind of birth certificate.”

(taken from http://web.archive.org/web/20081019034503/http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008/07/23/obama-was-likely-born-in-hawaii/ )

What this says is that if Obama was not born in a hospital (as indicated by Abercrombie) and if his grandma registered his birth (which is speculation), the local registrar would need an affidavit from a doctor or midwife. If that was not received within 30 days of the birth, the BC would be marked as DELAYED. When that affidavit came in it would be classified as an AMENDMENT to the BC, and the date of the amendment and the evidence that was submitted would be listed on the original document and on any computer printout. Obama amended his BC in late 2006. Fukino says his RECORD has a doctor’s signature. And Tsukiyama confirmed that there is evidence submitted to support the claims on Obama’s BC. Below are Chapter 8b’s rules on amendments. Adding a doctor’s signature 45 years after the birth would be classified as a major administrative amendment, I believe, because it calls into question the integrity of the document. A major administrative change made 90 days or more after the birth has to be marked ALTERED.

So if Obama’s grandma reported an unattended birth to a local registrar in 1961 but there was no doctor’s affidavit because neither Obama nor his mother were in Hawaii at the time, and then Obama added a doctor’s affidavit in 2006 it would fit the evidence we’ve got. The Administrative Rules also say that an abbreviated BC (COLB) cannot be printed unless all the REQUIRED items (the items on the CDC’s standard birth certificate) are completed on the original birth certificate. This was a problem for a couple within the last few years who refused to list their race and the HDOH refused to print out a COLB for their child. They argued that the question was an invasion of their privacy, I believe. Eventually an exception was made, IIRC, but it illustrated why Obama would have had to amend his BC in 2006: he couldn’t even GET a COLB until he had all the required data added to his record.

Exhibit J: Johanna Ah Nee Forgery

Here is the image at http://www.wnd.com/2011/09/342937/ now:

Here is a partial image of what was originally posted, which showed the bleedthrough. This image is reversed, with contrast and brightness adjusted:

First, the BC#. Here is a close-up of the digits of the BC#, with Gretchen and Susan Nordyke’s BC#’s underneath, for comparison:

Ah Nee’s looks like 61 09943. There is a dark horizontal line on the next-last digit. The only number that has a horizontal line is a 4. The digit right before it has to be a 9; since it can’t be a 3 (or an 8, when compared with the 8 in Gretchen Nordyke’s). The 4 in Obama’s BC# has a diagonal line connecting the top point and the horizontal line so the line coming downward where the 9 is has to be from the 9 – and it is right above the left-most point of the 4’s horizontal line. These digits overlap, which could not happen with a mechanical Bates stamp.

Now let’s look at Onaka’s signature on the back side, which has an issue date of Aug 8, 1995:

Here is the Onaka signature that shows on the Peter Kema COLB, issued on Sept 5, 1991:

These are clearly not the same signature stamp, but the Ah Nee signature is patterned after the Kema one, with the tail after the n of Alvin exaggerated, the loop inside the O of Onaka exaggerated, and the jumbled-up inside of the first a on Onaka exaggerated. The Ph.D. is a good attempt at a copy but the h is at the wrong angle. This signature is too “busy” to be Onaka’s. His signature is a quick, efficient, no-nonsense signature. The fake has too many curves, exaggerating every small detail of Onaka’s signature in the Kema signature.

Here is Onaka’s 1991 live (not stamped) signature on the retention schedule – the same year as the Kema signature stamp: