Miss Tickly - Our Worst Nightmare Confirmed

Miss Tickly – Our Worst Nightmare Confirmed
OUR WORST NIGHTMARE CONFIRMED: Obama’s

COLB Lacks Legal Veracity. What Now?
10/04/2009
By MissTickly (aka ‘TerriK’)
http://misstickly.wordpress.com/2009/10/04/our-worst-nightmare-confirmed/
On July 27, 2009, Obama was not verified as ‘Constitutionally Qualified to be U.S.
President’ by the standards of Hawaii’s Department of Health and Vital Statistics Registrar.
Any assertions by Nancy Pelosi or anyone else must be reexamined under the following
LIGHT:
THE KEY: ‘FILED by Local Registrar’ vs. ‘ACCEPTED by State Registrar’
We have two statements about two sets of vital records belonging to the President issued from
Hawaii. An “original birth certificate” that is “on record in accordance to state
policies and procedures” in October, 2008, AND “original vital records” that are
“maintained on file,” on July 27, 2009.
1.) Dr. Fukino, Director of the Department of Health on Oct. 31, 2008:
“Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital
Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have
personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s
original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and
procedures.”
2.) Dr. Fukino, Director of the Department of Health on July 27, 2009:
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the
original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health
verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen.
I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October
2008 over eight months ago.”
• We also have a COLB presented by President Obama that indicates the information shown
has been ‘Filed by Registrar.’ Fig.1 (see below)
• However, we also have samples found online of HAWAII COLBs that say they have been
‘Accepted by State Registrar.’ Fig 2 & Fig 3 (see below)
MOVING ON WITHOUT HAWAII’S HELP
Hawaii refuses to answer simple procedural questions. Using Nevada’s guidelines on vital
statistics, (http://www.leg.state.nv.us/nrs/NRS-440.html) we can reasonably discern the
Page 1 of 138
validity of President Obama’s COLB online and the “vital records” used to help verify his is a
“natural-born” American citizen and “born in Hawaii.”
In viewing the U.S. Vital Statistics System found here:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/misc/usvss.pdf (pp.62-63), we can see that there began a
distinct effort to establish uniform practices of recording Vital Statistic information in all
states.
Budget Bureau’s recommendations in 1943:
“Instead it proposed the creation of a cooperative vital records system,

comprising the existing State and independent city vital statistics offices and a
national office to ‘‘represent and serve the system from a Federal standpoint, and, by making
available financial and technical aid, would work to improve, develop, and integrate the
individual units of the system.’’ It called for a program of continuous allotment of money to
the present State, city, and Territorial offices to be spent for correcting defects in the
registration system and for expansion as required.”
Using the state of Nevada’s clearly posted procedures and policies

(http://www.leg.state.nv.us/nrs/NRS-440.html) as a guideline, we can conclude that
President Obama is not ‘constitutionally qualified’ to be U.S. President with the information
found on his original birth certificate. AND the information he submitted to the state, to
support any changes, was still pending approval on 7/27/09 and therefore insufficient to
verify anything legal…like birth place and natural born citizenship–which happens at birth
and those facts are static.
Birth place can arguably never really be amended once recorded the first time. Proof was
offered at birth in order for the State Registrar to record it originally….unless it was left blank
at birth...or perhaps the President has an *ahem* ‘clerical error’ on his original birth
certificate.
This is highly irregular, no?
IF THE U.S. HAS STANDARDIZED MUCH OF THE POLICY AND PROCEDURES

FOR RECORDING VITAL STATISTIC RECORDS LIKE THE U.S. VITAL
STATISTICS SYSTEM INDICATES, THEN WE DON’T EVEN NEED HAWAII TO
ANSWER OUR SIMPLE REASONABLE QUESTIONS.
Not really anyway. Only a FOOL would argue otherwise at this point. A paid or
unpaid FOOL:
• What does the phrase “on record in accordance with state policies and
procedures” mean in the October Statement referencing the President’s original birth
certificate?
• What does the phrase “maintained on file” mean in the July Statement referencing the
vital records verifying his birth place and “natural-born” American citizenship status?
• What does a ‘Filed by Registrar’ COLB indicate?
Page 2 of 138
• What does an ‘Accepted by State Registrar’ COLB indicate?
We can conclude from Fukino’s use of the phrase “maintained on file” which refers to the
vital records “verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a
natural-born American citizen,” the state had not recorded and indexed the
information verifying the facts within. We can conclude that the State of Hawaii was
unsatisfied on July 27, 2009 of those facts.
THIS IS SIMPLY OUTRAGEOUS. BREATHTAKINGLY STUPID. IT’S RECKLESS.

IT’S UNBELIEVABLE.
Excuse me? It is just beyond words.
I cannot imagine a worse scenario emerging from all of this. Can you?
And when the State issued his COLB that states ‘Filed by Registrar,’ in 2007, we can conclude
that the evidence submitted to them of the ‘proof of the facts stated within the
COLB’ was insufficient, at least at that time, to warrant recording on permanent state
record with the Registrar.
To preface the following, please read Leo Donofrio’s account of my experience that yielded
two types of admissions by the State of Hawaii’s Department of Health, that an amendment
&/or correction to the President’s Birth Record was pending on July 27.
• ‘Foreshadowing’ (first indication of admission)

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/09/29/terrik-investigation-foreshadowing/
• ‘TerriK Investigation: Part 2′ (statutory admission) http://tinyurl.com/y963eo7
The following ‘vital records policy and procedural information’ from Nevada also seems to
indicate, an amendment was pending OR INITIATED when the President was issued his
2007 COLB. I suspect similar policies are in place in Hawaii. We just can get to it. We can’t
ask…or at least they won’t answer. And they won’t tell us where to find the answer.
Staff at the Hawaii DoH do not want people to know how to read the legal
documents they issue AND they don’t want to explain what their statements to
the public really mean.
FIRST you mix the dough, THEN you bake it: there is a TWO STEP PATH to issuing
legitimate, registered birth certificates in Nevada. There are two sets of obstacles which an
‘application to file for’ and an ‘application to file for an amendment of information’ must
clear. The second involves providing PROOF of facts.
Amazingly, President Obama’s online COLB never got that far when it was
issued in 2007.
UNLESS BOTH STEPS ARE COMPLETED, THE STATE DECLARES THE FILED
APPLICATION OR AN APPLICATION TO AMEND HAS ‘INSUFFICIENT PROOF’
TO SUPPORT THE INFORMATION FOUND WITHIN.
Page 3 of 138
An application can be dismissed for lack of evidence after a period of time, or a person can
submit evidence to be reviewed and accepted in the SECOND STEP. In the interim, the
state makes no claim that the Birth Certificate ON FILE has been found
sufficient on a state registrar level. AND they should clearly state so on the
Certificate if this is the case.
They do. Now we all know–it’s been in front of our faces all along.
FIRST STEP IN FILING AND REGISTERING A BIRTH IN NEVADA IS

AT THE LOCAL ADMINISTRATION LEVEL:
http://www.leg.state.nv.us/nrs/NRS-440.html
LOCAL ADMINISTRATION
NRS 440.190 County health officer as registrar.
NRS 440.200 Furnishing blank certificates. [It's likely that President Obama filled
out a blank certificate or form supplied by the state to local officials in order to
file for an amendment to his birth information.]
NRS 440.210 Certificates of birth and death: Examination by local health officer.
NRS 440.220 Certificates of birth and death: Enforcement of requirements by local health
officer.
NRS 440.230 Certificates of birth and death: Numbering; attestation of date of filing by
local health officer.
NRS 440.240 Certificates of birth and death: Preservation of copies by local health officer.
NRS 440.250 Certificates of birth and death: Filing by deputy county health officer;
Page 4 of 138
filing of list of deceased persons with public administrator.

NRS 440.260 Certificates of birth and death: Time for delivery to State Registrar.
[NOTE: UPON COMPLETION OF THE FIRST STEP, THE FILED ‘APPLICATION

CERTIFICATE’ IS SENT TO THE STATE REGISTRAR FOR THE REQUIRED
APPROVAL.]
.
PLEASE ALSO TAKE SPECIAL NOTE OF THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE
(TERMINOLOGY) WHICH INDICATES THE PROCEDURES COMPLETED WHEN
PRESIDENT OBAMA WAS ISSUED HIS COLB POSTED ONLINE:
“NRS 440.230 …..Filing by deputy county health officer”
• Now add it to this:
“NRS 440.190 County health officer as registrar.“
• Translation: “Filed by Registrar” which is what the President’s online COLB states
clearly.
President Obama’s online COLB says ‘FILED BY REGISTRAR.’ The information on the
President’s COLB represents information he furnished the local registrar in an application to
amend his vital record information. He furnished this info likely on a blank certificate or
form supplied by the local registrar. Fukino’s statement in October 2008, indicates that an
original birth certificate already existed ‘on record in accordance to state policy and
procedure.’ The vital records she refers to on July 27, 2009, “verifying” the President is a
‘natural-Born’ American citizen and born in Hawaii are only “maintained on file,”
therefore they cannot possibly be “on record with the State Registrar:”
Fig 1
SECOND STEP IN FILING AND REGISTERING A BIRTH IN NEVADA IS

AT THE STATE ADMINISTRATION LEVEL:
THIS STEP MUST BE COMPLETED FOR A BIRTH CERTIFICATE OR INFORMATION

BEING AMENDED WITHIN A BIRTH CERTIFICATE TO BE FOUND VALID OR LEGAL
Page 5 of 138
PROOF.
If the records that verified our president was born in Hawai’i and is a “natural-born American
citizen” did not complete or end at state level registration through STEP TWO, those
records are completely empty and unfounded for all legal purposes.
STATE ADMINISTRATION
NRS 440.110 State Registrar of Vital Statistics.
NRS 440.120 Regulations of State Board of Health concerning registration;
enforcement by State Registrar. [NOTE: This never happened for the President's
online COLB, so the info found on it is NOT LEGAL.]
NRS 440.130 Preparation and distribution of forms and blanks; charge for blank certificate.
NRS 440.135 Form for reporting divorce or annulment of marriage: Preparation; contents;
distribution.
NRS 440.140 Preparation and issuance of instructions; use of other forms and blanks
prohibited.
NRS 440.150 Examination and supplementation of certificates. (See below)
NRS 440.160 Preservation and indexing of certificates. [Any pending application
has not been indexed. Therefore, the index data won't show the whole picture.
Perhaps, not even for Maya.]
NRS 440.165 Reproduction of original records and files.
NRS 440.170 Records open to inspection; use of data restricted.
NRS 440.175 Furnishing statistical data; limitation on preparation or issuance of certain
documents; charging fees to homeless persons prohibited; remittance required for issuing
copies.
Obama has an incomplete and unsatisfactory COLB if indications from Nevada policy are
true:
“NRS 440.150 EXAMINATION AND SUPPLEMENTATION OF CERTIFICATES. THE

STATE REGISTRAR SHALL CAREFULLY EXAMINE THE CERTIFICATES RECEIVED
FROM THE LOCAL HEALTH OFFICERS, AND IF THEY ARE INCOMPLETE OR
UNSATISFACTORY HE SHALL REQUIRE SUCH FURTHER INFORMATION TO BE
FURNISHED AS MAY BE NECESSARY TO MAKE THE RECORD COMPLETE AND
SATISFACTORY.”
In other words, The State Registrar says, “Something stinks here and I ain’t puttin’ any of it
on record.”
“COMPLETED RECORDS” – MEANING ONE WHERE ENOUGH EVIDENCE HAS

BEEN COLLECTED, REVIEWED AND ACCEPTED, PER POLICY AND PROCEDURE, TO
RECORD THE VITAL STATISTICS WITH THE STATE REGISTRAR.
IT IS AT THIS POINT THAT A FILED CERTIFICATE APPLICATION OF ANY KIND HAS

BEEN ‘ACCEPTED BY THE STATE REGISTRAR.’
It is now “ON RECORD IN ACCORDANCE TO STATE POLICY AND PROCEDURE.”
Page 6 of 138
Fig 2
OR the application for an amended certificate has been ‘accepted by the state
registrar.’
Fig 3
Once the President’s filed application to amend his Birth Certificate was accepted by the
State Registrar, the amended information would be pulled out, noted and endorsed as in
Fig 3 above. It’s impossible to tell by looking at the President’s COLB, which information is to
be amended until after it’s accepted. In fact, the notation that President Obama’s
COLB is ‘Filed by Registrar’ indicates the state stands by NONE of the
information found on the document.
HAWAII STATE REGISTRAR OFFICIALS ISSUED PRESIDENT OBAMA’S

ONLINE COLB IF NEVADA SERVES AS AN ACCURATE COMPARISON:
“NRS 440.165 Reproduction of original records and files. To preserve original documents,
the State Registrar is authorized to prepare typewritten, photographic or other
reproductions of original records and files in his office. (Added to NRS by 1967, 1108;
A 1971, 808)”
“…reproductions of original records and files…“
PRESIDENT OBAMA’S COLB IS A REPRODUCTION OF A ‘FILE.’
President Obama has a ‘reproduction of a FILE’ while other samples of Hawaiian COLBs
found online are ‘reproductions of RECORDS’ that have been accepted and therefore
Page 7 of 138
completed with the State Registrar using the support of sufficient evidence required by the
state to register the Birth Certificate on record.
Fig 2 and Fig 3 (above) have been validated and are found satisfactory to the standards of
state policy. These type are accepted, recorded and indexed by the State Registrar.
DISTRACTIONS, ROADBLOCKERS AND SMOKESCREENS
While conducting my investigation I encountered a FReeper that pointed me to her own

alleged Hawaii COLB which she provided to ‘Polarik’ for use in comparing to the President’s
COLB. In Leo Donofrio’s blog post, Foreshadowing, he mentions a comment left to me by
‘Polarik’ on August 4, 2009 at FreeRepublic. That comment indicates that ‘Polarik’ thinks I
am making the story up about receiving the Press Release pdf from Janice Okubo in Hawaii
on July 27, 2009.
HOWEVER, I received confirmation from ‘Polarik’ that he received the press release pdf sent
to me by Okubo when I sent it to him, myself, on August 3, 2009: the day BEFORE he left
that comment. He confirmed to me on August 3, 2009, that he got the pdf and he thanked me
for sending him a download link. I won’t post his private message but I assert that it
happened to the best of my understanding.
Why would he then try to discredit me on a post I left on FR, entitled “Orly is Working for
Obama?” (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2308045/posts). His thuggish
attempts to use sexism to paint me as ‘unstable’ bear a stark resemblance to the tactics used
on the left against Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin.
(http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2308045/posts?q=1&;page=51)
“There was NO PRESS RELEASE. It was a direct statement made to Dan Nagaso of the
Honolulu Advertiser.
An “electronic press release? You mean, like an email that nobosy else has seen except you?
51 posted on Tue Aug 4 14:38:36 2009 by Polarik (Obama: When destroying America is
not enough.)”
**It should be noted that when ‘Polarik’ confirmed he got the Press Release pdf sent to me
from Okubo on the night of 7/27/09, which I uploaded for him especially on August 3, he
then directed me to a story about Orly and the ‘Kenyan Birth Certificate’ that was
dropped on us all in early August. As it turns out, he directed me to a distraction. We
all remember the ‘crumpled ball’ photos saying we got punked? Eh?
I have my own understanding of what happened with ‘Polarik’ on August 4 and, therefore,
that led me to question the person that gave ‘Polarik’ her claimed Hawaii COLB. This person
approached me and in talking to her, she claimed to have a ‘Filed by Registrar’ COLB
from Hawaii herself. It’s available online, often in conjunction with ‘Polarik’s’ stuff. This
person also claimed that there was nothing unusual about the birth information contained
within her alleged COLB–no amendments pending or otherwise, she told me, just a regular
birth certificate. So I guess that blows that theory, huh?
Page 8 of 138
Not so fast, I say. This COLB came out shortly after Obama released his COLB online, as I
recall. It was used to get people focused on a possible forgery. Ha! It successfully distracted
people from questioning too closely the words” ‘Filed by Registrar’ found on both COLBs.
From the beginning. Imagine that?
I don’t know about you guys, but I have reason to suspect now that this person was mistaken,
joshing with us, or received a COLB issued in error IF her story behind it is true and
correct. Furthermore, a quick Google of her name indicated she was in Colorado–not
Hawaii.
I can’t say for certain, but it appears that people are having fun at our expense.
And these people link with other people we are trusting to help with this issue. The time to
STOP relying on others is NOW. Seems no one is above suspicion these days. Be wary.
Get answers from Hawaii or credible sources as I have. Do it yourselves.
INDEX DATA & WHAT IT MEANS
Although this data exists, it’s not relevant to move forward concerning the events of July 27,
2009, IMO. We KNOW the vital records used to verify the President’s Birth Place were
insufficient on July 27, 2009.
We understand NOW.
Dr. Fukino, rightly tells us the vital records she saw were only on file, not on record.
Unfortunately, Hawaii doesn’t offer any information on how to read a COLB nor do they use
terminology that they are willing to explain–even when outright asked. As much as I worry if
they are under some unfair pressure, I cannot help but think this is very disingenuous,
indeed.
However, those of you interested in gathering the rest of the index data information that we
are entitled to, might find this section useful. The ‘Index Data’ that Leo Donofrio reveals at his
blog may be just a portion of the data that Hawaii has. http://tinyurl.com/y8nfwsl
The information Leo received is likely incomplete and inclusive. Furthermore, the President’s
name may be recorded on multiple ‘cards’ or recorded multiple times without the index data
reflecting a change like ‘birth place.’ Please read the following and ask for ‘index data’
separately yourselves from Hawaii for a fuller picture. You will likely need to ask for each
name ‘attached’ to his family and himself (e.g. Barry Soetoro). Make one request at a
time or you may be directed to see the full record index in person for
examination.
Send everything in separate e-mail requests to: janice.okubo@doh.hawaii.gov &

chiyome.fukino@doh.hawaii.gov.
INDEX DATA (http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-440.html#NRS440Sec280):

“NRS 440.160 Preservation and indexing of certificates. The State Registrar shall:
1. Arrange and permanently preserve the certificates in a systematic manner.
2. Prepare and maintain a comprehensive and continuous card index of all births and deaths
registered. The cards must show the name of the child or the deceased, the place and date of
Page 9 of 138
birth or death and the number of the certificate. When a certificate of birth indicates
that a person has changed his name, the card index must contain a card for
each name.
[Part 18:199:1911; RL § 2969; NCL § 5252]—(NRS A 1960, 157; 1981, 464)”
RESOLUTIONS & CONCLUSIONS

By using Nevada as a reasonable comparison to Hawaii’s vital records/statistics policy and
procedure, we are left wondering: was the President’s “natural-born” American
citizenship and birth place verified using ‘original long form birth certificate
information’, an ‘application to amend his birth place’ and ‘insufficient pending
evidence of that amendment that was maintained on file at the DoH?’
If so, the information used is insufficient proof, unsubstantiated, unrecorded

and suspect.
State government seems to have a higher standard than our own federal
government when it comes to the integrity of recording vital events. For example, look
how seriously the state of Kentucky takes registering true and correct birth
information:
“The Vital Statistics 1999 Report Estimates approximately 324 births occurring outside a
hospital setting.
That means that 324 birth certificates were filed by local registrars and midwives who
interviewed the parents, gathered the information for the certificate, asked for evidence if
necessary, and prepared the certificate. Whatever the reason, there will probably be a time,
or several times, that you will be required to file a “home birth”.
The thought of it scares us. We have all heard the horror stories of how some
have established new identities for imaginary babies. We don’t want to be the one
that was duped into filing a fake birth certificate. But, it happens, and there are
precautions we should take. [Emphasis mine.]
This section will assist the registrar in filing home births or births that did not occur in a
hospital setting. All local registrars must require prenatal and postnatal documentation
plus documentation of residency in your county at time of birth.”
http://chfs.ky.gov/NR/rdonlyres/8C9672A5-C25C-4C13-9E66-
298D55C5FBAF/0/REGGUIDELINES112008.pdf
Page 10 of 138
COINCIDENTAL & BIZARRE CONGRESSIONAL MOVES…OR NOT, shhhhhh…
On July 28th, did Congress sell out our Constitution with a Resolution that declared that
President Obama was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961? If so, was it inadvertent, on
purpose, corruption or stupidity? All of the above? Who knows with that gang of thieves?
From FReeper ‘BP2’:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2351064/posts?page=28#28
“Looking at the dates of TerriK’s pre-release of Fukino’s written statement (July 27) and the
PUBLIC release of Fukino’s written statement (July 28) seems to indicate a COORDINATED
effort by the Hawaii Department of Health and Hawaii Congressmen in an attempt to “shut
down” further questions of Obama’s eligibility.
As you may recall, there was a non-binding Resolution with the passage of
H.RES.593 (House timeline on July 27) and S.RES.225 (Senate timeline on July
28) recognizing Hawaii’s 50th Anniversary as a US state. Also in the Resolution, among
other things, was a clause that stated “the 44th President of the United States,
Barack Obama, was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961.” (House version text).”
Could Congress have provided the ‘evidence’ to amend the President’s Birth
Place? If so, did Dr. Fukino answer my question HONESTLY on July 27, 2009
and with fifteen minutes to spare?
My question to Dr. Fukino, Director of the Department of Health on July 27, 2009:
“Is the Director of Health for the State of Hawai’i, along with the Registrar of Vital
Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records,
able to state they have verified that the Hawai’i State Department of Health has President
Barack Obama’s AMENDED original birth certificate on record in accordance
with state policies and procedures.[?]”
HER ANSWER TO ME RECEIVED AT 11:45 p.m., July 27, 2009:
original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health
Page 11 of 138
verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen.
I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued
in October 2008 over eight months ago.“
Had Dr. Fukino had answered my question with a straight-forward answer and without the
extraneous points about “..born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen..,” it would
have looked SOMETHING like this:
“I…have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State
Department of Health…I have nothing further to add to this statement or my
original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.“
AND, we would have seen clearly that:
1.) There ARE amendments and submitted proof: “Vital Records” (plural)
2.) The vitals records are NOT “on record in accordance with state policies and procedures”
3.) The vitals records are NOT verified to be on record by the “Registrar of Vital Statistics”
4.) The vital records and proof offered to amend are insufficient for the State Registrar and,
therefore, Fukino states they are “maintained on file.”
In other words, the support to amend his birth place is pending acceptance.
Furthermore, if we break her statement down further in context of the assertions made
within, we see this:
“I…have seen the original vital records…verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in
Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen…“
For most people it takes ONE (singular) ‘vital record,’ an ‘original long form
birth certificate,’ to verify these two things. For our President, it took more than
one.
These vital records ‘maintained on file’ had no evidential value it seems. They weren’t on
record in accordance to policy and procedure with the State Registrar. They were
possibly used by lazy or corrupt people to assure us, We the People, that our
Constitution was being upheld by government and election workers and elected
officials who made oaths to uphold the Constitution.
Games may have likely been played using terms like “natural-born American citizen” to
distract us from the truth.
FOR ALL WE KNOW, President Obama’s application is headed right for the
garbage can even with the non-binding resolution.
What are Hawaii’s standards for approving a filed application to amend/correct

‘birth place?’ I think we know that Congress hasn’t got any. I know what mine
are. How about you?
Page 12 of 138
There is only ONE TRUTH. Get answers from Hawaii. If need be, get answers from
Congress.
We have the evidence now, without accessing the President’s birth files – 1.) Dr. Fukino’s
7/27/2009 statement and 2.) President Obama’s online COLB because both state
clearly they refer to Files of NO EVIDENTIAL value…Files that are maintained, but not
on record… Files that are proof of nothing…SLEIGHT OF HAND.
Thank you Dr. Fukino for showing President Obama what transparency means, what
‘Open Government’ means. What honesty means. And what being forthcoming as a
leader in whom people place their trust means. You didn’t need to give us the last clue!
You’ve done enough.
Where do we go from here? What watchdog will protect us now that we have
the proof that we are being bamboozled by federal government leaders? What
does it mean that Hawaii won’t or can’t release information on policy and
procedure? Why can’t they tell us what their legal terms mean?
Please let me know what YOU think about how we should proceed…
And please spread this analysis FAR AND WIDE.
Thank you! MissTickly (aka TerriK)
Posted by misstickly
Filed in Uncategorized
66 Comments »
268 Responses to “OUR WORST NIGHTMARE CONFIRMED: Obama’s COLB

Lacks Legal Veracity. What Now?”
1. Joe The Blogger said
10/04/2009 at 5:22 am
This is very impressive TerriK. The Hawaii DOH are in total disarray. We’ve got them on the
run.
Reply
o misstickly said
10/04/2009 at 7:40 am
This is a gamechanger. Tell everyone you know until they ‘get it.’
Reply
Page 13 of 138
misstickly said
10/04/2009 at 8:04 am
BTW, I sent the link to Dr. Fukino and asked the following, just for the record:
“Dear Dr. Fukino–
Please verify that I have characterized the DoH/Vital Statistics policy and
procedure correctly. To be fair to you, I want to correct anything I have stated
that is incorrect.
http://misstickly.wordpress.com/2009/10/04/our-worst-nightmare-confirmed/
Thanks–T.”
2. song said
10/04/2009 at 6:08 am
Miss Tickly,
I can’t see the print too clearly, however I get the gist of it? I see your masterful attention to
details. Obviously the differences between filed and accepted by Registrar is huge, as it proves
a process involved with the management of records, but only those on the inside would
probably know the difference.In the meantime others on the outside, were utilized to shall we
say, muddy the waters.
Yes, I get it.
[MT: I will look into it. I promise. Not bad for my first time though, eh?]
Reply
o song said
10/04/2009 at 7:26 am
Oh Miss Tickly, you are incredible…no doubt in my mind you are unraveling the world
of policies and procedures? I believe that probably Obama “hisself” didn’t know.
As for my eyes?
well I’ll just get stronger readers.
doncha know
Page 14 of 138
[MT: Thank you! I hope someone with some real legal saavy can take this and run.
Please pass it along. It's utterly unacceptable.
Congress and Pelosi and the like expect us to take their WORD for it? Is that what
they've done? No WAY. Just because they have ZERO standards, doesn't make
him born in Hawaii and a natural born citizen.
I have passed this on to a legal group myself who found this time line and my story
VERY credible. Now we need to convince the right attorney who knows what to do
with the information. The lawyers I am speaking with are brainstorming, but you
guys need to brainstorm, too. This gives us credibility and destroys theirs. The
ridicule stops here.]
Reply
Nellie said
10/04/2009 at 1:03 pm
Do you think Andrew Breitbart at biggovernment.com would run with this?

They’re the ones who exposed ACORN.
[MT: Feel free to pass it on wherever=)]
3. FreeStateYank said
10/04/2009 at 6:37 am
Can you send the content of your post to Judge Carter? Looks like you’ve unraveled quite a
nasty, snarled ball of string. I’ve added your site to my bookmarks.
Thank you, MissTickly!
[MT: Feel free to pass it along. I wouldn't know where to start. I haven't been following
the case--I've been doing this.=)]
Reply
o Captain Steve said
10/04/2009 at 11:11 pm
Great work TerriK. I do think you broke the code.
Re Judge Carter: Orly Taitz is aware of your work here. She has a hearing tomorrow,
but the hearing is only to determine “standing.”
Page 15 of 138
CS
Reply
4. Kay said
10/04/2009 at 7:08 am
awwww good job terriK!
[MT: Thanky!]
Reply
5. questions..questions..questions said
10/04/2009 at 9:22 am
How can Nancy Pelosi verify he is a natural born citizen and/or born in Hawaii, if Hawaii
doesn’t even stand by those assertions. What the hell is going on here, MissTickly?
[MT: Couldn't have said that better myself!]
Reply
6. richard said
10/04/2009 at 10:12 am
You can believe the demonrats will continue stalling so nothing can or ever will be down about
this phoney in the white house.
[MT: Well then it's up to us to take it up with them. Look how far I've come and I am just
one woman.]
Reply
7. Bdaman said
10/04/2009 at 10:56 am
TerriK, you are wonderful my dear. Leo posted the link, asked us to bookmark. I’m here and I
did.
Thanks for all of YOUR hard work. I will be here with you daily.
Page 16 of 138
[MT: You are wonderful, too. Thank you, I needed that.=)]
Reply
8. Jimmy The C said
10/04/2009 at 12:23 pm
Hi TerriK,
I am so glad that you are teaching us how to understand that “words mean something”. Filed by
Registrar vs Accepted by Registrar is an incredible find. I saw this pointed out months ago but
didn’t understand the significance. Thank you for all you are doing.
Jimmy
[You're welcome. Now we know that all we have is Obama's and Pelosi's word for it. No
thanks.]
Reply
9. loucon said
10/04/2009 at 12:45 pm
Hi MissTickly
Very good post with sound logic and analysis.
Here are some things I’m sure you know and other stuff that may help connect the dots.
Re: “MOVING ON WITHOUT HAWAII’S HELP”
Comparisons of NRS and HRS
*NRS 440.080 “Vital statistics” defined. As used in this chapter, “vital statistics” means
records of birth, legitimation of birth, death, fetal death, marriage, annulment of marriage,
divorce and data incidental thereto.
*HRS 338-1 Definitions of terms.
“Public health statistics” includes the registration, preparation, transcription, collection,
compilation, and preservation of data pertaining to births, adoptions, legitimations, deaths, fetal
deaths, morbidity, marital status, and data incidental thereto.
*NRS 440.165 Reproduction of original records and files. To preserve original documents, the
State Registrar is authorized to prepare typewritten, photographic or other reproductions of
original records and files in his office.
*HRS 338-19 Photostatic or typewritten copies of records. The department of health is
authorized to prepare typewritten, photostatic, or microphotographic copies of any records and
files in its office, which by reason of age, usage, or otherwise are in such condition that they
Page 17 of 138
can no longer be conveniently consulted or used without danger of serious injury or destruction
thereof, and to certify to the correctness of such copies. The typewritten, photostatic, or
microphotographic copies shall be competent evidence in all courts of the State with like force
and effect as the original.
*NRS 440.290 Certificate of birth: Form and contents. The form of the birth certificate to be
used under this chapter shall include as a minimum the items required by the standard
certificate of live birth as recommended by the United States Public Health Service, but no
certificate to be used under this chapter shall include any notation of legitimacy or illegitimacy.
*HRS 338-11 Form of certificates. The forms of certificates shall include as a minimum the
items required by the respective standard certificates as recommended by the Public Health
Service, National Center for Health Statistics, subject to approval of and modification by the
department of health.
I’ll stop here, but the list goes on.
From Hawaii DoH website:
Alvin T. Onaka, Ph.D. State Registrar and Chief of the Office of Health Status Monitoring of
the Hawaii Department of Health was recently elected President of the National Association for
Public Health Statistics and Information Systems (NAPHSIS) at their 69th Annual Meeting in
Anchorage, Alaska.
From cdc.gov:
NCHS, together with the National Association for Public Health Statistics and Information
Systems (NAPHSIS) and the Social Security Administration (SSA), is involved in an intensive
effort to fundamentally re-engineer the processes through which vital statistics are collected
and produced in the U.S. The primary objectives of this effort are to improve the timeliness,
quality, and sustainability of the decentralized vital statistics system by adopting a
technologically sophisticated, cost-effective model electronic system based on nationally
developed standards and models. The production of usable national vital statistics relies heavily
on uniformity of data from the individual registration areas. In addition comparisons among
states and between states and the nation as a whole can only be done if the data are comparable.
From ncvhs.hhs.gov (NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON VITAL AND HEALTH STATISTICS)
“However, prior to the year 2000, to satisfy federal requirements, we had to really aggregate
our multiple races into the requirements that the National Center for Health Statistics asked us
to do, in putting it into one race. “ … Alvan Onaka
The State of Hawaii uses the very same standards as Nevada as do all other States in the USA.
The procedures will vary.
The doublespeak that comes out of the mouthpiece for the Hawaii DoH, and their refusal to
acknowledge their own policies and procedures will be the crack in the dam that finally allows
the free flow of information regarding the birth status of Barack H. Obama II.
Page 18 of 138
loucon
[I will have to read through this carefully and get back to you. I want to be sure I am
noticing all the details you want me to notice. Thanks!]
Reply
o Pete said
10/04/2009 at 10:33 pm
“However, prior to the year 2000, to satisfy federal requirements, we had to really
aggregate our multiple races into the requirements that the National Center for Health
Statistics asked us to do, in putting it into one race. “ … Alvan Onaka
I get it! Right in from of our nose, prior to 2000, races was aggregate. Thus, it had to be
after 2000 to be “african”.
[MT: Nice....you may be right on that]
Reply
10. leilani said
10/04/2009 at 12:59 pm
Congrats on the new blog Miss Tickly. Love the “Question Othority” slogan – wish I’d thought
of that one first, darn it!:-)
Keep up the outstanding sleuthing; As a complusive skeptic, I’m pessimistic about where all of
this BC stuff will eventually lead, but with all the misogynistic BS BHO has piled on women in
his parasitic political career, it sure would be fantastic karma if it turns out to be a woman who
ultimately exposes him to be a fraud & ‘defrocks’ him of his perceived mantle of authority for
the rest of his first (& last) term!
So by all means, keep giving ‘em hell, kid.
[MT: Yeah, wouldn't that be cool. *wicked cackle*]
Reply
11. Phillip said
10/04/2009 at 9:28 am
Page 19 of 138
One question that needs to be asked of the Hawaii officials, is this… When did they issue a
CLOD to Obama?
There was a ststement made back in December or there about, that said something to the effect
that there had never been a request for a copy of the CLOB made. This was through a comment
of a clerk at DoH by the clerks friend???
[MT: I have no idea. I've stuck to just asking Hawaii questions. I want to hear it from the
horse's mouth. Too many shady characters throwing up distractions and obstacles...]
Reply
12. Karl said
10/04/2009 at 9:33 am
My curiosity only; besides in his books (ghostwritten?), has Obama ever been questioned or
discussed the ramifications of his birth circumstances with any member of any form of media?
“T”, your investigations thus far have been brilliant, but I believe that until a respected
(oxymoron) member of either the print or TV media dives into this matter we will all be driven
around the block by the Hawaiians, et al.
Thanks for all you’ve done and will do!
[MT: We've taken away ALL their credibility with ALL the facts that I crammed into my
premier post! Kinda hard to argue when Hawaii didn't put the information that the
President presented us on their own STATE RECORD. What? We have to take Nancy's
word for it?]
Reply
10/05/2009 at 2:31 am
I’ve read (but can’t place its origin) that he was twice asked about his birth by the
media. Both times he evaded the question. One reply, as best as I can recall, he said,
“I’m from the planet Krypton.” The other was equally evasive. He has never answered
however.
[MT: He wishes he was Superman. He's just a Superego.]
Reply
13. JosephII said
Page 20 of 138
10/04/2009 at 9:38 am
Miss Tickly,
You are not “just one woman”, you are an incredibly awesome, totally beautiful woman of
integrity which the Founding Fathers of our beloved America would be honored to have you in
their company. Wish I could give you a kiss and a hug for the great work you are doing! I thank
God for you Miss Tickly and pray that He will keep you in the palm of His hand!
[MT: That is the sweetest thing anyone's ever said to me! Thank you. You guys deserve
some relief. Their (Congress) credibility is destroyed--so run with this=) We can't let this
man with shady birth records declare marital law until we see that original BC.]
Reply
14. Observer said
10/04/2009 at 9:39 am
Great work, TerriK, with great discernment. Have you considered contacting, as a resource for
attorneys if not himself, Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel for the Center for Law and Justice?:
http://www.aclj.org/About/default.aspx?Section=11
[MT: Thanks, but I am actually hoping someone can take it from here. I just pointed out
the two pieces of evidence right in front of our faces. You guys gotta help, too! Spread the
word.=)]
Reply
15. frank said
10/04/2009 at 9:55 am
Great investigative job! However!!! —the Constitutional issue at bar is “natural born”, not
citizenship itself. Are we experiencing another “distraction”?
As I understand it, to be a “natural born” citizen, one must be born to BOTH parents who are
full U.S. citizens owing no allegience to any foreign sovereign (re: “dual loyalties” clause). The
naturalization papers for both my grandfathers carry a provision requiring them to renounce
their prior alliegence to the Emporer of Austria as a condition for their admittance to U.S.
citizenship.
Accordingly, Obama could have been born on the moon for that matter; if BOTH his parents
were bonified U.S. citizens, he could be regarded as “natural born”. But: his father was a
citizen of Kenya; he was NOT a U.S. citizen, therefore Obama Jr. is NOT “natural born”, even
Page 21 of 138
though he may be a citizen in another capacity. As such, he is inelligable for the office of the
Presidency.
Now the “punch line”. What are the criteria by which Hawaii regards Obama as “natural born”?
Is there merit to filing an independant petition for a Declatory Judgement as to what constitutes
a “natural born” citizen, leaving Obama out of the equation at this point in time? When, or if, a
satisfactory Judgement issues, then it can be asserted with regard to Obama himself. Could
such an action survive the motions to dismiss brought by Obama’s defense? If Obama is not a
party to the action, can he have any “standing” to object?
[MT: You're right. We don't know the definition of NBC still. The important thing is that
perhaps they have been caught using wishful thinking on Obama's part to declare him
qualified. Ask the Hawaii AG Mark Bennett for the criteria he used. And also ask for any
opinion letter issued by him that details his decision.
The important thing is how much credibility is destroyed now that we know what his
COLB really meant legally--nothing.]
Reply
10/05/2009 at 2:35 am
The criteria issue is something Leo D is pursuing. I think he’s about 5 days into the
waiting period for their reply.
[MT: They should disclose that to him. For sure.=)]
Reply
16. Bdaman said
10/04/2009 at 10:16 am
The Obamafile has now picked you up, Congrats on that. The importance of that is found here.
http://www.theobamafile.com/LibraryOfCongress.html
Reply
17. Renee said
10/04/2009 at 10:17 am
Page 22 of 138
You go girl ! I love the graphics !
Reply
18. Twitter Trackbacks for OUR WORST NIGHTMARE CONFIRMED: Obama’s COLB Lacks
Legal Veracity. What Now? « MissTickly (aka TerriK): [misstickly.wordpress.com] on
Topsy.com said
10/04/2009 at 10:48 am
[...] OUR WORST NIGHTMARE CONFIRMED: Obama’s COLB Lacks Legal Veracity.
What Now? « MissTickly (aka Ter… misstickly.wordpress.com/2009/10/04/our-worst-
nightmare-confirmed – view page – cached OUR WORST NIGHTMARE CONFIRMED:
Obama’s COLB Lacks Legal Veracity. What Now? — From the page [...]
Reply
19. Keith said
10/04/2009 at 10:58 am
About Polarik:
He is associated with Berg from the beginning. There is bad bad blood between Berg and Taitz.
Berg is suing Taitz (suit filed). No suprise that Polarik might have loyalty to Berg.
[MT: It better to trust no one and go right to the source for credible useful help. We can
settle this on our own.]
Reply
20. Mike_Atlanta said
10/04/2009 at 11:02 am
TerriK,
You are truly the Paul (or Paulette Reverre) of our time! If constitutional qualifications are not
being respected and in the case of BHO a position being outright ursurped through fraud with
the aid and abettment of some of our highest elected officials, we shall not trust our political
representatives to uphold our constitutional rights.
Question: Why does the HI DoH need the Hawaii AG to review and sign off on the statement
made by the DoH that BHO is a natural born citizen? Is this because his amended files are
being “maintained” somewhere and not “recorded”?
Page 23 of 138
[MT: I have no idea about why and what...and how that happened. The hyphen is odd.
Were they just trying to detract from the question I asked so they gave us a bogus
verification? I have no idea. The timing is so unusual. My question, the non-binding
resolution...weird.]
Reply
21. d2i said
10/04/2009 at 11:04 am
MT – I’m not sure I understand all of this. Could you provide a bottom line analysis for me. If I
understand you correctly the “key”, so to speak, is the fact that the COLB advertisement paid
for by BO and posted on his FTS website had “filed” rather than “recorded” which carries two
very different meanings. Therefore, if I’m reading you correctly 0 filled out the COLB form in
2007 but the registrar only “filed” the request but never “registered” it into the official record.
Is this correct?
[MT: Exactly. So it's not worth the paper...is that good enough for you? Pelosi's word for
it?]
Reply
o d2i said
10/04/2009 at 2:42 pm
Is that good enough for me? Of course not. I recall Dean M who used to post over at
TDs state in one of posts that the truth is staring us in the face but we can’t see it. That
thought has always stayed with me and it would appear you have discovered precisely
what has been staring us all in the face for 18 months now. thank you for your tenacity.
And, btw, nothing that comes out of the mouth of Pelosi is believable. Nothing. Nada.
[MT: Considering what looks like took place with his birth information--she sold
her soul. Nasty Pelosi. Had to say it.
**ALSO, we were duped by another 'Filed by Registrar' COLB that was floated
around with Polarik. They debunked the idea a-ways back and none of us went
back to it. I wouldn't have if I didn't suddenly notice it in Fukino's July, 27
statement. I really believe that. They were prepared to distract us from the key
phrase as soon as the President dropped his COLB online.]
Reply
22. Dr. Bobbi Anne white said
Page 24 of 138
10/04/2009 at 11:10 am
TerriK
Congrats on your work.
Anyway that you can add an email subscription to your blog?
[MT: Thanks! I will look into how to do that. I am new to running a blog.]
Reply
23. Justin Riggs said
10/04/2009 at 11:20 am
Hi TerriK,
It’s a pleasure to finally “meet” you.
I enjoyed your post – it definitely helped round out what we already knew about your research
from what Leo’s told us.
I would be interested to see if you could create a more solid argument that Nevada and Hawaii
have similar statutes in place regarding vital records. Right now, it just seems like you assert
that they do. Do you have any side by side comparisons of NV and HI law that we could look
at?
Again, thanks for all your hard work. If there’s anything I can ever do to help out with your
research needs, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Justin W. Riggs
[MT: Yes, it should not be that hard to get our hands on this stuff to nail it down.
However, I think it's reasonable to deduce what I already knew to be true BEFORE I
ever went and looked at another state.]
Reply
10/05/2009 at 2:40 am
Speaking of this, has anyone seen a fully legit and verified HI COLB? Does it have
“filed” “accepted” “certified” or what?
Page 25 of 138
[One that is completed and registered... and has veracity says : "Date Accepted by
State Registrar." I will explain on my next post!]
Reply
Captain Steve said
10/05/2009 at 2:53 am
I found another COLB. The lower left data is all the same as far as OHSM 1.1
(Rev. 11/01) LASER
But as you wrote about TerriK, the data entry point shows, “Date accepted by
state registrar,” as opposed to date “filed.” Clearly there is a difference between
the two, and there is a reason they have different “titles.”
http://nobarack08.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/another-hawaiian-bc.jpg
Miss Tickly, I do think you broke the code. If so, you performed and amazing
feat of deduction and reasoning.
[MT: I think it gives us a scenario. More tomorrow=)]
24. Curiouser and Curiouser said
10/04/2009 at 11:21 am
Miss Tickly,
Thank you for your efforts. I wrote this last evening and posted it last night in Leo’s comments.
However, I would like to repost here so my questions can help with the brainstorming process
and possibly help shake the tree.
Questions for researchers and people making records requests of Hawaii:
1. If Obama’s parents are dead, am I correct in thinking that there are no longer any privacy
issues regarding any and all information regarding their respective and joint records and thus no
legal impediment to obtaining them from Hawaiii? If this is so, wouldn’t it also include any and
all communications and prior requests for those records including who requested them and
when? I assume the requirement for this crowd is being able to specify all the various
combination of names and alias and spellings as well as possibily having to specify the exact
records you want rather than a blanket request. I think this may be very helpful in giving
direction as to who might be orchestrating the firewall and when this began. I would also
suggest trying to get the same information regarding Obama’s grandparents as well as the
couple who owned the house where Obama was supposedly born.
2. You can only excluded Maya Soetoro not having a COLB if you can rely on the information
you think you know about her. But what proof is there validating her story? Is this her
name(first,last, maiden or married)? Trust nothing in the family mythology particularly if it
seems coherent.
Page 26 of 138
3. Were the newspaper announcements actually made? It’s interesting there are no paper copies
anywhere to be found and the only thing available is Microfilm or Microfiche which could
have been substituted. Has anyone ascertained that the Department of Health or any other
authorities actually send these announcements to newspapers? If they did then there should be a
record of it and that should be accessible since it is already in the public domain and they
released it. Do they still do this? How is it accomplished? If not, when did it stop and why? Did
they ever do this? How do we know? That should be easy enough to find out and maybe one of
your readers born in Hawaii could ask for a copy of their records regarding the process of
making the birth announcement just to find out what is available and in what form as well as
any communication surrrounding it. Also; did the announcements generally give the hospitals
name or any other information?
4. It isn’t clear to me that Obama’s parents were actually married. Again, there shouldn’t be
any legal impediment to getting the marriage record and all communication and
correspondence regarding it since they are dead.
5. Regarding “natural-born” citizen: As a physician thinking like another physician trying to
mislead someone, I think you could justify this phrase to mean a vaginal delivery or even more
broadly to mean any live birth rather than stillborn.
6. Regarding the COLB: Is there any evidence that one was actually issued for Obama(or his
sister) and is there anyway to find out if one was issued and when it was issued and who
requested it rather than the information on it?
7: Remember on the Fight the Smears web site Obama said specifically that he was a “native
born” citizen. Is there any place including any paperwork he filed to run for any election or
with the DNC where he stated that he was a Natural Born citizen or that he was qualified as a
candidate?
8. I remembered another public statement by Okubo. It may not be helpul but I thought I would
reference it:
http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/PROJECTS/Obama/Evidence/Chicago%20TRibune%2
010-31-08%20Birthplace%20rumors%20go%20nowhere.mht.
for any election or with the DNC where he stated that he was a Natural Born citizen or that he
was qualified as a candidate?
Thanks again to Leo Donofrio, Justin Riggs, TerriK, JBJD, Mario Appuzo, Gary Kreep, Phillip
Berg, Andy Martin, Stephen Pidgeon, the editors and contributors to the various Article II
Constitutionalist blogs and all the other Patriots that are fighting for our country. As John Paul
Jones said “I (We the people) have just begun to fight!”
[MT: There's a lot here. I will have to save this one for when I have a moment and get
back to you. Thanks!]
Reply
25. A Look At the Birther Claims - Page 6 - Christian Forums said
10/04/2009 at 11:37 am
[...] [...]
Reply
Page 27 of 138
10/04/2009 at 11:57 am
Regarding: Great investigative job! However!!! —the Constitutional issue at bar is “natural
born”, not citizenship itself. Are we experiencing another “distraction”?
If you request on what basis Hawaii determines “natural-born” status you need to clarify if this
is different in any way from the term “natural born” as found in Article 2 of the Constitution as
it isn’t hyphenated as far as I know in the Constitution.
[MT: Something is definitely up with the hyphen. Now we have two definitions to go
after.]
Reply
27. Sally HIll said
10/04/2009 at 12:16 pm
Interesting analysis!
In your opinion, is BHO’s COLB still pending?
How long can one keep amendments in a pending state? I’m wondering if he could play a paper
game (questions asked for purposes of verifying your requested amendments, and him giving
half answers that would require more questions) – going round and round in order to keep the
status of the COLB as pending almost indefinitely, or as long as it takes to keep the public
confused and uneducated?
Great work!
[MT: Thanky! I asked for an attorney general letter that might indicate the 'grace
period.' Haven't received it yet, they told me it would have to come snail mail.=(]
Reply
28. Capt Joe said
10/04/2009 at 12:22 pm
The real questions to ask Hawaii: Is there an original, long-form birth certificate for Obama
anywhere in the State of Hawaii’s possession? Does the State of Hawaii know the name of the
physician attending Obama’s birth? What was the hospital where he was born? Other things to
research: pediatrician?
Pharmacy records? Was he breast fed? Formula? Diaper service? Babies don’t just exist
without leaving a footprint. Thanks for the excellent work!
Page 28 of 138
[MT: According to the Oct. 2008 statement there is an original birth certificate on record
in accordance to policy and procedure. However, Dr. Fukino does not say she saw it, she
says she saw it was on record. Could indicate a sealed original resulting from an
adoption?]
Reply
o Mary Beth said
10/06/2009 at 2:29 am
Wait… if there’s a “birth certificate on record in accordance to policy and procedure,”

then why doesn’t the COLB reference that as opposed to that which was filed but not
verified?
[MT: What I am reading in other states is that an adult adoptee can sometimes
request a non-certified copy of an original BC. That BC would not reflect what is
legally on file with the state and would be issued by a local registrar. From what I
read it should clearly say it is not certified, however I am not sure that the COLB
that Obama posted is saying that clearly.
Also, if Obama filed for an amendment recently, it looks like he may have to get a
copy of a COLB to reflect that change from the local registrar because it takes
much longer, even years, for the state to issue a COLB that would reflect that
change.]
Reply
Mary Beth said
10/06/2009 at 4:00 pm
Thank you for your response.
Also… John Charlton over at Post N Email said that you “did not confirm that
[Obama’s record was amended]; it was expressly denied by Okubo. That there
are vital records in the plural indicates an least an “alteration” of the filing, not
an amendment necessarily.”
When I asked John where and when Okubo “expressly denied” Obama’s record
was amended…he asked that I check back with you and Leo’s blogs.
But I see you and Leo still using the term “amended” rather than
“altered”…which I am told are two separate things.
Am I misunderstanding something?
Page 29 of 138
29. tiger7 said
10/04/2009 at 12:25 pm
You do good work!!! The results of your efforts lead me to understand why the DNC (Pelosi)
sent the full Certification of Eligibility to just Hawaii–That gave a degree of validity to the only
people who could pose a problem. Thanks to such as you, the plot thickens!!
[MT: Is it all being used circularly? Did they use they insufficient evidence and the DNC
cert to verify N-BC and born in Hawaii? Again, that hyphen tells me we are chasing a
distraction. Especially, if Hawaii knew they had unrecorded files on their hands.]
Reply
30. Bdaman said
10/04/2009 at 12:42 pm
Ok, I just re-read it again. I posted some comments over at Leo’s over the last few days, and
your right. At this point you cant trust what anyone say’s. There has been to much
disinformation on both sides. We need to get the answers directly from DoH.
I suggested that like jbjd did in his election fraud filing for anyone to download. Why don’t
“We the People” make individual request upon Okubo. This would over load the Dept. with
request. I know if it was me, I’d get P.O.ed and either tell you to stop e-mailing me, which she
can’t do, or quit because I had enough. We need to break them down. They are already in
retreat. Now it should be bombs away to drive them back further.
I would like to start sending my own e-mails to the dept. I’m sure their are others. In fact I
know I can get at least 10 other people from my e-mail address book to do so, but don’t know
what to ask.
[MT: Hawaii has already told us twice that they don't back up the facts of his birth.
Therefore, why should Congress declare him born anywhere? Once they told us on the
COLB and once on 7/27/09. Fukino has done her job considering the pressure she is
under. She can't read and hear for us, too. We have proof. The only important thing now
is to use this legal issue to VERIFY his birth information in and OPEN and transparent
way. We've been lied to for so long. Cheated by our government leaders. "GIVE US
TRANSPARENCY, FACE IT, YOU'RE CAUGHT."]
Either personally to me or posted on line, can you gime me/us the e-mail questions?
It is apparent that they are working overtime at the DoH. I pointed this out as well and it’s now
been confirmed with their latest repLIES on a Saturday.
[MT: Here’s all the info for making a UIPA request. You make the request directly to the
Director of the Agency that holds the record you are requesting. They have 10 days to
answer/respond. If they rule against you or don’t even answer, you file the request with
Page 30 of 138
the OIP Director for an appeal. The contact info is below, too. The Lt. Governor oversees
the OIP so if they are not helpful (and they have been for me) let the Lt. Gov. know you
need a watchdog.=) If you don’t like the OIP’s opinion, you can always file it with circuit
court if you have the resources time and gumption.
Contacts:
(Ms.) Dr. Chiyome Fukino, DoH Director: chiyome.fukino@doh.hawaii.gov
Ms. Janice Okubo, Communications Director (DoH): janice.okubo@doh.hawaii.gov
ATTN: Mr. Paul T. Tsukiyama, OIP Director or ATTN: OIP Staff Attorney (for advice):
oip@hawaii.gov
(Mr.) Lt. Gov Aiona: ltgov@hawaii.gov
UIPA Guidelines for download here:

http://www.state.hi.us/oip/UIPA%20Manual%205aug08.pdf
Template for a UIPA request:
“Dear Dr. Fukino-
Under the Uniform Information Practices Act of the State of Hawaii, “…the people are
vested with the ultimate decision-making power. Government agencies exist to aid the
people in the formation and conduct of public policy. Opening up the government
processes to public scrutiny and participation is the only viable and reasonable method of
protecting the public’s interest. Therefore the legislature declares that it is the policy of
this State that the formation and conduct of public policy—the discussions, deliberations,
decisions, and action of government agencies—shall be conducted as openly as possible.”
(INSERT YOUR REQUEST HERE)
Please consider this request as a Hawaii UIPA (Uniform Information Practices Act)
request under section (§92F-12).
Thank you,
XXX”
Two Statements by Fukino:
STATEMENT BY HEALTH DIRECTOR CHIYOME FUKINO, M.D. (7/27/09):

“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen
the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health
verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American
citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in
October 2008 over eight months ago.”
STATEMENT BY DR. CHIYOME FUKINO (10/31/08):

“There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth
certificate. State law ( Hawaii Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified
birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record.
Page 31 of 138
Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, along with the Registrar of
Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital
records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health
has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and
procedures.
“No state official, including Governor Linda Lingle, has ever instructed that this vital
record be handled in a manner different from any other vital record in the possession of
the State of Hawaii.”]
Reply
31. ramjet767 said
10/04/2009 at 12:55 pm
Mr. Kerchner, the lead plaintiff in the Kerchner vs Obama and Congress lawsuit, is interviewed
in early August 2009, about the Obama claim to being born in Hawaii and the misleading and
so called evidence to that being put out by Hawaii. Mr. Kerchner believes that Obama’s birth
may be REGISTERED there but that Obama was not actually, physically born there. Listen to
this 10 minute interview of Mr. Kerchner by Bill Cunningham on his national radio show on
700 WLW of Cincinnati, Ohio.
[MT: Reread what I wrote-I am saying he was probably not born in Hawaii.]
http://www.thebirthers.org/
RJ
Reply
32. Jimmy The C said
10/04/2009 at 1:06 pm
Hi TerriK,
There’s a lot of speculation regarding Maya having a COLB. Leo seems convinced that she
doesn’t because DOH response that there seems to be no index data on her.
Maya Soetoro was born in Indonesia to a father who was an Indonesian citizen so her
citizenship should be Indonesian, however on pafe 5 of S. Ann Dunham’s divorce from Lolo
Soetoro in 1980 she claims that both she and her child who has lived with her since 1974,
which has to be Maya, are US citizens.
How can I or you word a request to DOH regarding how Maya became a US citizen and maybe
it is under Maya Dunham? If she was naturalized would DOH have any records of Maya to get
a SS#, registered in school, or get a license? Thanks again for what you are doing.
Jimmy
Page 32 of 138
[MT: Anything pending would not be indexed (yet). She may have records on file, but not
on record with the State.]
Reply
33. Bdaman said
10/04/2009 at 1:11 pm
I notice that the time stamp on my screen for comments are four hours ahead of EDT. When
you have time can u correct this.
[MT: Done. I think...]
Reply
o redwood1205 said
10/04/2009 at 1:36 pm
I am curious about the file date 8 August. Couldn’t it be that a birth certificate was
applied for on 8 August 1961 but was never approved for the record. Potentially the
initial info was not sufficient and no onr ever followed up with sufficient info to get it
recorded. Obama has gotten by all this time using a filed but not recorded birth
certicate. This would support the position that Obama may have been born elsewhere
and someone tried to get him citizenship. This would require however that Hawaii was
incorrect in the initial
claim of a recorded birth certificate.
[MT: The question is: If not enough support was filed at birth to prove where he
was born...could they deny him a bc if he had no other one elsewhere? I tend to
doubt it but need to dig up some info. Seems reasonable that they would just issue
registered copies of records with that portion missing. All the rest of the info was
probably much easier to prove. Could he have initiated the steps to fill in that
information recently? Like when the COLB was issued in 2007? I don't
know..that's one plausible explanation if you ask me.=)]
Reply
redwood1205 said
10/04/2009 at 3:59 pm
Potentially his birth certificate was never recorded based on the initial info. It
was either just left hanging or no additional info changed the picture. The
question is does a filing ever disappear at some point if it never becomes
Page 33 of 138
recorded. In other words the grandparents attempted but were unsuccessful in

getting a birth certificate recorded. Obama may now realize this and has beening
trying to supply info or pressure to record. The congressional act may be a basis
for Hawaii eventually recording.
34. beyond baffled said
10/04/2009 at 1:16 pm
Excellent blog. It all makes perfect sense which is how you need to approach this issue…what
makes sense rather than what has been stated.
I will be a devil’s advocate for a minute just to get your or others thoughts. My logic (and
maybe I am giving too much credit to elected officials and the judicial system) is that “at birth”
BHO II was considered a NBC.
We have already proven him ineligible based on who he states his parents are. So where is the
argument? Why won’t anyone listen?
Because he was in fact born on US soil of two US citizens. I only say this because everyone
elected official and the media state that he is a NBC and they are not that stupid to not know the
definition. I still cannot believe that there is any argument that would keep one official from
pursuing constitutional eligibility even if they were in complete danger (drama added for lack
of better wording at the moment). You see the big smoke screen is the birth certificate not for
place of birth but for identity biological of parents.
Consider the wording on the index data provided. Name of child born and the name of two
people that were married. Not name of parents. Well what would be so harmful about naming
the parents on the index data for birth record? Surely they could release that. It has no location
of birth on it. And why release a marraige index? Just to make the two when placed side by side
with the birth index look like these two people who were married were also the biological
parents when in fact there is nothing to indicate that.
The risks associated with him not being eligible at birth are so enormous that I cannot believe
anyone would even be a participant in the cover-up. Think of all the people involved. I may be
wrong but I think the uncovering of the BC will lead us right to where they want us to
be…NBC at birth. Embarassing yes, criminal no????
I am really looking for someone to negate this argument so if you could convince me otherwise
I would be very appreciative because.
["Consider the wording on the index data provided. Name of child born and the name of
two people that were married. "
MT: This could indicate something because Hawaii automatically grants paternity on a
BC to a child of two married parents. Wouldn't make him the father though, eh? Can't
remember where I read that at the moment--couldn't be too hard to find again...]
Page 34 of 138
Reply
o Claudia said
10/04/2009 at 4:34 pm
there has beeen speculation about who the father really is, BUT….. IT doesn’t make
any difference as to the real parentage of BHO, because BHO Snr claimed him as a
product of the marriage and is thereby the actual father, if NOT the DNA father, and
accordding to the Constitution, all that is necessary is the father of record claiming to be
the father in actuality, which BHO (Snr) did in the divorce papers. The Constitution
makes no distinction for the DNA, because they had no way to test for that back when it
was written, so if the PARENT FATHER CLAIMED THE SON, that was enough for
all legal purposes of Identity, passing on of inheritance, land grants, etc…. and
especially citizenship and NBC status back when the Constitution was drawn up.
Obama states for all the world to see that he is not an NBC per his own words that he is
the son of a Kenyan/British Citizen under the British Nationality Act of 1948 and
therefore accoriding to Art II Sec 5 Clause 1, he can NEVER be an NBC, he has dual
loyalties to the father who by birth and nationality is/was Kenyan
Reply
beyond baffled said
10/04/2009 at 6:01 pm
Thanks…I’m glad you cleared this up for me.
beyond baffled said
10/05/2009 at 2:38 pm
**Obama states for all the world to see that he is not an NBC per his own words
that he is the son of a Kenyan/British Citizen **
This is why I tried to come up with a scenario that trumped the Kenyan
connection but as you say “no dice” Is there a specific citing that you can
provide because it has never been clear to me.
35. nobarack08 said
10/04/2009 at 1:25 pm
Thank you for your work.

Please look at the e-mails I have recieved from Hawaii.
Page 35 of 138
http://nobarack08.wordpress.com
http://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2009/03/25/obama-supporter-responds/
http://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2009/06/27/obamas-lawyers-caught-in-lies/
The adoption of Obama.
Was Obama brought into the marriage by Barack Obama Sr.
Barack Obama was born in Kenya, as his blood-relative ‘grandmother Sarah’ has stated. The
adoption of Obama by Stanley Ann genereated the birth record on file by the Hawaiian
Department of Health.
http://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2009/07/16/the-adoption-of-obama/
If Obama WAS born in Hawaii, he would have released his records months agao. The fact that
he hasn’t only adds to the speculation that he was in fact born in a foreign country.
The fact remains that EVEN if Obama was born in Hawaii, he still does not meet the Natural
Born Citizen requirement of the Constitution.
["The adoption of Obama."
MT: There are too many unanswered questions and birth records that weren't even
recorded in the state he claims he was born. Keep going with Hawaii.]
Reply
10/04/2009 at 1:33 pm
Why are people just sending requests to Okubo? Why not cc and address them specifically to
Fukino and to Alvin Onaka since he is mentioned in the announcement by Fukino “Therefore, I
as Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics” on
10/31/08. At the same time cc as well as send copies to the Hawaii Ombudsman Robin
Matsunaga at:http://www.ombudsman.hawaii.gov/ I would also consider sending copies and cc
to Hawaii’s Republican legislators:
Senators 1. Fred Hemmings-Senate Minority Leader 2. Sam Slom
Representatives: 1. Lynn Finnegan-House Minority Leader 2. Gene Ward 3. Barbara Marumoto
4. Corrine Ching 5. Kymberly Pine 5. Cynthia Thielen
This is a meager lot but we need to leverage our efforts and point out to the omsbudsman as
well as the representatives the misdirection, obfuscation, stonewalling and malfesance that has
occured. This would put the Department of Health, Attorney General and any other
departments on notice that all eyes are upon them. I would also suggest sending them copies of
prior correspondence and replies along with an introductory letter regarding these efforts so
they can draw their own conclusions.
Page 36 of 138
Reply
37. Scott1 said
10/04/2009 at 1:35 pm
Good Job Terri

Just a note. I just finished reading Treatise on Citizenship by Alexander Porter Morse. He uses
Natural-Born citizen with the hyphen. For what it is worth.
Best Regards
[MT: Don't know him, is he OR does he have a close connection to the writers of the
Constitution?]
Reply
38. Claudia said
10/04/2009 at 1:38 pm
TerriK,
I live in Nevada, and would LOVE to be of any help to you that I can. I am in Reno, so if there
is anything at all I can do to help you, (my advocation for the last ten year has been as an
Abstractor/Document Researcher and I sort of hang out down at the County Offices in
Washoe.) so please let me know, cause I would be open and available.
I have followed all the posts you have made on Leo’s site and been very interested and
fascinated by your tenacity.
[MT: Thank you! I may just take you up on your offer!]
Reply
39. GratefulForMissT said
10/04/2009 at 1:53 pm
Miss Tickly, you won’t let them get away with anything! So glad you’re on top of things.
This June 24, 2008 Israeli Insider story also spotted one of your questions…
“Whereas the uncertified Obama document provides the date “filed by registrar”, the certified
DeCosta document provides the date “accepted by the registrar.” The difference between filing
an application for a Certification of Live Birth and having it accepted may be key here.”
http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/12939.htm
Page 37 of 138
[MT: I would say the 7/27/09 statement confirms they were right.=)]
Reply
40. Benaiah said
10/04/2009 at 2:01 pm
The issue of whether or not Obama is “eligible to the office of President” depends upon
whether or not he is an Article II “natural born citizen” of the United States.
The phrase “natural born citizen” “must be interpreted in the light of the common law, the
principles and history of which were familiarly known to the framers of the Constitution”
(Wong Kim Ark – Paragraph 16).
United States v. Wong Kim Ark., 18 S. Ct. 456, 169 U.S. 649 (U.S. 03/28/1898)
[1] SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
[16] The Constitution nowhere defines the meaning of these words [“citizen of the United
States,” and “natural-born citizen of the United States”], either by way of inclusion or of
exclusion, except in so far as this is done by the affirmative declaration that “all persons born or
naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the
United States.” In this, as in other respects, it [The Constitution] must be interpreted in the
light of the common law, the principles and history of which were familiarly known to the
framers of the Constitution. Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162; Ex parte Wilson, 114 U.S.
417, 422; Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616, 624, 625; Smith v. Alabama, 124 U.S. 465. The
language of the Constitution, as has been well said, could not be understood without reference
to the common law. 1 Kent Com. 336; Bradley, J., in Moore v. United States, 91 U.S. 270, 274.
The “common law, the principles and history of which were familiarly known to the framers of
the Constitution” is plainly expressed in “Scott v. Sandford”, which quotes Vattel, and
explicitly states, “The natives or natural-born citizens are those born in the country of parents
who are citizens…”
Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (U.S. 01/02/1856)
[1] UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT
[418] …The natives or natural-born citizens are those born in the country of parents who are
citizens…
[419] Again:
[420] …to be of the country, it is necessary to be born of a person who is a citizen, for if he be
born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. The
inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are foreigners who are permitted to settle and stay in
the country. Vattel, Book 1, cap. 19, p. 101.
Page 38 of 138
Furthermore, the Supreme Court of the United States, in Minor v. Happersett, confirmed the
definition of a “natural born citizen” as “children born in a country of parents who were its
citizens”.
Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 21 Wall. 162 162 (1874)
“No person except a natural-born citizen or a citizen of the United States at the time of the
adoption of the Constitution shall be eligible to the office of President”… At common law, with
the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted
that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon
their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from
aliens or foreigners.
Moreover, the Supreme Court of the United States, in The Venus, relied upon Vattel’s “Law of
Nations” as the authority on citizenship issues.
The Venus, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 253, 1814
“Vattel, …is more explicit and more satisfactory on it [CITIZENSHIP ISSUES] than any other
whose work has fallen into my hands, [Vattel] says, …’The natives, or indigenes, are those
born in the country, of parents who are citizens’”.
Vattel’s Law of Nations: § 212. Citizens and natives
The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.
Suffice it to say, Article II natural born Citizens, “are those born in the country, of parents who
are citizens.”
Hence, Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” of the United States, even if he was born in
Hawaii, as his father was a “foreigner”…
[MT: Let's settle the issue first of whether his vital records can be backed up. This
destroys their credibility. We need to focus on how outrageous this is.]
Reply
41. anon said
10/04/2009 at 2:02 pm
please provide an RSS feed for your blog. thanks
[Don't know how, advice?]
Reply
Page 39 of 138
o Shez ZK said
10/04/2009 at 6:11 pm
TerriK,
On your dashboard go to Appearance > Widgets tab, and enable your RSS Feed widget.
You’ll find many more handy widgets there also. (Link Feeds are for placing other’s
blog feeds in your sidebar, or footer bar in your case with this theme). Widget display
boxes can be dragged into position of what order you want them also.
Some widgets may be enabled but won’t actually show up until it has some data to
display, for instance Categories or Tag Clouds, etc. There’s lots of us out here that will
gladly give you some good tips on how to fix up your great new blog.
[MT: Hopefully, I got that going, now. Let me know if I don't...Thanks!]
Reply
42. Texo said
10/04/2009 at 2:19 pm
TerriK,
I have added a Hat Tip: to your blog from my Obama page at:
http://www.dixhistory.com/obama.htm
Nicely done MissTickly!
[MT: Thanky. I hope you see that this is a HUGE problem-nothing to take lightly. His
COLB has no legal value and they ridiculed us that had questions. They spent so much
time on the 'forgery' issue to distract us from this. Must be good. Other signs tell me this
is they KEY.]
Reply
o Texo said
10/04/2009 at 6:15 pm
TerriK,
I take it or at least I guess that the nuances that Leo speaks of on his blog is the Key that
you speak of.
Page 40 of 138
I agree with you that words matter and if the Key you speak of comes down to these
two words then I am suprised that Leo calls this a matter of nuances.
I agree with Justin Riggs that your medthods should be compared with those of HI.
That some more details need be brought to light but if it is clearly shown on HI records
that the terms on Record and on File are not the same thing then it is not a small matter
but indeed may well be the key.
I also told Leo that I am guessing he is thinking that if HI used these records to make
their statment that Obama is a Natural Born Citizen of America then that should put
those records in play from a legal point of view. Be they on file or as accepted as their
records.
My own thoughts are that words matter and these are very imporant words.
http://WWW.DixHistory.Com
Reply
43. Richard said
10/04/2009 at 2:20 pm
It will take considerable efforts to annul the Obama presidency. The democrat liberals know
this, and they will continue to pressure the federal courts not to take actions against Obama, in
fear of a black uprising.
[MT: To me, this is silly. I give the African American community A LOT more credit
than that.]
They love to play the race card, and they will use it. Actually, I’m sick of so many the wishy-
washy Rpublicans in the senate and congress, having proven themselves unfit to hold such
office. There is always the possibility of military action, especially if Obama continues his past
and present cuddling of the moslem Arabs. After all, he does bow and kiss their hands, hate
Israel, and most likely now that there will be no big celebration in thug city chicago. Obama is
a Trojan horse, and has every intentions to destroy the United States of America. After all, he
sat under his mentor hate preacher Wright for twenty years and totally absorbed his hate
America the great satan. I believe it will become far worse before we see the end of this
despicable demagogue presently in the White House.
[MT: They all need to go.]
Reply
44. Phillip said
Page 41 of 138
10/04/2009 at 3:00 pm
We’re assuming that DoH issued a CLOB in 2007. There was a rumor that a friend of a clerk
that worked in DoH said there was never any request for a copy of the CLOB made in 2007?
Something to check out.
[MT: He may have obtained the COLB when he initiated a request to amend his birth
place. If his birth place was blank since birth, I am not sure what that would do to the
indexing of his records with the State of Hawaii, ya know? Maybe it's a relevant thing to
have been left blank, if it was. I need to do more homework on the functions of the state
and local registrars in other states this evening...I will post what I find.
Perhaps using a combination of the 'date filed' and the other lingo on the COLB, and also
from both of Fukino's statements– we can discern EXACTLY what the scenario must
have been through deductive reasoning alone. For now, I am using other state's guidelines
to move forward with that. Nevada sure explained Obama's COLB, IMO. I loved KY's
strong words on 'imaginary babies.']
Reply
45. Scott1 said
10/04/2009 at 3:03 pm
Here is the full title
“A treatise on citizenship, by birth and by naturalization : with reference to the law of nations,
Roman civil law, law of the United States of America, and the law of France; including
provisions in the federal Constitution, and in the several state constitutions, in respect of
citizenship; together with decisions theron of the federal and state courts”.
Apparently he was an International Lawyer. It was very informative book. Unfortunately it

came out in 1880 before Wong Kim Ark.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9A07E6DF1730E033A25757C2A9609C94659
ED7CF
Reply
10/04/2009 at 3:21 pm
I know you are probably going to be overwhelmed by comments, so I only have one more:
What do you make of the statement at the bottom of the COLB? “This copy serves as prima
facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding.”
Page 42 of 138
[MT: It says that this COLB is proof of the facts stated within, take it at face value. One
of those facts seen clearly is that the information is not sufficiently proven according to
the State Registrar.=) (ie. 'Date Filed by [local] Registrar’)
You see how bad it really is? It’s important you guys understand that if he submitted that
2007 COLB to Nancy Pelosi in 2008, she effed us bad. Really bad. His original could say
Krypton, as you know…
WE HAVE TO FIND OUT WHAT PROOF NANCY PELOSI SAW. HAS SHE EVER
SAID THAT ANYONE KNOWS?]
Reply
47. Benaiah said
10/04/2009 at 3:23 pm
Whether Obama is constitutionally “eligible to the office of President”, and thus eligible for
“the carrying out of [the] constitutional… duties of the President”, depends upon whether
Obama is a “natural born Citizen” of the United States.
Whether Obama is a “natural born Citizen” of the United States depends upon the information
contained within his original long form birth certificate.
Thus, Obama’s original long form birth certificate unequivocally relates to and has an effect
upon whether or not he is eligible for “the carrying out of [the] constitutional… duties of the
President”.
Thus, Obama’s original long form birth certificate is not a “personal record” according to the
US CODE regarding “Presidential records”. Please see US CODE, Title 44, Chapter 22, § 2201
(3), which is copied below.
Hence, pursuant to US CODE, Title 44, Chapter 22, § 2205 (2)(A), Obama’s original long form
birth certificate “shall be made available pursuant to subpoena or other judicial process issued
by a court of competent jurisdiction for the purposes of any civil …investigation or proceeding
[including but not limited to a UIPA §92F-15 Judicial Enforcement Proceeding].
Please note that US CODE Sections 2201 and 2205 are Article IV “general laws” enacted by
the Congress which “prescribe the manner in which such… [public Presidential] records
…shall be proved…”
Thus, perhaps Article IV, the US CODE, and a UIPA §92F-15 Judicial Enforcement
Proceeding, will result in what no Senators or Representatives have been willing to do, which is
to support and defend Article II of the Constitution of the United States.
Article IV Section 1
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articleiv.html#section1
Page 43 of 138
Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public …records …of every other
state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such…
records …shall be proved, and the effect thereof.
US CODE – TITLE 44 – CHAPTER 22 – PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode44/usc_sup_01_44_10_22.html
§ 2201. Definitions
As used in this chapter—
(1) The term “documentary material” means all …documents…
(2) The term “Presidential records” means documentary materials …which relate to or
have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional …duties of the President.
Such term [“Presidential records”]—
(A) includes any documentary materials relating to the political activities of the President or
members of his staff, but only if such activities relate to or have a direct effect upon the
carrying out of constitutional… duties of the President; but
(B)[The term “Presidential records”] does not include any documentary materials that
are…
(ii) personal records;
(3) The term “personal records” means all documentary materials …which do not relate
to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional …duties of the President.
Such term ["personal records"] includes—
(C) materials relating exclusively to the President’s own election to the office of the
Presidency…
Please note, Obama’s original long form birth certificate relates to the very heart of
whether or not Obama is eligible to carry out the ever present “consitutional …duties of
the President”. The “carrying out of [the] constitutional… duties of the President” is thus
an ongoing requirement of the President. Thus, Obama’s original long form birth
certificate does not exclusively relate to Obama’s “election to the office of the
Presidency”. Hence, § 2201 (2) (C), above, does not apply to Obama’s original long form
birth certificate
§ 2205. Exceptions to restricted access
Notwithstanding any restrictions on access imposed pursuant to section 2204—
Page 44 of 138
(2) subject to any rights, defenses, or privileges which the United States or any agency or
person may invoke, Presidential records shall be made available—
(A) pursuant to subpoena or other judicial process issued by a court of competent

jurisdiction for the purposes of any civil …investigation or proceeding;[including but not
limited to a UIPA §92F-15 Judicial Enforcement Proceeding].
§92F-15 Judicial Enforcement.
(a) A person aggrieved by a denial of access to a government record may bring an action
against the agency at any time within two years after the agency denial to compel disclosure.
(b) In an action to compel disclosure the circuit court shall hear the matter de novo. Opinions
and rulings of the office of information practices shall be admissible. The circuit court may
examine the government record at issue, in camera, to assist in determining whether it, or any
part of it, may be withheld.
(c) The agency has the burden of proof to establish justification for nondisclosure.
[MT: Thanks for clarifying this, there are those that aren't used to talking about 'records' of
this type and that. Educate us anytime.=)]
Reply
48. jtx said
10/04/2009 at 3:33 pm
MissTickly (luv the name!!):
Actually, someone IS going along the paths you are now digging out explicit information about
– and they will be heard in court (and eventually the SCOTUS) so that – be advised – your
work is NOT falling upon “deaf ears”.
At least one lawsuit – that of Kerchner et al – is (and has been) on this path since January 20,
2009 (before the man was sworn into office) with by far the most comprehensive case that sues
not only Obama but also both houses of Congress as well as Nancy Pelosi and Dick Cheney
(these two personally for failing their official acts).
It is this suit that is causing the Obots the most heartburn … and rightfully so as it will
eventually completely denude them of any credibility. The Judge in the case has been dragging
his feet on 2 key decisions which are now about 2 MONTHS past the date the court itself
established for a decision.
If you haven’t read this wonderfully-drafted pleading, I suggest you go the Mario Apuzzo’s
site, read the action, and then write Judge Simandle to “shift or get off the dot” (or words to
that effect) and tell him why!! His address can be found on the blog by accessing DOC 40 in
the RH panel.
Page 45 of 138
Here’s the link:
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
[MT: I will take a look, thanks!]
Reply
49. Shez ZK said
10/04/2009 at 3:55 pm
Hi TerriK,
Good job. Have you tried to slightly reword this sentence yet from your July 27th request of:
“..AMENDED original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and
procedures.[?]”
to something like:
“AMENDED original birth certificate on FILE in…[?]” ?
I don’t trust anything they are telling us.
It will be interesting to check more fully with many state’s policies and procedures to compare.
I do remember last year the many discussions between ‘Filed By..’ and ‘Accepted by..’
meanings. That had triggered a memory that I had to get new copies years earlier. At the end of
2002 I had to replace my and my daughter’s birth certs. There are many differences between
the 2 states and types I received.
Mine is from Texas, mailed to me from the central office of vital records in Austin. It states it is
a “Certification of Vital Record”. On the bottom left all it says is: “Date Filed: 02-23-195x”.
Strangely nothing about registrars. (Note, my birth is 1-5-195x, I found it very odd it was
“filed” weeks after my birth? My dad was military but I was born off base. I have found a
similar TX cert online that was filed the very same day as the birth. But it is a long form
version and says: “Date Rec’d by Local Registrar”)
Under that it states: “This is a true and correct abstract of the original record as recorded in this
office. Issued under the authority of Section 191.051, Health and Safety Code.” and “Issued 10-
24-2002″. It has a TX raised seal on the left bottom corner.
At the time I received it I noticed it doesn’t have my time of birth listed and many other details
missing (making this is a short form). I had called Texas back up immediately and was told that
to get the full data I would have to request another copy: from the county clerk in the actual
county I was born in.
My daughter’s birth cert from here in Michigan is very different. I happened to obtain that copy
directly from the county she was born in, instead of the MI central office in Lansing, and it is
the long form. It states it is a “Certificate of Live Birth”, and “Date Received by Local
Registrar – December 11, 198x. (A week after her birth) On the back it says Void Without
Page 46 of 138
Raised Seal. But I can’t find a raised seal on it anywhere, not by touch or visual inspection,
only a large very pale watermark MI seal in the middle of the document.
Now I’m very curious. I’m going to request new copies of both, but in reverse types. I’m going
to request a long form for me from the county of TX I was born in. I’m going to request a copy
of my daughter’s from the central vital records office of MI to see just what they send out, and
if a short or long form comes back. And compare all four of them.
We’re trying to figure out the ‘FILED by Local Registrar’ and ‘ACCEPTED by State
Registrar’
stuff. My daughter’s MI one is slightly different as being “Date RECEIVED by Local
Registrar’, (and a TX long form using this same ‘REC’D by Local Reg’ wording). My TX short
form is simply ‘FILED by’ with no local or state registrar info at all. This is showing us that not
only does state to state differ, but so does whether it is a short or long form, AND a third layer
of whether it is obtained from the central state office of vital records vs. actual county court
vital records. I hope I’m being clear on the distinctions for us to investigate. It is complex as to
local and state registrars, plus factoring in if the information is “filed, accepted, or received”,
what’s factual and legal, and what is prima facie and/or pending authentication.
We’re trying to get info from the central office of HI (Honolulu), but what about the county
court records? The UIPA laws should cover them too.
[MT: "“Date Rec’d by Local Registrar”: this is the first step a long form original takes. This is
also the first step an application to amend a birth certificate takes. Can you send me links to this
BC you are talking about? Not yours, the other one...]
[MT: FYI, you haven't lost me, I am just marking up the BC you sent me using Fukino as
'local health official/local registrar' and Onaka as 'State Registrar of Vital Statistics.' and
writig out some possible scenarios..]
Reply
10/05/2009 at 1:54 pm
Shez ZK said
10/04/2009 at 3:55 pm
Hi TerriK,
Good job. Have you tried to slightly reword this sentence yet from your July 27th
request of:
“..AMENDED original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and
procedures.[?]”
to something like:
“AMENDED original birth certificate on FILE in…[?]” ?
Page 47 of 138
I don’t trust anything they are telling us.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Brilliant!
Seems like all requests should ask for every and all records on file, held, recorded,
accepted, archived, stored, amended, AMMENDED (and every other possibility that
you can think of).
Reply
50. ramjet767 said
10/04/2009 at 4:34 pm
Re-posted here my post in the CW blog.
—————————————-
To JJ and CN,
re. “Why not request the index data for the record number which appears on O’s COLB,
without mentioning a name.
See who’s vital record turns up”
Good idea. Whoever is knowledgeable in the process may wish to ask for the index data for
that Obama claimed number AND two numbers before it AND two numbers after and see what
comes up based on those file numbers. Straddle the target and see what is similar and what is
different. Just an idea and thinking our loud and passing it along to anyone out there working
on the HI records system and cover-up.
When the people involved in this are rhetorically hanged, it will be the cover-up activities and
actions that gets most of them the quickest, imo. When the ship starts sinking, and the tipping
point is reached, watch all the cover-up rats scurry for safety and even helping to sink the ship
faster to save their own tails in the tales.
—————————————-
RJ
Reply
51. Scott1 said
10/04/2009 at 4:35 pm
Page 48 of 138
Found this buried in some comments while researching my own state.
“FACT: The computer generated Obama birth certificate on the internet has an “ACCEPTED
BY REGISTRAR”. This indicates that the information was not received from a hospital or
other official place of birth. If it were it would instead have “FILED BY REGISTRAR” as do
birth certificates from people who were born in a hospital or delivered by a physician at a
clinic, etc. This is strong evidence that the mother registered Obama’s birth after the fact.
Question: Why does Barack Obama’s computer generated birth certificate have an
“ACCEPTED BY REGISTRAR” instead of a “FILED BY REGISTRAR”?
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/peter-roff/2009/08/03/from-obamas-birth-certificate-to-trig-
palins-birth-both-sides-have-fringe-nuts/comments/3
Reply
o Claudia said
10/04/2009 at 7:08 pm
Scott,
IF you go look at the Fightthesmears.com website, you will see exactly the opposite of
what you wrote. Obama’s COLB on fightthesmears is FILED BY REGISTRAR, not
accepted by Registrar. I don’t know where you got the turn-around from, but that site
you pointed to does NOT give very reliable facts….. at least from what I read, and
admittedly, that was not very much, because all I read in the few short minutes I was
there seemed to be bogus to me. JMHO, but I think you should check out the facts from
the source before you start making references.
Reply
52. Shez ZK said
10/04/2009 at 4:42 pm
Here’s the TX long form I found:

http://sanjuanitausa.com/onlinedocuments/USBirthCertificate.pdf [PDF]
I was googling for the Section 191.051, Health and Safety Code when I espied that long form
TX birth certification. (Interesting that both the short and long form TX are ‘Certification of
Vital Record’ and look very similar) I could scan my short form for you and email it as long as
it doesn’t get published, although I could redact it and upload it to my server if needed for
online verification of your research.
[MT: Hold off on that...I think I have what I need to move forward tomorrow.]
Reply
Page 49 of 138
53. Scott1 said
10/04/2009 at 4:46 pm
Some more,
http://www.obamaspast.com/popups_facts/guarded_records.html
1. Obama’s “Certification Of Live Birth” and a “Certification Of Live Birth” for Patricia
Decosta are printed on the same form, identified in the lower left corner as, “OHSM 1.1 (Rev.
11/01) LASER.” This document identification means that this form was revised and approved
in November, 2001 for use with laser printers, and would have been produced by the HSDH
VR office after November 2001. However, if they are the same revision of the document,
would they have such a vastly different border hatching? Would the revision numbers on the
bott
Please note: Both certificates come up in half-size format — clicking them will expand the
certificates to original size.
2. In the lower left section, Obama’s document contains the legend “Date Filed By Registrar.”
Decosta’s certificate contains the legend, “Date Accepted By State Registrar.” If they were
both produced on the same document revision, why is the language different?
Reply
54. Scott1 said
10/04/2009 at 4:58 pm
Not trying to spam you, I find this facinating. Hidden in plain site! You connected the dots.
Here is an interesting comment.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2249416/posts?q=1&;page=51
To: rreahsito
The “Original” birth certificate that “O” posted on his campaign site had “Date filed by
Registrar” as August 8, 1961, so I wouldn’t see how he could get by with going over as an
adult to create what was supposedly in existence in 1961.
If it is a “delayed” or “unattended” type certificate, then it’s possible that he was born earlier,
maybe not too much earlier, than the certificate says. Also possibly not where the certificate
says. If his original certificate shows his grandmother as witness, rather than an attending
physician or midwife, and birth in someplace other than a hospital, that would be somewhat
suspecious. His mother and grandmother would not have falsified the application so that he
could be natural born, and eligible to the office of President, but rather so he could be a citizen
at all, since IF he was born outside the country and IF his father was not a citizen (which he
was not IF he was Barack H. Obama Sr.) then he was not a citizen at birth, provided his parents
were married, since his mother did not then meet the criteria for passing on US citizenship to
Page 50 of 138
her offspring. (She did by the time his half sister was born) In 1961, even left wing types still
saw advantages to being an American citizen.
68 posted on Tuesday, May 12, 2009 6:10:32 PM by El Gato (”The Second Amendment is the
RESET button of the United States Constitution.” — Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]
Reply
55. Dr. Bobbi Anne white said
10/04/2009 at 5:11 pm
for email subscription service, you can go to

http://www.google.com/support/feedburner/bin/answer.py?answer=78486&cbid=-
1e5tspumnryaq&src=cb&lev=answer
you will need to open an account with feedburner.
Reply
56. vrajavala said
10/04/2009 at 5:15 pm
actually I just looked at the “global dashboard” in wordpress and ylu can just check the box
there for “enable subscription by email”
Reply
57. “itooktheredpill” research rocks Leo Donofrio’s world and TerriK’s blog address «
Politicaldoc’s Dx said
10/04/2009 at 5:37 pm
[...] http://misstickly.wordpress.com/2009/10/04/our-worst-nightmare-confirmed/ [...]
Reply
58. RJJohnson said
10/04/2009 at 5:41 pm
original vital records maintained on file”
Page 51 of 138
If they are just on file and not yet accepted by the Registrar can you actually call them “vital
records”?
[MT: More on this later today...]
Reply
59. DABIG said
10/04/2009 at 5:45 pm
“MT: According to the Oct. 2008 statement there is an original birth certificate on record in
accordance to policy and procedure. However, Dr. Fukino does not say she saw it, she says she
saw it was on record. Could indicate a sealed original resulting from an adoption?”
+++++++++++++
Question (with emphasis on: Resulting from an adoption?)
How can we help here?
[MT: Please research the possibles and see if they fit with what we have been presented...]
Reply
60. Texo said
10/04/2009 at 6:24 pm
I was just reading other posts. Want to say the only place that I know of that he signed saying
he was Natural Born is in AZ.
I had sent that to Leo months back but it was sent by email to me so I have no actual source
record that this is in fact true.
I can’t say what Nancy saw when other that I sent her a letter back in Jan. I doubt she ever saw
that letter or the green card. She or none of her staff people have never made a reply to my
many requests.
http://WWW.DixHistory.Com
Reply
o Sheila said
10/05/2009 at 9:28 am
TerriK, Love your new site I think the info on the Obama swearing he’s an NBC in
Arizona is on jbjd site at word press.
Page 52 of 138
[MT: Thanks!]
Reply
61. Scott1 said
10/04/2009 at 6:28 pm
B. Obama was Born Friday August 4th

COLB “Filed with Registrar” Tuesday Aug 8th
The Nordyke twins were born Saturday August 5th @ Kapeilani Hospital
Birth cert says “Accepted by Registrar” Friday August 11th
Chances they were born at the same place, slim and none. And slim just left town.
Reply
62. Tom JD said
10/04/2009 at 6:58 pm
Very good,TerriK,
I wonder if the “vital” records referred to include the congressional resolution with the same
language, Born in Hawaii and a Natural Born Citizen.
Reply
63. Tian Min said
10/04/2009 at 7:25 pm
Hi Miss Tickly,
Great work you’re doing! FYI, regarding the notations on the lower left of a Hawaii COLB,
apparently there have been various terms used.
My son was born in Hawaii on 9/20/00. There are two entries for date in the lower left corner,
as follows:
DATE RECEIVED BY LOCAL REGISTRAR [=Date Filed by Local Registrar-or a very

close approximation. This happened on the local level.]
September 25, 2000
Page 53 of 138
DATE COPY WAS ISSUED [=Date Accepted by State Registrar-this was probably the
original so it says 'issued'.]
December 20,2000
Neither entry mentions the terms ‘filed’ or ‘accepted’.
[MT: Hopefully, this helps clarify. For Hawaii, it seems to be the difference between those
terms, but when you look across state lines, it's the meaning of them that counts, does that
make sense to you?
I am reading stuff from other states about information from around 2000 on that might
not be reflected in a COLB...just looking into it. may have no relevance....]
Reply
64. Ruby Tuesday said
10/04/2009 at 7:50 pm
MT, How about a letter campaign to Barry Soetero c/o the White House with a simple request:
Dear Whatsyourname,
Show me. Don’t tell me.
Sincerely,
Guess Who
A 42 cent stamp would also serve to help the Post Office.
Reply
65. Justlookingforthetruth said
10/04/2009 at 7:56 pm
This is all so VERY wonderful! Guess back when they figured they could do this nobody
realized the power of the internet and a few hundred people who CARED!
Any idea of what is next? Going through OIP? Will that have any power in DC? He has got to
GOOOOOOOOO!
Pelosi too and everyone of the stinkin idiots. Just can’t imagine how this will be carried
out……
Reply
Page 54 of 138
66. Mike James said
10/04/2009 at 8:00 pm
The attempt to lead people away from the “filed by” versus “accepted by” distinction is very
interesting. Does anyone have any additional information on the alleged COLB with the “filed
by” entry, and/or the dispute with Polarik about the press release? With some hindsight it
should be possible to determine whether or not these were simply honest misunderstandings or
if there was actually intent of mis-direction. Also, is there anyone who knows someone who
has worked in a registrar’s office of any state? Insider knowledge would be very valuable here.
“With some hindsight it should be possible to determine whether or not these were simply
honest misunderstandings or if there was actually intent of mis-direction.”
[MT: Trust me I was being kind.=)]
Reply
o Claudia said
10/04/2009 at 10:01 pm
I am going into the Registrars Office tommorow, on regular business that I do all the
time, that is in Washoe County, NV and I will find out if there is indeed a difference, I
will talk to the Registrar personally and ask her….. I think that she wil give me an
honest anwer, especially if I don’t tell her why I am asking….
Reply
misstickly said
10/04/2009 at 10:08 pm
Awesome. Please report what you find. I am calling the relevant agencies in my
state to get answers, too tomorrow…
67. stand up and fight said
10/04/2009 at 8:30 pm
Miss Tickly
You do not have to wear a uniform to fight for this great country.The truth always wins out in
the end.Keep up the great work you are doing.So many have died fighting for our freedom now
it is our turn to fight to honor their great sacrifice.
Page 55 of 138
God bless you and God bless the U.S.A.
‘MT: thank you, and I copy that!]
Reply
68. ramjet767 said
10/04/2009 at 8:41 pm
Miss Tickly,
Adoption and sealed records. Bing! Maybe on Ann’s marriage to Soetoro, Mr. Soetoro
officially adopted Barack in Hawaii, and Obama became officially Barry Soetoro??? Does that
fit as a possibility given other independent facts and evidence elsewhere? Maybe that is what
they are trying to hide too.
RJ
Reply
69. ramjet767 said
10/04/2009 at 9:04 pm
Maybe we’re dealing with a false registration of birth by the grandmother in 1961, then
subsequently a name change to Barry Seotoro when Ann married Mr. Soetoro, and with an
official name change (if that is what they did) a new birth certificate being issued for that in
Hawaii, and then maybe as an adult in later life, say about 2004-2007 Obama had the birth
record file changed again to have his official name in the Hawaii records changed back to
Barack Hussein Obama II. Just thinking out loud.
RJ
Reply
70. FrenchNail said
10/04/2009 at 9:06 pm
Glorious!!! I see your approach and Leo’s complementary.
I just said to some friends Thursday was the last good day of O’s Presidency. It’s all downhill
from there for him. The dam has cracked and You were the one to crack it.
Page 56 of 138
Also a very good friend of mine had read the so-called explanation of Polarik regarding the
technique he employed to unmasked Maya’s COLB. And he had told me back then, it was BS.
(My friend works with these softwares for a living).
So yes, let’s be very careful. There are some Alinsky masters out there.
[MT: "Glorious!!! I see your approach and Leo’s complementary." So do I....=)]
Reply
71. HighlanderJuan said
10/04/2009 at 9:07 pm
Miss Tickly,
I just put a copy of this blog up on Scribd.com.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/20611487/Miss-Tickly-Our-Worst-Nightmare-Confirmed
Maybe it will drive some traffic to your blog.
Good luck in your pursuits – we’re all with you!
Juan
[MT: Thanks!]
Reply
72. ramjet767 said
10/04/2009 at 9:12 pm
From what I can see about this whole family and their connections in Hawaii, they were all a
bunch of commies and grifters, imo, out to bamboozle the system to accommodate their
personal needs at whatever stage of life they were in. Mutiple SSNs, multiple passports,
multiple names to suit the needs and occasion at hand. Grifter reds operating out of corrupt
personal needs or maybe even worse, a deep sleeper cell in the works for decades with name
and ID changes and spelling variations in various records to cover their tracks. JMHO.
RJ
Reply
Page 57 of 138
o Claudia said
10/04/2009 at 10:06 pm
one thing is for sure, their tentacles run very deep into many places that did NOT and
would have NOT come to light without a lot of dedicated investigation. “They”
(whoever “they” are) have done a LOT to cover every single trail that any one of them
might have left, and undo all the footprints that they might have stumbled around.
Reply
73. LouisianaCajun said
10/04/2009 at 9:37 pm
How can we help you? I am so excited! Just let us know.
[MT: We'll brainstorm tomorrow. I promise.]
Reply
74. Sid Davis said
10/04/2009 at 9:38 pm
If you are born outside the USA, you don’t necessarily get a birth certificate from any State in
the USA, but still can be a US citizen by operation of federal legislation that gives you
citizenship because you are the child of a US citizen born abroad. Or you might be able to
apply for (but are not required to apply for) a birth certificate from a State like Hawaii which is
willing to issue Hawaiian birth certificates to those foreign born to residents of Hawaii.
Maya would not need to be naturalized because she was born a US citizen under the law, but
she obviously could not be a “natural born citizen” because of her father not being a US citizen.
There are numerous classes of citizenship, including naturalized (born without US citizenship),
legislative (born to a US parent while abroad), and natural born (two US parents and born in the
USA).
If a US citizen and his US citizen wife takes a trip abroad and gives birth while outside the
USA the child is still a US citizen, and would have a birth certificate issued by the country in
which he was born, like John McCain who has a birth certificate from Panama. He still is a US
citizen, just like Maya, but neither of them are natural born citizens, and neither of them would
have a birth certificate issued by any State in the USA, unless that state provided for issuing
certificates to foreign born children of those who reside in their state.
[MT: "Consular Report of Birth or FS-240, is considered a basic United States citizenship
document."]
Page 58 of 138
Reply
10/04/2009 at 10:11 pm
Miss Tickly, I saw this quote at logisticsmonster.com and immediately thought of you!
“Be the kind of woman that when your feet hit the floor in the morning the Devil says, “Oh Shit
– She’s Awake”!
[MT: I LOVE it.]
Reply
76. ramjet767 said
10/04/2009 at 10:28 pm
Miss Tickly,
Regarding the accepted and filed terms and the birth records for the twins having a file number
lower than Obama’s and yet Obama was allegedly born the day before the twins and thus his
number should be lower than the twins, how does this scenario sound?
Obama is born on the 4th of Aug 1961 in Kenya. Ann phones home and tells grandma about
the new news, she has a grandson. The twins are born in the Hawaii hospital on the 5th and
there birth registration is filed by the hospital. That filing is received on the 7th or the morning
of the 8th in the morning mail at the Health Department and the file numbers are assigned.
Then later in the afternoon of the 8th in walks grandma Dunham and drops off the filled our
mail in form or fills out the form there in the office registering her new grandson as being born
at home in Hawaii and stating the mother is to weak to come in herself to do it. She thus filed
the birth registration after the twins registration even though Obama was born before the twins.
That would account for the out of order file numbers for Obama and the twins at first glance
based simply on the dates of birth reported. It is really the date of filing that would get the
number, yes/now? And with my theory, grandma Dunham filed the birth registration after the
twins had theirs filed. How does that narrative sound and fit the facts known?
RJ
Reply
o John Charlton said
10/05/2009 at 12:20 am
Page 59 of 138
Ramjet,
I’ll present a tweeked version.
———–
Obama is born on the 4th of Aug 1961.
The twins are born in the Hawaii hospital on the 5th and there birth registration is filed
by the hospital. That filing is received on the 7th or the morning of the 8th in the
morning mail at the Health Department and the file numbers are assigned.
Then later in the afternoon of the 8th in walks grandma Marilyn Dunham and drops off
the filled our mail in form or fills out the form there in the office registering her new
grandson as being born in the backyard cottage of the home at 6085 Kalanianaole
Highway, in Hawaii and stating the mother is to weak to come in herself to do it.
Marilyn insists that her daughter give birth there, because she is deeply ashamed of
having a mixed race grandson, and does not want the doctors at a hospital deliver such
from her white daughter.
This is her excuse to hide the race of the child. On the birth filing she submits she
indicates that the race of the parents and child is WHITE.
She thus filed the birth registration after the twins registration even though Obama was
born before the twins. That would account for the out of order file numbers for Obama
and the twins at first glance based simply on the dates of birth reported.
But HI only files this at-home-birth affidavit, and requests more informaion, which is
never received, because Stanly Ann Dunham is sent by mom to WA state to get her out
of town at the first possibility.
Years later Barry Jr. finds this original filing document in a closet. He has already been
trained to hate the white race by Frank Marshal Davis, so when he sees grandma’s filing
he goes beserk, because it says that he is WHITE.
So sometimem thereafter he files an alteration request (Amendment is for adoptions

only), and gets the AFRICAN race indication put on it.
But this filing is not accepted, because his father and mother are already dead.
So before granny dies, he tries to get her to give him an affidavit so that he can get his
birth record accepted. He does get something, but HI still wont accept, because she is a
third party.
So he is really in a fix, since he has no legal evidence of his birth, AND IN FACT
CANNOT PROVE WHEN OR WHERE HE WAS BORN, LET ALONE HIS
PARENTS IDENTITY.
Page 60 of 138
This is why when he files his Selective Service Registration he does not show his BC,
because he does not have one.
What he does do, is have his campaign issue a COLB to show the information claimed
by Marilyn Dunham in her affidavit, that is why it says filed, not accepted.
His lawyers give him this advice, since they believe so long as there are no contrary
affidavits outstanding, that he can legally claim a HI birth, with Dunham and Obama Sr.
as parents.
This is why Kenya will not admit to having documents that prove Obama Sr. is his
father; because there are none in existence anywhere.
What his lawyers did not count on is the NBC issue.
Now his goose is double cooked.
[I'd have loved to post this interpretation at The Post & Email, but Ramjet and you
MissTickly deserve credit.]
Reply
o Claudia said
10/05/2009 at 12:45 am
ramjet767,
OR….. there are two different hospitals located in close proxmity to each other and
each hospital is given a “set” of forms to be used to get the baby infomration ready to
file, those sets are consecutive numbers and not divided up by dates, so hospital A gets
numbers 1 thru 20 and hospital B gets numbers 21 thru 40 and back and forth or
through each hospital in the town, county or area served by and located in that state
jurisdiction…… and the Registrars Office files those documents according to input, not
according to number on Certificate. They may also be based partially on the day or time
they were turned into the Registrars Office, and MOST of those were physically
walked/delivered in person into that OFFICE on purpose and NOT MAILED in. And
say on the day that the twins spoken about were born on a day when there were many
other births and Obama was born on a day when there was only one other birth, maybe
the actual taking of the records to the Registrars Office might have been put off for a
few hours or even a day.
All I am saying is systems back 45-50 years ago were a bit different than they are today,
and many newer ways of doing recordings and filings of all different types of
documents has changed a lot in the ensuing 40+ years.
Reply
Page 61 of 138
77. Scott1 said
10/04/2009 at 10:29 pm
State of Illinois circa 1961 Certificate of Live Birth,used the term.
Received for filing on ______
(Signed)_________________Local Registrar
Reply
78. Scott1 said
10/04/2009 at 10:40 pm
State of Illinois circa 1962

Cetificate of Live Birth
“The Childs Birth Number will be assigned by the StateOfice. A record of that number will be
sent to the county clerkand registrar for their file copy”
“The State office will send the parents a special form (in triplicate) in cases where the given
names of the child are missing when the birth certificate is filed. No form will be sent if the
baby died or is illegitimate. The County clerk registrar will receive a copy of the completed
form.”
Reply
79. Bill R said
10/04/2009 at 10:53 pm
I’m convinced. If only the American people new the truth. Obama tried to fake us out by filing
an ammendment to his “birth certificate” and Hawaii has not confirmed his ammended colb
because of lack of evidence he is a Natural Born Citizen. You have shown us the truth. Now
obama can’t hide behind an “incomplete” non verified colb he says is his birth certificate.
Congress under the control of the democrate has tried to coverup for the imposter obama.
ThankYou TerriK for revealing the FRAUD obama.
Thanks to Leo Donofrio also. Your both true patriots!
[MT: Thanky!]
Reply
80. mickeyb said
Page 62 of 138
10/04/2009 at 10:56 pm
MT,
May be of no relevance to you, but I pulled my kid’s BCs from Minnesota, born in 2002 and
2005. MN has three dates listed… “date of birth”, “date filed”, and “date issued”. Also, they
say “Birth Certificate”, not COLB
“Date Filed” had additional verbiage “THIS IS A TRUE AND OFFICIAL RECORD OF THE
BIRTH REGISTERED IN THE OFFICE OF THE STATE REGISTRAR”
“Date Issued” and “Place Issued” (County) are next to the signature of the “State Registrar”
My wife and I have our originals from OK from the early and mid 1970s. They are labeled
“Certificate of Live Birth” and have four dates… date of birth, date received, date filed, and
then a stamp next to the registrar’s signature that I assume to be the “date accepted”.
[MT: I will post on this later today. I have done much research today.=) I can help you to
understand better, i think.]
Reply
81. EarthwalkUSA said
10/04/2009 at 11:34 pm
Find the video of Obama when he was running for Senator and said to “somebody,” You only
have to be a natural born citizen if you are running for President. AND what about the hearings
this week with Judge Carter?
Reply
o HighlanderJuan said
10/05/2009 at 6:06 am
Earthwalk,
I think you are referring to an after debate conversation between Obama and Alan
Keyes, The tape went missing right after it became known to exist. All of us would love
to find that tape because it tells us that Obama and the DNC have been hugely
conspiratorial in his every action since then.
Obama IS consciously competent, and he is very well aware of his fraudulent actions to
attain the highest office in our land.
But Obama is from Chicago. So, what’s the big deal?
Page 63 of 138
Juan
Reply
John Charlton said
10/05/2009 at 6:18 am
Here is the story on the tape, which I have from one of my informants.
It occured in the second debate with Alan Keyes for the US. Senate seat in IL, in
the fall of 2004.
The tape was the uncut version: the aired version on Chicago TV (ABC) did not
have the segment; the edited version was distributed for many months at Keyes’
site. In an appearance at Plains radio in January or Feb. of 2009, Keyes when
asked directly about this, said he did not remember.
The exchange was this:
Keyes made a cutting accusation, saying: “You are not even a natural born
citizen”
Obama quickly retored, “So what, I am running for the U.S. Sentate not the
presidency.”
This uncut version was shown on national TV, via C-Span during mid to lat
April 2005, and after each debate aired there was a call in for comments.
After this segment aired and the commentator took questions, he commentator at
C-Span said that the Obama Campaign wanted to clarify that Obama’s statement
in reply to Keyes’ charge of not being a nbc, did not signify that Obama was not
a nbc, only that it was not a requirement for the office he was seeking.
C-span made the point of indicating to the audience that they were showing the
uncut versions which they had requested from the Chicago ABC station
explicitly in this form, for national airing, since Obama was being talked about
in DC as an up and comming political figure; and so that views could get a more
complete insight into him.
In my humble opinion, Obama did admit he was a NBC; but his campaign after
seeing his election victory, started then an there to rewrite his past…
Note that no where did Obama say he was a NBC, except in the AZ candidacy
filing, which supporters claimed, when outed on this point, was signed by his
legal representative, not him.
Page 64 of 138
82. Mary S_FL said
10/05/2009 at 12:05 am
Hi Miss Tickly!
Where to go from here? Hopefully, Orly and Judge Carter are aware of this by now, and that
tomorrow’s court date will proceed with immediate demands for disclosure by Hawaii, Obama,
Pelosi, Biden, etc. I believe it can happen.
On the other hand, what if the suit goes away tomorrow, and the Press never picks up on your
wonderfully researched, well-documented information? You certainly have logically exposed
what others did notice before, but their statements without paperwork sounded like they were
“grasping at straws.”
Lord help us all – legalese is strangling us, in addition to greed and power-grabs.
Perhaps we Americans will learn a great lesson from all this – we must stay involved and ask
questions and bear with being dismissed as nut job birthers.
You and Leo made a wonderful team here – I myself have probably spent as much time reading
and thinking about all this as both of you have, but it never ever occurred to me that Hawaii
would have two sets of vital records: one that is “real” and one which is not; and that they
would freely act as if both were legal – in writing, no less! How wickedly clever they are.
And the worst part is the Dem’s online COLB was not legally fraudulent. Leo calls it guilt of
misrepresentation – which sounds more like a minor problem than “stealing an election” does,
but that may well be all they can legally be accused of – if they ever are accused of anything.
Keep sending the info. out, as will I. Thank you, dear!
Hugs from FL and NY, where I am visiting right now. Pray all morning for Orly’s case, so this
doesn’t go on forever.
[MT: Hawaii is playing tricks. But everything they are hiding can be found elsewhere...]
Reply
10/05/2009 at 6:16 am
Mary S,
Judge Carter can only respond to the paperwork that is before him in court. He doesn’t
do any research of his own.
Page 65 of 138
Unfortunately, there is so much scattered information about this usurpation that it would
take a legal research team as big as Obama’s team to keep track of it all and make
certain that it gets presented in a legal manner before the court. This is why I think we
see missed opportunities in court – there is too much information and misinformation
spread around. Obama likes it that way.
Maybe the American people will be lucky and actually win in the end, but stopping this
takeover of our republic is no small task at hand. The forces we are fighting against are
large and they are devious because there is a lot at stake.
Reply
Truth Exists (Paulajal) said
10/05/2009 at 11:26 am
This is not true. I worked as a researcher for a judge. They most certainly do
research themselves (or their hired legal clerks do).
[MT: ?]
FrenchNail said
10/05/2009 at 11:36 am
I remember following the OJ trial and noticing that the prosecution was not
introducing the obvious: the presence of another person with OJ at Nicole
residense (Probably Kardashian) and thinking to myself: They cannot prove it.
Rule 1 of a trail: You only pursue lines of attack that you can prove.
Right now, everybody is using pending trials as primary tools for research.
The system does not provide to adequately use trials for outing evidences. You
out evidences BEFORE you go to trial, you confirm and reinforce your evidence
during discovery and you present your best evidence during the trial.
This is why Leo’s and MissT’s work are so important.
We need to be as close as possible to the truth BEFORE going to battle.
That’s how you win cases.
10/05/2009 at 6:22 am
Page 66 of 138
BTW, regarding your comment about legalize, this whole adventure shows us how we
have to learn the law ourselves in order to protect our nation.
But if it’s any consolation to you, I understand that during the colonial period, one of
the major complaints that King George received from the governors was ‘everybody
knows the law.’
Hah, ha!
If that’s the rules of the game, then let the games begin. This is something we can do.
Reply
83. JustMe said
10/05/2009 at 12:31 am
First of all, the graphics/illustration on your site are very, very, very well done. A breath of
fresh air, much like yourself, I’m sure, in your approach to uncovering the facts/truth – thinking
outside the box…Congrats to you and thanks to you and Leo.
Reply
84. Editorial: Oct. 5, 2009 — Now Obama’s Goose is double-cooked « said
10/05/2009 at 12:46 am
[...] of what happened, based on my tweaked version of what Ramjet (www.thebirthers.org)

suggested in a comment at Terrik’s blog, where I have posted this theory, in my own comment.
Here I flesh it [...]
Reply
85. Kay said
10/05/2009 at 12:54 am
TerriK,
I so admire you girl!
I wished I was an attorney instead of just a passionate lady for my country…
MOVING ON WITHOUT HAWAII’S HELP

IMO….they are guilty of all http://www.leg.state.nv.us/nrs/NRS-440.html
Page 67 of 138
Where is Michelle Malkin, Glenn Beck or anyone that can get this out there…
I thought Glenn Beck was number 1 in the media????
I say put away the chalk board and work on this!!!
Sorry just had to vent..
You’re AWESOME Thank you!
[MT: The certificate certainly lacks veracity--but there's more.=)]
Reply
86. OriginalPatriot said
10/05/2009 at 4:27 am
Thank you so very much for your brilliance, aggressiveness, and relentless persistence in
bravely pursuing this very important matter which directly affects national security and the
United States Constitution, “Miss Tickly”. May God richly bless you and may God save, bless,
and protect These United States of America. Sincerely, a direct descendant of Founding Fathers
John and John Quincy Adams and the Herndons of Virginia.
[MT: Thanky!]
Reply
10/05/2009 at 6:37 am
John Charlton said

10/05/2009 at 6:18 am
Here is the story on the tape, which I have from one of my informants.
It occurred in the second debate with Alan Keyes for the US. Senate seat in IL, in the fall of
2004.
The tape was the uncut version: the aired version on Chicago TV (ABC) did not have the
segment; the edited version was distributed for many months at Keyes’ site. In an appearance at
Plains radio in January or Feb. of 2009, Keyes when asked directly about this, said he did not
remember.
The exchange was this:
Keyes made a cutting accusation, saying: “You are not even a natural born citizen”
Obama quickly retored, “So what, I am running for the U.S. Sentate not the presidency.”
Page 68 of 138
This uncut version was shown on national TV, via C-Span during mid to lat April 2005, and
after each debate aired there was a call in for comments.
After this segment aired and the commentator took questions, he commentator at C-Span said
that the Obama Campaign wanted to clarify that Obama’s statement in reply to Keyes’ charge
of not being a nbc, did not signify that Obama was not a nbc, only that it was not a requirement
for the office he was seeking.
C-span made the point of indicating to the audience that they were showing the uncut versions
which they had requested from the Chicago ABC station explicitly in this form, for national
airing, since Obama was being talked about in DC as an up and coming political figure; and so
that views could get a more complete insight into him.
In my humble opinion, Obama did admit he was a NBC; but his campaign after seeing his
election victory, started then an there to rewrite his past…
Note that no where did Obama say he was a NBC, except in the AZ candidacy filing, which
supporters claimed, when outed on this point, was signed by his legal representative, not him.
===================
Thank you, John. So do you know what happened to the tape, or why has it disappeared? Does
ABC or C-SPAN still have an uncut copy?
My version of the story came from a search request on a blog some six months or more ago. I
assumed (I know, that’s a bad thing to do) because we have never seen the tape displayed since
then, that the tape was never found, and being the conspiratorial kind of guy that I am, I
assumed the worst.
Reply
o John Charlton said
10/05/2009 at 8:33 am
I cannot say. I can say that at least one witness of the C-Span broadcast is willing to file
an affidavit about what he did see. There are probably thousands of Alan Keyes fans out
there also who recorded the C-span broadcast, and don’t realize that their old VHS
recording, stored away in the closet will one day help bring down the “president”.
Reply
88. Mike James said
10/05/2009 at 10:04 am
Page 69 of 138
This whole thing is fascinating to me. But there is something that does not seem right. If all of
this is true, it means that Hawaii issues documents that appear to be true birth certificates, when
in fact they contain unverified data. And only the true insiders know that “filed by” means it is
bad data. There are many people whose job requires them to use birth certificate data, people
who issue driver’s licenses, Social Security cards, passports, register children for school, sign
up kids to play little league, etc. Do all of these people know the difference between “filed by”
and “accepted by”? One of the biggest problems this country currently faces is illegal workers
gettting Social Security numbers by using forged birth certificates. Why is there a need to forge
a birth certificate? Just get Hawaii to issue one that says “filed by” and no employer will ever
know the difference. Somehow there has to be more to this story.
Reply
o beyond baffled said
10/05/2009 at 11:09 am
I am with you on this point. I am completed mystified as to why if someone requested a

COLB the latest UN-verified copy is released. That’s why I am so confused about this
COLB, from the beginning no one would stand by it yet everyone refered to it as proof
of Hawaiin birth.
Reply
89. Observer said
10/05/2009 at 10:16 am
Miss Tickly,
Regarding the accepted and filed terms and the birth records for the twins having a file number
lower than Obama’s and yet Obama was allegedly born the day before the twins and thus his
number should be lower than the twins, how does this scenario sound?
Well, not only is the number for Obama higher but isn’t the number different in the fact of it
having a zero placed before the number? I’m wondering if that could have been done in order
to have some later recording of the birth date entered and the file amended with the possibility
of the fitting number already having been taken, they added the zero to make it another separate
number but still filed on the same date. Or could the zero have another meaning within the regs,
differentiating this file for some reason – like not authenticated as required?
Reply
90. TooMuchTime said
10/05/2009 at 10:32 am
Page 70 of 138
TerriK, I suggest you stop referring to The Pretender as “President Obama.” If you were in a
court and you called him “President Obama,” that would be explicit acceptance of him as
president. In other words, you would be making statements against your own argument.
Also, what you would have to do is every time the respondents referred to him as the president,
you must object with the statement that he is NOT president and should not be referred to as
such, until the matter is resolved.
If you call him “President Obama,” you are defeating your own purpose.
Since, by precedent, we address a person with their highest political office attained, he should
be called “Senator Obama.”
Personally, I use “The B.O.” and “The Pretender” because his socialist policies stink to high
heaven and he has yet to prove to my statisfaction that he is a naturally born citizen.
[MT: I feel it would be distraction to call him anything but President Obama until I have
the answers I need....I will give it some thought though...]
Reply
91. Jon said
10/05/2009 at 11:18 am
Great detective work and it refreshes me to realize that we are getting closer to the truth even
though all levels of government are conspiring to protect Obama. If this was a Republican the
Left and media would be unrelenting until the POTUS resigned.
[MT: Surprise! I am a liberal, progressive, disgruntled feminist (AND Hillary & Palin
voter) with a chip on her shoulder!=) This isn't about partisan politics--it's about common
sense. IT'S about OPEN GOVERNMENT. More on that today!]
The story questioning eligibility would be front page news and those famous ABC, NBC, CBS
would be covering it nightly. I also recommend adding a link of A SYNTHESIS OF WHAT IS
KNOWN INDICATES THAT OBAMA CANNOT PROVE HIS BIRTH IN ANY WAY,
SHAPE OR FORM by John Charlton to your blog.
[MT: This is correct although legally speaking, what's been done may be legally on the
level.]
This article explains the reasons why Obama has failed to reveal his BC and background
information and why he has the latent hatred for white people. With all said why hasn’t there
been action to remove Obama based on the fact that only one parent was a US citizen and
Obama admits in his book he had dual nationality at birth? His case would be the same as
President Chester Arthur failing to disclose his father was not a US citizen when he ran for
president.
Page 71 of 138
Reply
92. naturalborncitizen said
10/05/2009 at 11:34 am
“Although this data exists, it’s not relevant to move forward concerning the events of July 27,
2009, IMO. We KNOW the vital records used to verify the President’s Birth Place were
insufficient on July 27, 2009.”
We don’t know for sure that the COLB he used at the start of the election had not been updated
by July 27, 2009. And we don’t know if Fukino was using the COLB or other vital records to
make the July 27th statement. You have jumped to a bit of conclusion here. Piece by piece we
will get to the truth, but it’s important to be 100% accurate right now.
Furthermore, as to the index data. It is very important in many ways -
1. just the fact that it was always available to the public while they continuously denied access
to “all information’ shows a pattern of obfuscation. [MT: True.]
2. having access to the index data allows us to terminate confusing myths. [MT: Not so fast...If
it's not on record with the State Registrar of Vital Statistics, it's not been indexed.
Obama's COLB tells us this could make Index data irrelevant to the big picture.]
- we can prove Obama Sr and SAD were married in Hawaii. [MT: Nope, that isn't conclusive-
-that information can be amended on a BC at later date and that is where 'Bride' and
'Groom' came from as I recall, is that correct?]
- we can prove no COLB for Maya exists [MT: See point #2]
- we can see whether there’s any index data for “Barry Soetoro”. Okubo said no such records
existed in her correspondence with KingsKid, but she said that she would send the request on to
Onaka just in case, so he answer is not conclusive under OIP administrative rules.[MT: See
point #2]
At the end of the day, what will matter is who can pry the documents out of the hands of the
DoH. That is where the battle must be focused. [MT: If anyone can get to it, it will be you!]
Reply
93. tiger7 said
10/05/2009 at 12:07 pm
Thanks to you and a few others Obama’s ship is about to hit the sand. The results of today’s
court hearing, hopefully, will get the first olive out of the jar as far as some of the media is
concerned—they are in it for ratings and I think some of them will jump ship. At least Fox is
Page 72 of 138
supposed to have significant representation at the hearing.

The vast majority of the American people–especially those like you–are truely great and
deserve much better than they’re getting from their government.
God speed and, as old fighter pilots say, check six
Reply
94. Benaiah said
10/05/2009 at 12:14 pm
Thank you for defending liberty…
United States Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas

http://www.thehopeforamerica.com/play.php?id=897
“…the framers …understood that for liberty to exist the populace needed to be educated
enough to understand liberty and to be able to defend liberty. They also understood that liberty
was not on automatic pilot, that liberty would not exist simply because it was once started, and
that having won it it was very delicate and had to be protected…”
Reply
95. Benaiah said
10/05/2009 at 12:27 pm
Barack Obama’s 1967

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1254673317520&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%
2FShowFull
“…As the writer and historian Simon Schama wrote, history should endeavor “to
disentangle fact from fable,” also reminding us that one of America’s Founding Fathers,
John Adams, had said “Facts are stubborn things.”
Reply
96. epicurious said
10/05/2009 at 12:27 pm
See John Charlton’s blog. He outlines what he believes to have occurred based what you have
found.
http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/10/04/editorial-oct-5-2009-—-now-obamas-goose-is-
double-cooked/
Page 73 of 138
This theory is perhaps the most pausible I have seen. It explains why Kapi’olani Medical
Center removed from its website the letter from BHO that made reference to the hospital as his
birthplace.
Surely the State Department knows the difference between a BC that is on file vs. one that has
been accepted by the State Registrar.
My question: How did he ever get a passport issued??? Can someone please explain?
[MT: They didn't remove it, it's right here in a pdf postd on their fundraising site. I
believe it's relevant, too. More in the future on this, but today--I want to try to explain
better, the implications of a non-legal COLB.
http://www.kapiolanigift.org/uploadedfiles/centennial-magazine.pdf]
Reply
97. Jimmy The C said
10/05/2009 at 12:38 pm
Here’s a link to a guy named Mitchell Langbert,PHD who made a request in July 2008 and his
experience with the DoH. It’s titled “The Plot Thickens: Obama’s Birth Certificate and HRS §
338-18″
http://mitchell-langbert.blogspot.com/2008/07/is-hawaii-manipulating-obama-related.html
You might want to contact him to see if he has gotten anywhere since 2008.
Thanks again for what you are doing.
Jimmy
Reply
98. Nellie said
10/05/2009 at 12:51 pm
http://gen.doh.hawaii.gov/sites/har/admrules/default.aspx
If you look there, the administrative rules Onaka uses are supposed to be in Chapter 17. But
note that it says the rules are in the process of being changed. If we can find Chapter 17
somewhere it may tell us what Hawaii’s procedures are.
Reply
o Nellie said
10/05/2009 at 1:01 pm
Page 74 of 138
Oops. Chapter 117.
Reply
99. Nellie said
10/05/2009 at 1:00 pm
Chapters 120 and 123 are pending repeal upon adoption of Chapter 117. Those topics are
(Chapter 120) “foreign born person adopted in Hawaii” and (123)”names of natural parents on
birth certificate of adopted person”>
Looks like Onaka is trying to convert “Public Health Regulations, Chapters 8, 8a, and 8b” to
administrative rules – and birth certificates of foreign-born persons adopted in Hawaii seems to
be the issue at stake, if I’m reading this right.
Reply
100. Just Words. - TDR Roundtable said
10/05/2009 at 1:27 pm
[...] [...]
Reply
101. yo said
10/05/2009 at 1:31 pm
This may have been covered somewhere else on here, so disregard if it has.
In one of the comments you quoted that the doh as saying that they cannot release “certified”
bc. Well, if this one is not certified, why can’t they release? Wouldn’t a “certified” bc be one
that is “accepted”?
If his is merely “filed”, then it’s not “certified”, right?
[MT: Interestingly, I am reading that SOME states have looser privacy laws on releasing
uncertified, abstract, short form COLBs.]
Reply
102. yolomann said
10/05/2009 at 1:36 pm
Page 75 of 138
I have MS and OK Certificate of live births from the early 60’s. Both have a “Date Recd by
Local Registrar” and a “Registrar Signature” field. The OK has a Date Received by State
Registrar. Neither say anything similar to “Accepted By”. Both Certificates look very similar,
nothing like a HI COLB.
[MT: If it makes any reference to being recorded, on record, accepted or registered with
VItal Statistics or by the State Registrar, that's the same thing. Also, if it says that the
COLB was issued by the [State] Registrar or by Vital Statistics, that’s the same thing. Let
me know if you see any indications of that.
Onaka stamps his as State Registrar to certify it’s a true and correct copy. We should
note that the Obama COLB purports to bear Onaka’s stamp on the back. I believe it may
be just as claimed. If it’s there, I understand that to mean that Onaka certifies he does not
have it on record and that is it only filed by the [local] Registrar. More on that today…]
Reply
o yolomann said
10/05/2009 at 2:42 pm
MT,
Yes, I think this is what you’re asking.
The MS BC has “THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE ABOVE IS A TRUE AND

CORRECT COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ON FILE IN THIS OFFICE” with a date
stamp (1988) and two signatures State Health Officer and State Registrar. The OK has
similar wording with one signature from the State Registrar.
It would be interesting to get copies from all of the states in that time period (short and
long).
Looking forward to more details. I find this topic interesting. Thanks for all the
research.
Reply
103. Marjo said
10/05/2009 at 1:47 pm
Here’s a general question. If Zero ordered his personal records sealed on his first day in office,
does this mean we can’t get to it no matter what?
Page 76 of 138
[No, that refers to records created out of his administration in the executive branch. We
are talking about his PERSONAL records, here... Leo really has the advice on what's
open to disclosure...]
Reply
104. Bdaman said
10/05/2009 at 2:11 pm
TerriK waiting on Carter decision here just ic case you missed it. Luv you
http://giveusliberty1776.blogspot.com/2009/10/1st-report-keyes-v-obama-
10509.html#comment-form
Reply
105. ramjet767 said
10/05/2009 at 2:41 pm
A narrative posted by Mountain Publius Goat back in June of this year postulating a
explanation of the events back in 1961 based on what was known as of this year.
http://countryfirst.bravehost.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=105&t=4438
RJ
[MT: Could be relevant, I want to see what we have going on now from what we know
and can find out. I will keep this in my mind for later, though.]
Reply
106. naturalborncitizen said
10/05/2009 at 2:43 pm
“2. having access to the index data allows us to terminate confusing myths. [MT: Not so
fast...If it's not on record with the State Registrar of Vital Statistics, it's not been indexed.
Obama's COLB tells us this could make Index data irrelevant to the big picture.]”
You’re contradicting yourself – The information from the “index data” has been indexed,
otherwise it wouldn’t be on the index. You said above that if it’s not on record with the State
registrar then it’s not indexed…the info on the index has been indexed. It comes from the index
Page 77 of 138
maintained by Onaka, the registrar. [MT: It's not a contradiction. I can't get my hands on
Hawaii's policies, but I am finding that there may be times when a non-indexed COLB
(event) may be issued. I will post later on this. Seems to have much relevance.]
If it’s NOT in the index data, it might not have been accepted by the registrar. But if you go to
the registrar and pay for the index data, and get something for Obama then it certainly has been
indexed. [MT: Not everything is reflected in an index, that much I know.]
Something has been accepted by the registrar since Obama is indexed there. People on the
ground in Hawaii will, of course, double check Okubo’s response to KingsKid, but if they pan
out then he’s been indexed.
“- we can prove Obama Sr and SAD were married in Hawaii. [MT: Nope, that isn't conclusive--
that information can be amended on a BC at later date and that is where 'Bride' and 'Groom'
came from as I recall, is that correct?]”
No. That is not correct. The bride and groom stuff is not from the birth index, it’s been culled
from the registrant indexes of SAD and BHO. It’s a marriage index event, not birth. That was
made clear in my report. [MT: Ah, I couldn't remember for sure when I wrote that. Will
have to look again at your post.]
- we can prove no COLB for Maya exists [MT: See point #2]
There’s no birth event on file for Maya. if the concept is that Maya’s COLB helped generate
Obama’s COLB, and if there is no birth event listed for Maya, then this is bunk. [MT: This is
not my concept nor has it ever been.] If your argument is that she might have a filed COLB
which has not been accepted and indexed, then if that were the case, Obama wouldn’t need to
use hers as a forgery device because it’s so simple to get one for himself. The COLB for
Obama was NOT forged using a COLB from Maya. [MT: This is not my concept nor has it
ever been.]
That did not happpen. [MT: I know. Never said it did.]
No birth event for Maya is on file – according to Okubo, for Maya. [MT: It's irrelevant to me at
this time, anyway, too.]
Reply
107. Jon said
10/05/2009 at 2:52 pm
I read another article today in which Cpt. Barnett represented by Orly Taitz believes Obama
may have violated the Logan Act by involvement in politcs in Kenya and Indonesia. I recall
reading where Obama assisted a family member in Kenya to be elected, he lost and bloodshed
resulted, Obama continued his involvement by having this criminal appointed to a new
government post. This could be a very fertile investigation area,
Page 78 of 138
Reply
108. ramjet767 said
10/05/2009 at 3:06 pm
Leo loves TerriK? Where would Leo be on this issue without TerriK? On his own blog
explaining why they split and blowing his own horn and telling everyone else why they are
wrong, as usual.
RJ
Reply
109. KJ said
10/05/2009 at 3:10 pm
MT:
Please be very careful of what you publish online: best to have a lawyer review everything in
the posts first.
You wouldn’t want to give anyone on opening for a legitimate or slam lawsuit that would shut
you down.
Don’t you know the O team wouldn’t hesitate to slam you if you give them an opening.
Just a suggestion. We all want to see what else you find in the days ahead.
Very interesting post. Thank you.
[MT: As I said, I sent a link to Dr. Fukino and asked that she correct any
mischaracterizations I made about their policy and legalities. So far she has not
responded to me. I told her I would correct any misinformation.]
Reply
110. Bdaman said
10/05/2009 at 3:11 pm
This just In
11:50 am Pst Gary reported the court is in recess and finished for the day. Intially Justice Carter
was leaning to dismiss the case and accept Defendant’s MTD, however Orly Taitz and Gary
Creeps made a very impassioned arguement and the gallery burst into applause, the Marshalls
Page 79 of 138
did not stop the outburst, and it was felt Justice Carter was swayed by the outburst to not throw
out the MTD but rather reconsider his decision.
He advised both parties no matter his ruling, both would be able to appeal to a higher court.
Issues that plagued Orly’s case in Justice Carter’s mind, were STANDING and
JURISDICTION-regarding Quo Warranto
Quo Warranto must be filed in the Distrct of Columbia as a Writ against the government for
Congress to address
type in Quo Warranto in the search section of our blog- I have an article about it from previous
writings
http://giveusliberty1776.blogspot.com/
Reply
111. Slamdunk said
10/05/2009 at 3:15 pm
Please disregard the first one (I goofed:)
Dear Janice Okubo,
Aloha, and thank you very much for your response to my inquiry about HRS 338 (a) and (d). I
hope you had a restful weekend as I know you have been put through a wringer over this issue
of the President’s birth.
I would like to share the following with you:
The Honolulu Advertiser reported the birth of Barack Obama II on Aug. 21, 1961. Everyone
cites this as a proof for his Hawaiian birth.
The President declared his birth at Kapi’olani Hospital in a Jan. 24, 2009 letter to the hospital
which posted it on their website. (It has been taken down)
There was a non-binding Resolution with the passage of H.RES.593 and S.RES.225
recognizing Hawaii’s 50th Anniversary as a US state. Included in the Resolution was a clause
that stated “the 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama, was born in Hawaii on
August 4, 1961.” (House version text).”
The President’s on line birth certificate says that he was born in Honolulu.
The President’s half-sister, Maya, said he was born in one of Hawaii’s hospitals (Queens or
Kapi’olani).
Page 80 of 138
The President declared himself a “natural born citizen” in his Dec. 13, 2007 Arizona
Presidential Preference Election Candidate Nomination form. By saying he was a natural born
citizen he was acknowledging, by virtue of its legally accepted meaning, his birth in the United
States.
The President’s Hawaiian birth is a fact that is publicly known, but I am unable to understand
what conceivable reason there could be for the HDoH not willing to merely affirm in which
hospital he was born and include it with the index data just released by HDoH.
I would like to request that information please.
Thank you kindly.
Regards,
J. Black
[MT: I like it! Now we have to make sure their standards on verifying an amendment
meet ours. BTW, I did sedn a link to this post to Dr. Fukino and asked her to correct any
mischaracterizations I may have made. I sent it on Oct. 4 and have heard nothing back.
Take it for what you will.]
Reply
112. ResisTyr said
10/05/2009 at 3:33 pm
Miss Tickly,
You are an AWESOME Patriot! Please submit this info & along with your personal letter to the
Landmark Legal Foundation & the American Center for Law & Justice. Mark Levin & Jay
Seculow are two of the most BRILLIANT MINDS & dedicated Patriots in America when it
comes to Constitutional Law.
http://www.landmarklegal.org/DesktopDefault.aspx
http://www.aclj.org/
I IMPLORE you to please do this!
Sincerely, ResisTyr
[MT: Thank you, I will! Let me finish up what I have for the blog today and I will send it
on..]
Reply
o ResisTyr said
Page 81 of 138
10/05/2009 at 5:23 pm
Thank you for your prompt reply & for taking heed of my advice. If one or both of
these fine Constitutional attorneys agree to take this on & help you, I truly believe it
will be the beginning of the end for our dear Pres__ent NObama.
With my profound gratitude for your efforts,
ResisTyr
Reply
o ResisTyr said
10/05/2009 at 5:48 pm
Landmark Legal Foundation – Contact Info:
Washington Office
19415 Deerfield Ave
Suite 312
Leesburg, VA 20176
Phone: (703) 554-6100
Fax: (703) 554-6119
For additional information send us an email at contact@landmarklegal.org.

__________________________________________________
American Center for Law and Justice

P.O. Box 90555
Washington, DC 20090-0555
1-800-296-4529
Legal Helpline Phone: 757-226-2489

Legal Helpline Fax: 757-226-2836
Member Services: 757-802-9160
Radio call-in number: 1-800-684-3110 (from 12-12:30 PM EST/EDT.)
Petition call-in number: 1-877-989-2255
For information on broadcasting Jay Sekulow Live! or Jay Sekulow Weekend:

Phone: 770-414-0806
Page 82 of 138
The following form is for Legal Help Requests only. Please complete the form below if
you are in need of legal help. Upon submitting the form we will review your request
and respond in an appropriate manner. Please note that we only practice Constitutional
law and that we are unable to represent individuals or organizations in legal actions
involving other areas of law, such as personal injury, and corporate matters; these issues
are outside our area of practice.
https://www.aclj.org/Contact/
Reply
113. Lisa C. said
10/05/2009 at 3:33 pm
Please consider using another working name. TerriK is far superior to Misstickly that, should
the media get interested in this (ha, when pigs fly probably), being known as Misstickly is just
asking for more ridicule and disparagement. I was at a dinner party in Chicago recently with 19
other well-educated people and was, coyly and barely-snidely, since I’m a registered
independent, if I had heard of the birther stuff. And I answered, that I had but found them of
little interest, being more significantly impressed by the analysis and documentation of the
“natborners” and then asked if anyone at the table would define “natural born citizen” for our
joint edification. No surprise when none could, despite the company including 5 attorneys.
We’re fighting utter slime here so anything that gives them a wedge in undignifying the quest
adds fuel to their sneers.
For what it’s worth, I’m a graduate of University of Michigan, and Harvard and Penn graduate
programs. My liberal friends thought me a well-reasoned, well-read and insightful intellectual
until…until I used those same attributes to look carefully at Obama. They have a hard time
sneering but still manage because they’re the Kool-Aid drinkers and can only see the faux
messiah!
[MT: They won't sum me up with a username--I don't want anyone to let me speak for
them. That's why I am encouraging people to go after this info on their own. Don't rely on
anyone to do the work or it might not get done. And also, I am a liberal--know this: I like
you for seeing through the faux-messiah. No one's given up yet and that's good. They
don't want you to know that NOT everyone is on board. A couple-few of us aren't...]
Reply
114. Not Free said
10/05/2009 at 3:43 pm
Orly Taitz said Hawaii’s requirements for the short form bc were so loose that his grandmother
could have sworn he was born in Hawaii in order for the mother not to have to pay an atty to go
Page 83 of 138
thru immigration. Contradictory evidence is sufficient to cause the prima facie presumption of
the COLB to fall. Obama therefore has the burden to come forward with competent evidence to
conclusively prove that he was born in Hawaii.
[MT: Most of the state's laws I've ready are pretty strict when it comes to proof. But
Orly's right in that much of it could be easily obtained by someone with a lot of resources
and the motivation.]
Reply
115. Scott1 said
10/05/2009 at 3:48 pm
Texas Info
http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/emstraumasystems/brthchp2.PDF
Registrar Information
Registrar’s File Number [18a]: The local registrar will enter the appropriate file number. The
number will consist of the registrar’s unique two-digit number and the sequential file number,
separated by dashes or spaces. The year may also be used if desired, and must be shown after
the file
number and preceded by a dash or space. The local registrar shall consecutively number
certificates
in separate series, beginning with the number “1” for the first birth certificate in each calendar
year.
For example, a registrar assigned the number “02” would enter the following number for the
first
birth certificate completed each year: “02-1” or “02 1.” The use of leading zeros in the file
number
section is also permitted, e.g., “02-001” or “02 001.” If the registrar wishes to use the year in
the
file number, it would read: “02-001-98” or “02 001 98.”
Date Received by Local Registrar [18b]: The local registrar will enter the date that the
certificate is
received in his or her office.
Note: This item documents whether the certificate meets the statutory requirement of being
filed
with the local registrar less than one year from the date of birth. [HSC §192.021(a)]
Signature of Local Registrar [18c]: The local registrar for the registration district in which the
event occurred will sign the certificate when it is accepted and filed. The signature may be
either
26 Handbook on Birth Registration—Update
Chapter 2—Instructions for Completing a Certificate of Birth Rev. 6/98
handwritten or stamped in durable blue or black ink. If the certificate is signed by a deputy
registrar,
the registrar’s name (typed, or printed) should be followed by the deputy’s signature and title:
“Registrar’s name—by (deputy’s signature), Deputy Registrar.” The registrar’s stamped
Page 84 of 138
signature
is preferred in lieu of the deputy’s signature.
Reply
116. Not Free said
10/05/2009 at 3:49 pm
Even if he was born in the US (doubtful) he is still not natural born because Vattel’s
encyclopedia was used to write our Constitution, and it defines natural born as being born to
two parents who are citizens: [MT: I agree with you and have 'Law of Nations' in my
library, too=)]
Benjamin Franklin’s (a signer of our Constitution) letter to Charles W.F. Dumas, December
1775
I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came to
us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to
consult the Law of Nations. Accordingly, that copy which I kept (after depositing one in our
own public library here, and send the other to the College of Massachusetts Bay, as you
directed) has been continually in the hands of the members of our congress, now sitting, who
are much pleased with your notes and preface, and have entertained a high and just esteem for
their author
GOTO Letter 459 in this link:

http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/DelVol02.html
Def of natural born in Vattel’s Law of Nations:

http://www.obamacitizenshipfacts.org/
[MT: Yes, it's clear to me that someone isn't interested in the integrity of our Law, instead
they want to manipulate it. Why?]
Reply
10/05/2009 at 4:08 pm
Hearing before Judge Carter on the Orly/Kreep case is over. No decision. Summary of what
went on at the hearing:
http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/10/05/lady-liberty-before-carters-bench/
Also, another eyewitness report will be posted later today at:
http://giveusliberty1776.blogspot.com/
Page 85 of 138
Reply
118. Scott1 said
10/05/2009 at 4:18 pm
Terri
http://www.welfareacademy.org/pubs/dataneeds/dataneeds-ventura.pdf
US Standard Birth Certificate, Page 14
(date filed by registrar)
I am going to guess that “accepted” and “filed” can mean the same thing. Depending on the
type of form that was filled out and where.
But if Resident Obama was born in the same hospital as the Nordyke twins it would have been
the same. So he was not born there.IMO
Reply
10/05/2009 at 4:54 pm
There are a number of possibilities, but “they mean the same thing” isn’t one of them.
Hawaii has two virtually identical forms (same form number and revision date etc), but
with that one entry being different. No way is that an accident.
I made up a side by side comparison of two Hawaiian COLB’s with Obama’s COLB
from Politifact.com.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-
part-ii/
Large comparison images.
http://s55.photobucket.com/albums/g160/steveb777/?action=view&current=ObamaCO
LBfromPolitifactdotcom_Compa.jpg
Zoom of lower left corner to compare “Accepted” vs. “Filed” wording.
http://s55.photobucket.com/albums/g160/steveb777/?action=view&current=ObamaCO
LBfromPolitifactdotcom_Co-1.jpg
No way is that programmed into they computers to mean the same thing.
Page 86 of 138
[MT: I agree. they don' t mean the same thing. It's possible they could but unless
the state say that this is what they have on record--that question is open.
Furthermore, the State Registrar (Vital Statistics) is a division of the State DoH
and located adjacent to it if what I am reading is correct. Why not go there to get a
COLB if his LOCAL REGISTRAR is indeed in Honolulu, Oahu? Does anyone
know how close these two departments are in terms of prosimity?]
Reply
119. Bill R said
10/05/2009 at 4:57 pm
Office of Health Status Monitoring under maintenance sat 3 oct until now mon 5:00pm est oct
5. Makes me think Hawaii doesn’t want anybody checking vital records for some reason. Very
strange. It went down after they answered your question about Barry Soetoro. It doesn’t take 2
days to do maint on a web site. Hawaii is hiding the facts. Obama went down for
“maintenance” after he made a fool of himself in front of the olimpic committee.
Reply
120. TerriK: The COLB was “filed” but not “accepted” « Politicaldoc’s Dx said
10/05/2009 at 5:02 pm
[...] TerriK: The COLB was “filed” but not “accepted” By politicaldoc
http://misstickly.wordpress.com/2009/10/04/our-worst-nightmare-confirmed/ [...]
Reply
10/05/2009 at 5:02 pm
Scott,
I question the dif between filed locally and Accepted By State .
Reply
o Scott1 said
10/05/2009 at 5:59 pm
Maybe so, but If I was an Obot or a reporter who actually checked facts I would want to
know what is the signifigance of (filed by Registrar) when it is used on the Standard US
Page 87 of 138
COLB form.
I part with Terri on this for now,and don’t believe there is any signifgnace in (filed by
Registrar) other than the type of form used.
I still maintain that BHO was not born at Kapiolani Hospital. If he was, the COLB
would have been the same as the Nordykes.
My own COLB has a Local Register sig and that’s all. He represents the State.
Maybe Terri has some more evidence and will enlighten us. She has a better handle on
this than I do.
Reply
epicurious said
10/05/2009 at 8:07 pm
I doubt Malkin will do anything with this; she dismissed the “conspiracy
theorists” long ago. See: http://michellemalkin.com/2008/12/05/truthers-to-the-
left-of-me-truthers-to-the-right/
122. Kay said
10/05/2009 at 5:07 pm
I just sent this email to Michelle Malkin

with TIP!! in subject line..
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Michelle,
Is there anyway you can get this to Fox News?
This really needs to hit MSM….
PLEASE!!!
Thank you in advance for any and all help you can give us…
Please ask Glenn Beck if you can’t do it…
http://misstickly.wordpress.com/2009/10/04/our-worst-nightmare-confirmed/#comments
Reply
o ResisTyr said
10/05/2009 at 6:05 pm
Page 88 of 138
I don’t think we should blow the whistle quite yet. Terri used Nevada Law for some of
her conclusions, and we must make quite certain that in Hawaii “Filed” doesn’t mean
“Accepted.”
[MT: Agreed. We need answers from Hawaii on what they mean when they issue a
COLB.]
Reply
Scott1 said
10/05/2009 at 7:08 pm
They are going to give you the same thing that they already have,double speak.
This needs to go to court so the facts can be bore out. When that happens let the
letter writing campaign begin. Sending letters etc.. to congressman and media
without facts dosen’t do anyone any good.
123. Hennie Bogan said
10/05/2009 at 5:48 pm
Congrats on your incredible findings!

It doesn’t seem that anyone knows what to do with all of this fine discovery.
I believe that nothing will ever happen without PUBLIC AWARENESS.
Close to two million protested in D.C. on Sept. 12th.
There is tremendous momentum which can be fueled by the discovery of TRUTH.
And this momentum can in turn spread the TRUTH, creating a snowball effect.
Here’s the problem –
COMMUNICATION.
We have this wonderful new media and we are not using it effectively enough.
Look what the “ACORN expose video” on YouTube did for TRUTH.
My recommendations are:
1) Streamline and simplify (without sacrificing rigor) your writings;
classifying each statement in one of the following categories;
observations, facts, opinions, conclusions or recommendations.
2) Create a YouTube video outlining your Discoveries. Keep it short 7-10 minutes maximum.
Ask viewers to pass it along. Project what the Constitution says should happen if a USURPER
is removed from the White House, ie. the VP steps up until another election is conducted etc.
3) Distribute the video to key Oath-taking Officials at all levels of government,

by asking viewers to distribute in their local government. Our last line of defense will be the
company and field grade officers of the military. The general grade officers, I am not so sure
about. These people must see your work ASAP.
Page 89 of 138
4) Make some attempt to get publicly famous person(s)/celebrities to step up to atleast endorse
the call for judicial discovery and formal hearing of the NBC issue or maybe to comment via
audio +/or video on your discoveries.
We want everyone questioning whether BO is our real president or a USURPER who has no
legal claim to the office of the POTUS.
KEEP THE VIDEO SIMPLE AND FACT CENTERED. BACK UP THE VIDEO WITH A
FORMAL INVESTIGATIVE WHITE PAPER. GET SOME LEGAL/TECHNICAL WRITING
HELP.
There may be only one real court left in America, the COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION. Don’t
wait for the Judicial to save America or for the MSM to report on the TRUTH or the efforts
being made to get to it.
I personally am getting tired of looking at the dog’s wagging tail

I will pursue the PRECINCT EXECUTIVE involvement locally.
[See http://www.networkamerica.org/10minute.htm
Thanks for your efforts.
Reply
124. Magna Carta said
10/05/2009 at 5:53 pm
I have not read all the posts above but have you thought about testing your understanding of
these beaurocratic terms by finding folks in Hawaii that would fit the profiles of “filed’ vs.
‘accepted’ to make sure thats the case.I understand you are saying at the DoH in HA. they will
not explain these distinctions….
Will spread the word.I have e-mail contact with a rep or two.
Reply
125. Monax said
10/05/2009 at 6:24 pm
If the biggest fraud of the century falls in the woods….
Reply
126. Bdaman said
10/05/2009 at 7:17 pm
Page 90 of 138
TerriK, I just read Florida’s application for ammended BC. I’m sure this is in every state but an
attorney can sign the application for the registrant and must include their bar or license number.
This would not pose a problem for someone like the president.
Just throwing it out their, things that make you go Huumm
Reply
127. Benaiah said
10/05/2009 at 7:28 pm
“Accepted by the State Registrar” on a COLB in the State of Hawaii apparently has legal
significance in the State of Hawaii. It would appear that “Accepted by the State
Registrar” is determinative of parentage in the State of Hawaii, as well as determinative
in determining one’s legal name.
Please see paragraph 81 of Inoue v. Inoue, 185 P.3d 834, 118 Hawai’i 86 (Haw.App.
01/31/2008), below which states, “The Court finds and concludes that upon the issuance of
the original Certification of Live Birth which was accepted by the State Registrar on
September 17, 1996, Egan is [Child One]’s legal father and her legal name is [Child One] Inoue
Inoue v. Inoue, 185 P.3d 834, 118 Hawai’i 86 (Haw.App. 01/31/2008)
[1] IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAII
[14] Defendant-Appellant Gina L. Inoue, now known as Gina L. Khouw (Gina), appeals from
the Divorce Decree filed on June 9, 2006 (Divorce Decree), as well as several related orders
entered by the Family Court of the First Circuit (family court).*fn1 Gina challenges a number
of the findings of fact and conclusions of law entered by the family court. Most notably, Gina
contends that the family court erred in holding that she was equitably estopped from denying
that Plaintiff-Appellee Egan H. Inoue (Egan) was the father of Child One for the purposes of
determining custody. Egan was indisputably not Child One’s biological father. Gina was
pregnant with Child One when she met Egan, and she did not identify him as Child One’s
father when she first obtained a birth certificate for Child One. However, Gina and Egan
subsequently were married, and Gina, with Egan’s consent, obtained an amended birth
certificate for Child One which identified Egan as Child One’s father. Moreover, both Gina and
Egan treated Child One as the daughter of Egan. The family court found that Egan was Child
One’s “legal father,” and that Gina was equitably estopped from contending otherwise.
[72] IV. Discussion
[73] A. The family court did not err in concluding that Egan was Child One’s “legal father,”
and that Gina was equitably estopped from contending otherwise.
[76] Egan and Gina are the parents of three minor children. The Certification of Live Birth
issued by the State of Hawaii for each child indicate the following:
Page 91 of 138
[77] (a) [CHILD ONE] was born on September 11, 1996 in the County of Honolulu. Mother’s
Maiden Name is Gina Lenee’ Butera. The initial Certification of Live Birth did not identify a
father for [Child One]. Gina, with Egan’s consent, arranged for another Certification of Live
Birth to be issued which identified Father’s Name as Egan Hajime Inoue. The second
Certification of Live Birth indicated that the date accepted by the State Registrar was
September 17, 1996.
[79] Under H.R.S. §338-17.7(b), “[w]hen a new certificate of birth is established under this
section, it shall be substituted for the original certificate of birth.” H.R.S. §338-12 states that
“Data pertaining to the father of a child is prima facie evidence if: (1) The alleged father is: (A)
The husband of the mother; or (B) The acknowledged father of the child. . . . Data pertaining to
the alleged father acknowledging paternity of the child is admissible as evidence of paternity in
any family court proceeding, including proceedings under chapter 584.”
[81] The Court finds and concludes that upon the issuance of the original Certification of
Live Birth which was accepted by the State Registrar on September 17, 1996, Egan is
[Child One]’s legal father and her legal name is [Child One] Inoue.
Reply
10/05/2009 at 10:42 pm
Benaiah said
10/05/2009 at 7:28 pm
It would appear that “Accepted by the State Registrar” is determinative of parentage in

the State of Hawaii, as well as determinative in determining one’s legal name.
[81] The Court finds and concludes that upon the issuance of the original Certification
of Live Birth which was accepted by the State Registrar on September 17, 1996, Egan is
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Benaiah,
Excellent reference, but I draw a different conclusion.
Even though it involves parentage in your particular case reference, the word
“accepted” needn’t have anything to do with parentage.
I conclude the word “accepted” actually means, “officially recorded, recognized,

certified, and final.”
[MT: The State Registrar applies the stringent rules of the state on the information
recorded. We need to know the information that Obama presented us passed the
Page 92 of 138
smell test with the state. It's not clear from the COLB that it did-hence it lacks
legal vercity.]
Reply
Benaiah said
10/05/2009 at 11:25 pm
I agree with you that “Accepted by the State Registrar” means “accepted”
actually means, “officially recorded, recognized, certified, and final”.
The conclusion I have drawn is that a COLB has to be “Accepted by the State
Registrar” in order for it to be conclusive of parentage. To say it another way, a
COLB has to be “officially recorded, recognized, certified, and final” in order
for it to be conclusive of parentage. The antithesis is that if a COLB is not
“Accepted by the State Registrar, it isn’t conclusive of anything…
[MT: exactly]
128. Bill R said
10/05/2009 at 7:38 pm
Hawaii state law restricts the access to vital records to only authorized individuals. Birth and
Marriage certificates may only be requested by the individual, the individual’s father, the
individual’s mother or the individual’s relatives.
https://www.ehawaii.gov/doh/vitrec/exe/vitrec.cgi
This site also lists state agency as a possible requestor of a birth certificate. This means certain
state agencies in Hawaii could have requested and received a certified copy of obama’s birth
certificate.
Would the same restricions on releasing obama’s birth certificate apply to different state
agencies as anyone else obtaining a copy of obama’s birth certificate? Once a copy is on file
with another agency what is the restrictions if any? Remember once information is made public
about someone’s birth certificate doesn’t the law allow for it to be received by anyone on
request?
Yes i’m fishing but i’m hoping to catch an imposter.
Reply
129. Claudia said
Page 93 of 138
10/05/2009 at 7:43 pm
I ust got back from the County Offices, specifically the Health Dept, where I was sent after
talking to my firend in teh Registrars Office, who told me that birth and death certificates are
handled in a separate office in Nevada, so I toddled downt he hall to the Health Dept, and the
lady there was less than helful, all in all. I asked her what the meaning was behind the wording:
Date FILED by Registrar and Date ACCEPTED by State Registrar?? SHe said each state has
different wording and that what it might mean here is not necessairily the same as what it might
mean in say California, because I had to give her a reason for asking, so I used my daughter
and her sons BC’s for the question. She said the context could mean one thing in very different
circumstances varying by state usage and that there really is NO Uniform Rulings that apply to
all usage of words and their meanings in all Certified documents from around the country.
Sorry about not being of much help here, but from what I gleaned from this lady, she was not
going to give me anything that I could hold up and say is definete form of terminology and
usagae that is universally accepted as correct. It depends on what the definition of “is” is……
and who is doing the defining.
[ME: No,this is GREAT information, we know it means something...I am trying to find

out what. If Onaka, the State Registrar issued it with his stamp, why doesn't it say he
accepted it?]
Reply
o ramjet767 said
10/05/2009 at 8:00 pm
Hi Claudia,
You tried and that is what counts. One never knows which try by a concerned citizen
will reveal the next kernel of wheat in all the deceptive chaff being dished out by our
government bureaucrats.
RJ
Reply
130. Benaiah said
10/05/2009 at 8:02 pm
Please see paragraphs 77 and 79 of Inoue v. Inoue, 185 P.3d 834, 118 Hawaii 86 (Haw.App.
01/31/2008), which is copied below.
Page 94 of 138
Please note that “The second Certification of Live Birth…[which was] accepted by the
State Registrar [on] September 17, 1996″ was designated by the court as the original
Certification of Live Birth for Child One.
Thus, an amended or altered COLB, may be designated as the “original” COLB despite the fact
that it isn’t the “initial” COLB.
Please also note that in the Inoue matter, “The initial Certification of Live Birth did not identify
a father for [Child One]” . Thus, a COLB can be issued in the State of Hawaii even if a father is
not identified on the COLB.
In addition, please note, that in the Inoue matter, it was the amended or altered “second
Certification of Live Birth…[which was] accepted by the State Registrar”.
Thus, it would be interesting to see how the “initial” COLB in the Inoue matter was designated.
In other wrods, was the “initial” COLB in the Inoue matter designated as “Filed by Registrar?
[ME: I got the Attorney General Letter today that sets out the procedure to amend a
birth certificate. It's interesting, but 49 pp long. I have had to pause to read it closely...I
recommend everyone request one from the Hawaii State Att Gen Library.]
[77] (a) [CHILD ONE] was born on September 11, 1996 in the County of Honolulu.
Mother’s Maiden Name is Gina Lenee’ Butera. The initial Certification of Live Birth did not
identify a father for [Child One]. Gina, with Egan’s consent, arranged for another
Certification of Live Birth to be issued which identified Father’s Name as Egan Hajime Inoue.
The second Certification of Live Birth indicated that the date accepted by the State
Registrar was September 17, 1996.
[79] Under H.R.S. §338-17.7(b), “[w]hen a new certificate of birth is established under
this section, it shall be substituted for the original certificate of birth.” H.R.S. §338-12
states that “Data pertaining to the father of a child is prima facie evidence if: (1) The alleged
father is: (A) The husband of the mother; or (B) The acknowledged father of the child. . . . Data
pertaining to the alleged father acknowledging paternity of the child is admissible as evidence
of paternity in any family court proceeding, including proceedings under chapter 584.”
Reply
131. smrstrauss said
10/05/2009 at 8:08 pm
Re: “Vattel’s encyclopedia was used to write our Constitution.”
Page 95 of 138
Vattel recommended such things as a country establishing its own religion and forcing people
to join it or to leave the country. And Vattel wrote that countries could pick their leaders, their
sovereigns from princes and kings who were not citizens at all but were instead nobility in
other countries.
So, while the writers of the Constitution respected Vattel, they respected the common law too,
and the definition of Natural Born under the common law, and the laws in the US colonies at
the time of the Declaration of Independence, and after that in the early states, said that a
Natural Born citizen was simply one who was born in the country. Indeed, that is what Natural
Born meant. It was the 18th Century way of saying Native Born (which was hardly used at all
at the time). The word Naturalize comes from Native Born. It means to make someone who
was not born in the country like someone who was born in the country, someone who was
Natural Born.
Reply
132. Benaiah said
10/05/2009 at 8:16 pm
[7] On the briefs [The following are the attorneys that were involved in the Inoue matter]:
[8] Robert M. Harris and Sara R. Harvey for Defendant-Appellant.
[9] A. Debbie Jew (Oliver, Lau, Lawhn, Ogawa & Nakamura) for Plaintiff Appellee.
Perhaps someone in the State of Hawaii could contact EGAN HAJIME INOUE (Child
One’s Father) and/or GINA LENEE KHOUW (Child One’s Mother) to see if they have
the “initial” COLB for Child One, as well as the “second” COLB for Child One, which
was “accepted by the State Registrar” on September 17, 1996, and designated by teh
court as teh “original” COLB. Perhaps they would be willing to publicly share redacted
versions of these COLBs with Child One’s name being readcted…
Furthermore, perhaps the attorneys in the Inoue matter would be willing to share their
insights regarding the following statements by the Department of Health of the State of
Hawaii:
“Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital
Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have
personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s
original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.”
Page 96 of 138
original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying
Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have
nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over
eight months ago.”
Reply
133. epicurious said
10/05/2009 at 8:24 pm
Not sure if this is relevant or not to your investigation, but does it stands to reason the index
data would include the source of the original birth data or at least the entity of who submitted it
in order to register the live birth.
If he was born in a hospital, the hospital sends the birth data to HDOH. If he was born outside
an institution but there was an attending licensed physician or midwife, the birth data would
have been submitted by one or the other. If he was born outside an institution w/o an attending
licensed phyisian or midwife, then BHO’s mother, father, or other person who was present at or
shortly after the birth would have submitted the birth data for inclusion in the DOH’s vital
records.
My analogy is based on Oregon Revised Statute Chapter 432.
Just food for thought.
Reply
134. john said
10/05/2009 at 8:36 pm
If I were to file some paperwork in Hawaii that I was just born. Could I then request my COLB
and receive one? If I could, presumably it would say “Date filed by Registrar – 10/06/09?
If the answer is yes and yes, then why not file one then we have “standing” to ask about the
verbage around “Date filed by…..”
[MT: They should just tell us what that language means and why the local registrar's files
are reflected in the COLB--not the State's records.]
Reply
Page 97 of 138
135. Kay said
10/05/2009 at 8:43 pm
Leo Donifrio on tonight at 6:00 pm PST..9:00 pm EST

Just minutes from now…
Leo Donofrio explains the pursuit he shares with Terri K, of the Obama Birth Certificate (if
that is what it is) based upon the State of Hawaii’s implicit admission that it has been
amended..
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Sentinel_Radio/2009/10/06/Leo-Donofrio-on-the-New-Obama-
Birth-Certificate-Investigation-on-The-Awakening#
Reply
136. Ruby Tuesday said
10/05/2009 at 8:47 pm
Q. Does anyone know the name of the Registrar in 1961? May be, I’m dense and missed the
fact presented.
Exactly who is the official who would have signed the original long form birth certifcate had
Ms.Dunham been admitted to a hospital and gave birth with medical staff attending?
************
Isn’t it amazing that there isn’t one living soul that recollects this miraculous event?
*************
Who’a name will appear on the original BC once it is presented?
Thanky!!
Reply
137. Scott1 said
10/05/2009 at 8:56 pm
http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-07-99-00570.pdf
Read this, Talk about nightmares. Especially the conclusions.
[MT: I am reading this now--thanks!
this is interesting: "limited oversight of local issuing entities by State vital records
offices."]
Reply
Page 98 of 138
138. kj said
10/05/2009 at 9:50 pm
If Mr. Obama does not have a totally valid US birth certificate, how could he have obtained a
passport for travel to and from Indonesia as a child? How could he have obtained a passport for
travel to Indonesia and Pakistan in the early 80’s? How could he have obtained a passport for
travel to Kenya about the time of his father’s funeral?
Wouldn’t the State Department have realized that his birth certificate hadn’t been accepted by
the State Registrar? Wouldn’t a long form have been required at those times?
Maybe Mr. Obama is a citizen of the world because he is essentially stateless. [MT: I don't
think you are far off on this.]
Reply
10/05/2009 at 10:10 pm
I imagine the more of us searching for answers in how the Hawaii vital records system works,
the better. Hawaii has an online Records Report System (RRS) which allows you to search the
types of records that are in use at the various departments and agencies. We are primarily
concerned with:
Department: SOH/HEALTH
Agency: Office of Health Status Monitoring
For instance, go to http://hawaii.gov/oip/rrs/index_html and type in one of the RSN numbers

given below (or type in all the numbers separated by a comma.) Then click the Submit button.
Click on the underlined RSN number link and you will have all kinds of information regarding
how that record is kept, who uses it, who has access, the legal authority for access (statutes,
etc.) and other information that may be of use in your research.
RSN #9165 Certificate of Live Birth

RSN #9173 Certificate of Death
RSN #9169 License and Certificate of Marriage
RSN #9167 Certificate of Absolute Divorce or Annulment
For a Guide on how to use the RRS system go to

http://hawaii.gov/oip/recordsreportsystem/guide_to_RRS_on_Internet.pdf
Anyone who has the time to do some in depth research, there is a wealth of information on
records here:
RRS Page For The Public http://hawaii.gov/oip/recordsreportsystem/publicpage.html
And, the RRS Page For Agencies has lots of information on the inner workings of how the
Page 99 of 138
agencies use the RRS including data input procedures and explanations.
http://hawaii.gov/oip/recordsreportsystem/agencypage.html
NOTE:
For anyone who wants to view websites without revealing your IP or other information, go to
http://anonymouse.org/anonwww.html and enter the website address you want to visit in the
address bar.
Reply
140. Karl said
10/05/2009 at 10:40 pm
There is no birth certificate as we understand BC’s. I have contended from day one that there is
no long form, short form, nothing.
The Hawaiians are protecting scraps of information that absolutely lend to the fact that Obama
has NO birth certificate.
The passports are from foreign countries.
Reply
141. scott1 said
10/05/2009 at 11:02 pm
http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-07-99-00570.pdf
According to this, there is only 1 birth certificate issuing entity in Hawaii. I take that to mean
only 1 registrar for the State.
[MT: That's the final word, but most states allow you to get a COLB issued by the local
registrar's files. Of course they don't necessarily have what is on record with the state in
some cases.]
Reply
142. yo said
10/05/2009 at 11:17 pm
I read the israeli article.

So Obama posts a copy of a colb on the internet, without seal and registrar signature, not
certified, only filed, and goes on to be elected potus. And the entire media runs interference for
Page 100 of 138

him, and virtually every elected republican and almost every media conservative WILL SAY
NOTHING.
How in the world have we come to this?
Reply
143. Claudia said
10/05/2009 at 11:17 pm
I just dug up my daughters ORIGINAL Certficate of Live Birth, and although it is from
California in 1968, it has on it: Date ACCEPTED for Registration by Local Registrar Sep 23
1968 (date stamped by stamp) and then in purple ink: This is a true certified copy of the record
if it bears the seal of the County Recorder imprinted in purple ink. Fee $2.00 Jan 23, 1969 (she
was born 9-23-68), there is a bit of crunched up purple ink in a line that is abut 3/4 inch long
and a bit less than 1/4 inch wide, and the seal of the County Recorder Los Angeles County
California in a round seal, and printed below the date County Recorder and Deputy COunty
Health Office Los Angeles County, California and a signature of a Ray E. Lee. AND… running
up the side of the Certificate are the words: Filed 10-4-68 Ray E. Lee County Recorder
Then….. I dug up my own Certified Copy of Certificate of Live Birth:

State of California
Certification of Vital Record
County of Monterey
Salinas, Califonia
which I had to get in 2002 for SS. On it at the bottom after the obvious copy set into the center
of the more florient for with a border of sage green, down at the bottom it reads:
Certified Copy of Vital Records
State of California}
County of Monterey } SS (Like in a Notary Seal)
This is a true and exact reproduction of document officially registered (all on one line)
and placed on file in the Office of the Monterey County Clerk-Recorder (2nd line) (and the
signature of Joseph F. Pitta typed and signed above, and his title County Clerk-Recorder, below
the sign line…. and below that
Date Issued 9-00-200? ATTEST (with a signature that I can’t read) and below that:
This copy not valid unless prepared on engraved border displaying seal and signature of Deputy
County Clerk-Recorder.
I am putting this up here to show that there are a few different terms used and at different times,
it would seem…..
[MT: Are these both original BCs?]
Reply
Page 101 of 138

o Claudia said
10/06/2009 at 1:48 pm
My daughters is totally original, gotten right after her bith and along with the Hospital
generated “souvinor’ Birth Certificate.
Mine is the one gotten from the County of Monterey, in California in 2002 (I was born
in 1846, and have my original around here somewhere, but can’t find it at this time), but
it is a reproduction with the ORIGINAL COPIED EXACTLY into the newer form with
the border and the applicable wording that I copied verbatum on the bottom under the
original copy of my BC from Salinas, CA. The wording is NEW from the County and
was not on the ORIGINAL that was copied into the new form. There is no wording on
the ORIGINAL that comes anywhere close to anything accept:
first line on the very bottom of Original, running across page – State of California —
Certiicate of Live Birth – U.S. Dept. of Commerce
second line running across bottom of page:

Department of Public Health — Bureau of the Census
oh, and there is another thing on my BC Certified Copy, it is a NUMBER in the border
on the opposite side of the page from the embosssed seal and it is 6 digits in RED. It is
NOT on the original BC that is copied into the new format.
On this Copy of my ORIGINAL BC is all of the information — District No: Registrar

No:
My full name, last name of mother,
(first box) place of birth, county, City, name of hospital, Mother’s stay in hospital
before delivery, and time in community, my sex,, twin or triplet
(second box, next to firt box) Usual residence of mother, length of residence, state,
years,
county, months, city or town, months, street address, number of months of pregnancy,
date of birth,
(third box, under first box) Father of Child, full name, Color or race, age at time of
birth, length of residence in Calif, Birthplace, Usual occupation, Industry or business,
(fourth box, next to third box) exactly the same info that was filled in for father only for
Mother of child.
(fifth box, under third box) children born to this mother, how many other children of
this mother are now living, how many other children were born alive but are now dead,
how many children were born dead
(sixth box, next to fifth box) Mother mailing address for Registration Notice,
(seventh box, under fifth box – runs all the way across page) I hereby Certify that I
attended the borth of this child who was born alive at the hour of —— on the date
above stated and that the information given was furnished by (my mother) related to this
child as — Mother
(eighth box, under full line of seventh box, but only half of this column like above side
by side boxes) Date received by Local Registrar 3-00-00, Registrars signature, given
name added, (each line with signatures)
Page 102 of 138

(ninth box, next to eighth box) Attendant’s own signature – with signature, midwife or
other, Initialed -M.D., Date signed, Address, Salinas, Calif.
(tenth box, under eighth box) Pregnancy, complications of: NONE, Labor,
complications of: NONE, Induced: —- Was there an operation for delivery: YES, State
all operations: Episiotomy Low Forceps, Was a prophylactic used in the baby’s eyes:
YES IF YES, state drug: Ag NO3 1%
(eleventh box, bext to tenth box) Did the baby have any congenital malformation:
NONE Describe: — Birth Injury: NONE, Describe —
Was a seriological test made for syphilis on this mother: YES, If so, at what period of
gestation: 4
As you can see, the information on my BC is quite extensive, although it does not give
my length, weight, width
And there is a number (3 digits) that is buried in the black of the reverse copy
technique, but still visible if one looks for it, up near the top of the Certificate in
towards the middle above my mothers maiden name. All of the Original BC that is
copied onto the new format is reverse black background with white type, sort of like the
old mimeograph technique. In all there are lines for 27 questions and answers and on
question 27, the one about the health of the baby and mother — there were a,b,c,d,e,f, to
be answered.
My daughters BC is a copy on something like the old fax roll paper and is brittle from
being folded
and in my safe. It does have her length and weight, althought the copy is cut off at that
point, as well as all the other questions that were on my form (that are inside the
information boxes), with the information inserted into the copy about the purple ink and
certifiying info above listed and the name of Ray E. Lee and the seal.
Reply
Claudia said
10/06/2009 at 1:59 pm
sorry, I made a typo, I was not born in 1846, but rather 1945, I had not turned on
the overhead light because I thought that it was light enough, but obviously
not…. and please forgive any other typos that I don’t catch, because proofing is
really har when you have just written whatever you are writing…. best to go
back a while later with fresh eyes.
144. Tony said
10/05/2009 at 11:42 pm
WEll I have to come up with something funny because I aint to bright.
Page 103 of 138

TerriK, I was blown away by the fact that is was right in front of my nose. Since I assume you
are female are you also know as Hanah Giles the Acorn Buster. But if I had to put money on
your analysis it would be to Win. Not place or Show mindyou but Win.
Let the horse race begin because I believe the Lawyers you contacted can take this places.
[MT: I don't know...too many unanswered questions that Hawaii won't answer.]
Reply
145. Mary S-FL said
10/05/2009 at 11:56 pm
Since noone ever saw Sydney Ann Dunham Obama pregnant, perhaps she was the adopting
mother, and not the birth mother. Maybe there is a long form birth certificate on record in
Hawaii, but the names of BOTH parents are different from those stated. And maybe neither one
was a citizen. This man needs to be vetted.
Reply
146. truthREVEALED said
10/06/2009 at 12:14 am
It’s the fact that in at least one instance, brand new birth certificates are issued to adults instead
of amending the original.
Snap Shots Options [Make this Shot larger] [Close]

Options
Disable
Get Free Shots
citizensagainstproobamamediabias.word…
Close
Snap Shares for charity
Citizens Against Pro-Obama Media Bias
Not affiliated with, nor endorsed by, any candidate, political party or organization
« How did barry “lose” the Chicago 2016 bid?
Taitz’s site attacked for the 5th time »
HI: brand new (not amended) birth certificate issued…
By mattie14
October 4, 2009
Updated birth certificate posts/videos/lawsuits
…with a sex change.
Page 104 of 138

New name + new gender = brand new birth certificate
Sex change is not the relevant issue.
It’s the fact that in at least one instance, brand new birth certificates are issued to adults instead
of amending the original.
HAWAII Statute: Haw. Rev. Stat. Ann. 338-17.7(a) & (4) (B) (2004)
Hawaii will change both name and sex, and will issue a new birth certificate rather than amend
the old one.
You will need an original, or certified, copy of the letter from your SRS surgeon. A court order
is not required.
(a) The department of health shall establish, in the following circumstances, a new certificate of
birth for a person born in the state who already has a birth certificate filed with the department
and who was referred to below as the “birth registrant”; 4) Upon receipt of an affidavit of a
physician that the physician has examined the birth registrant and determined the following:
(B) The birth registrant has had a sex change operation and the sex designation on the birth
registrant’s birth certificate is no longer correct; provided that the director of health may further
investigate and require addition information that the director deems necessary.
Alvin T. Onaka, Ph.D

State Registrar and Acting Chief
Office of Health Status Monitoring
1 Votes
Quantcast
Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)
* UPDATE 2: barry’s birth certificate

* barry has free access to his own long form birth certificate
* Andy Martin video
* The elusive HI birth certificate… again
Tags: “birthers”, amended birth certificates, barack obama birth certificate, barry soetoro, birth
certificate, citizens against proobama media bias, COLB, gender reassignment, natural born
citizen, orly taitz, president obama, proobamedia, sex change, The Constitution, usurper
This entry was posted on October 5, 2009 at 6:00 AM and is filed under barry, birth certificate,
citizens against proobama media bias. You can follow any responses to this entry through the
RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Leave a Reply
Click here to cancel reply.
Page 105 of 138

Name (required)
E-mail (will not be published) (required)
Website
Notify me of follow-up comments via email.
Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).
Reply
147. truthREVEALED said
10/06/2009 at 1:05 am
Website link for last post:
http://citizensagainstproobamamediabias.wordpress.com/2009/10/05/hi-brand-new-not-
amended-birth-certificate-issued/
Reply
148. Sharon said
10/06/2009 at 1:47 am
Miss Tickly,
I apologize in advance if you have addressed this and I missed it. I read at Leo’s blog that you
were told by the DoH that payment records for COLB are part of vital records. Were you told
that a payment record exists for Obama’s COLB, but that you can’t have access or simply that
payment records are privileged. I remember Leo stating that the response for disclosure have to
be either (1) they exist and you can have them; (2) they don’t exist or (3) they exist but are
private and can’t be disclosed. What is the case for the request for the COLB payment record
for Obama?
Thanks.
[I asked for invoices and receipts that he paid to amend his BC. They told me I couldn't
have those because they are protected by state law and they also cited an exception that
states his records could be sealed--EXCEPTION 4 from UIPA. I only noticed this
yesterday and am looking into it now. I want to read everything I have for clues befor I
post...]
Reply
Page 106 of 138

o Sharon said
10/06/2009 at 12:13 pm
IT is very important as to HOW they framed the response. It should be very clear that
they do have the documents, versus they won’t even bother to check because the
documents will be privileged anyways. Do you understand what I mean? They can get
around the answer that there are no payments receipts (which would prove that he never
requested a COLB) by making a general answer that you can’t have them whether or
not they exist. DoH has been treading carefully with answers.
Reply
149. Sharon said
10/06/2009 at 1:48 am
It’s late so please excuse my horrible grammar and typos from above!
Reply
150. sara said
10/06/2009 at 2:26 am
Great blog, Miss T! Keep at ‘em!
Reply
151. Benaiah said
10/06/2009 at 2:36 am
§338-16 Procedure concerning late and altered birth certificates.
(a) Birth certificates registered one year or more after the date of birth, and certificates which
have been altered after being filed with the department of health, shall contain the date of
the late filing and the date of the alteration and be marked distinctly “late” or “altered”.
(b) A summary statement of the evidence submitted in support of the acceptance [by the
Registrar] for late filing or the alteration shall be endorsed on the certificates.
(c) Such evidence shall be kept in a special permanent file.
Page 107 of 138

(d) When an applicant does not submit the minimum documentation required by the rules
for late registration or when the state registrar finds reasons to question the validity or
adequacy of the certificate or the documentary evidence, the state registrar shall not
register [shall not accept] the late certificate and shall advise the applicant of the reason
for this action.
The department of health may by rule provide for the dismissal of an application which is not
actively prosecuted.
(e) As used in this section, “late” means one year or more after the date of birth. [L 1949, c
327, §20; RL 1955, §57-19; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-16; am L 1972, c 66, §1(2);
am L 1997, c 305, §3]
[77] (a) [CHILD ONE] was born on September 11, 1996 in the County of Honolulu. Mother’s
Maiden Name is Gina Lenee’ Butera. The initial Certification of Live Birth did not identify a
father for [Child One]. Gina, with Egan’s consent, arranged for another Certification of Live
Birth to be issued which identified Father’s Name as Egan Hajime Inoue. The second
Certification of Live Birth indicated that the date accepted by the State Registrar was
September 17, 1996.
[79] Under H.R.S. §338-17.7(b), “[w]hen a new certificate of birth is established under this
section, it shall be substituted for the original certificate of birth.” H.R.S. §338-12 states that
“Data pertaining to the father of a child is prima facie evidence if: (1) The alleged father is: (A)
The husband of the mother; or (B) The acknowledged father of the child. . . . Data pertaining to
the alleged father acknowledging paternity of the child is admissible as evidence of paternity in
any family court proceeding, including proceedings under chapter 584.”
[81] The Court finds and concludes that upon the issuance of the original Certification of Live
Birth which was accepted by the State Registrar on September 17, 1996, Egan is [Child One]’s
legal father and her legal name is [Child One] Inoue.
Reply
152. Rory said
10/06/2009 at 4:56 am
My son was born in Hawaii, the Ceriticate of Live Birth was amended to reflect fathers name
by court order.
(box 16.) Date Recived by Local Registrar April 8,1992 week after birth
(box 17.) DATE ACCEPTED BY STATE AUGUST 18.1994
(box 32.) SIGNATURE OF PARENT OR INFORMANT I certify the personal information
provided above on this certificate is correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signature
(some one from the state in this case)
Page 108 of 138

Date Stamp on Back side: MAY 18 1995 I CERTIFY THIS A TRUE COPY OR ABSTRACT
OF THE RECORD ON FILE IN THE HAWAII STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Alvin
T.Onoka,Ph.D STATE REGISTRAR
this shows what wording the DOH used in 1995
[MT: WOW. Does it say that it took two years to change it with the state? Or is 1992
when your son was born? When did you file to amend the BC?]
Reply
o Benaiah said
10/06/2009 at 12:05 pm
Is your son’s Certificate of Live Birth marked distinctly as “altered”?
(a) Birth certificates registered one year or more after the date of birth, and certificates
which have been altered after being filed with the department of health, shall
contain the date of the late filing and the date of the alteration and be marked
distinctly “late” or “altered”.
Reply
o Benaiah said
10/06/2009 at 12:55 pm
(a) Birth… certificates which have been altered after being filed with the department of
health, shall contain the date of the late filing and the date of the alteration and be
marked distinctly …“altered”.
(d) When an applicant does not submit the minimum documentation required by the
rules for late registration or when the state registrar finds reasons to question the
validity or adequacy of the certificate or the documentary evidence, the state registrar
shall not register [shall not accept] the late certificate and shall advise the applicant of
the reason for this action.
Thus, “certificates which have been altered after being filed with the department of
health, shall contain” the following:
1. the date of the late filing

2. the date of the alteration
3. be marked distinctly “altered”
Page 109 of 138

It appears that “the date of the late filing” is simply the date that the “altered” COLB is
received by the Registrar from an applicant, and is noted in box 16.
Box 16: “Date Received by Local Registrar April 8,1992 week after birth”
In my opinion, an “altered” COLB which is received by the Registrar is simply a record

which is on file with the Department of Health. A record on file with the Department of
Health is not always “Accepted by the Registrar”.
Please note, “when the state registrar finds reasons to question the validity or adequacy
of the certificate or the documentary evidence, the state registrar shall not register [shall
not accept] the late certificate and shall advise the applicant of the reason for this
action”.
Suffice it to say, an “altered” COLB which is received by the Registrar is not

synonymous with the “acceptacnce” of the “altered” COLB by the Registrar. In my
opinion, an “altered” COLB which is received by the Registrar is simply “Filed by the
Registrar”.
FILED is NOT synonymous with ACCEPTANCE.
Now then, perhaps “the date of the alteration” of the “altered” COLB is synonymous
with the date that the “altered” COLB is validated and “Accepted by the Regstrar”, as is
reflected in box 17.
Box 17: “DATE ACCEPTED BY STATE AUGUST 18.1994″
Reply
153. loucon said
10/06/2009 at 6:51 am
A lot of people have brought up adoption scenarios. According to the HDoH, this is the
procedure from their end. Note that the COLB must be marked with two things.
1. Certificate of birth entitled a “Hawaii Certificate of Foreign Birth”
2. The statement “This certificate is not evidence of United States citizenship for the child or
the
parents named above.”
If the online COLB is not a forgery, then the issue of adoption isn’t an issue.
TITLE 11
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
CHAPTER 120
FOREIGN BORN PERSON ADOPTED IN HAWAII
Page 110 of 138

Sec. 11-120-1 Purpose

Sec. 11-120-2 Application for Hawaii certificate of foreign birth
Sec. 11-120-3 Application requirements
Sec. 11-120-4 Issuance of certificate
Sec. 11-120-1 Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to establish instructions and procedures for filing of a Hawaii
adopted in Hawaii. [Eff. FEB
19 1981] (Auth: HRS Secs. 321-9, 338-2) (Imp: HRS Sec. 338-20.5)
Sec. 11-120-2 Application for Hawaii certificate of foreign birth.
(a) An application by a legal parent or an adult adoptee shall be filed with the state registrar of
vital statistics before a new
certificate of birth entitled a “Hawaii Certificate of Foreign Birth” is issued.
(b) Application forms shall be provided by the department of health. [Eff. FEB 19 1981] (Auth:
HRS Secs. 321-338-2) (Imp: HRS Sec. 338-20.5)
Sec. 11-120-3 Application requirements.
(a) The applicant shall provide the following information:
(1) Full name at birth or prior to the adoption;
(2) Sex;
(3) Color or race;
(4) Date of birth (if unknown, this shall be approximated);
(5) Place of birth (true or probable country of birth);
(6) New name as set forth in adoption decree;
(7) Full name of natural father, if known;
(8) Full maiden name of natural mother, if known;
(9) Full name of legal father and full maiden name of legal mother;
(10) Date of birth of each legal parent;
(11) Place of birth of each legal parent;
(12) Race of each legal parent;
(13) Mailing address of legal parents;
(14) Date on which legal parents assumed custody; and
(15) Date the decree of adoption became effective.
(b) The applicant shall also provide to the state registrar a copy of the adoption decree or
certificate of adoption affixed
with the certification by a court of competent jurisdiction in Hawaii and a copy of any
investigatory report and
recommendation which may have been prepared by the director of social services.
(c) The applicant shall sign the application form and attest that the information provided is true
and correct to the best of
his knowledge. [Eff. FEB 19 1981] (Auth: HRS Secs. 321-9, 338-2) (Imp: HRS Sec. 338-20.5)
Sec. 11-120-4 Issuance of certificate.
Upon submission of the application as provided herein, the registrar shall prepare and file the
Hawaii certificate of foreign
birth that shall contain the following information:
(1) Information about the adopted person:
(A) Full name as set forth in the adoption decree;
(B) Sex;
(C) Date of birth; and
(D) Place of birth.
(2) Information about the adoptive parents:
Page 111 of 138

(A) Name of father and maiden name of mother;

(B) Date of birth of each parent;
(C) Place of birth of each parent; and
(D) Mailing address of parents.
(3) The statement “This certificate is not evidence of United States citizenship for the child or
the
parents named above.” [Eff. FEB 19 1981] (Auth: HRS Secs. 321-9, 338-2) (Imp: HRS Secs.
338-17.7(c), 338-20.5)
Reply
o Nellie said
10/06/2009 at 9:57 am
See http://gen.doh.hawaii.gov/sites/har/admrules/default.aspx
Chapter 120 (summarized as regarding “Foreign-Born Persons Adopted in Hawaii”) is

“pending repeal upon adoption of Chapter 117″ – which is in the process of being
changed even as we type. Elsewhere I had seen that if administrative rules are going to
be changed there has to be a hearing that is announced publicly so far in advance. I
haven’t heard anyone say they saw any such action by the DOH before changing their
policies in June of this year. I e-mailed AG Mark Bennett to ask him how these changes
were initiated, not knowing at the time that they had to be subject to a public hearing
before being changed. Bennett never responded to my e-mail.
The other Chapter which Onaka is trying to change is Chapter 123, summarized on the
chart as regarding “Names of Natural Parents on Birth Certificate of Adopted Person”
TITLE 11
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
CHAPTER 123
NAMES OF NATURAL PARENTS ON BIRTH CERTIFICATE OF ADOPTED
PERSON
Sec. 11-123-1 Purpose
Sec. 11-123-2 Definitions
Sec. 11-123-3 Application for inclusion of names of natural parents on supplementary
birth certificate
Sec. 11-123-4 Application requirements
Sec. 11-123-1 Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to establish procedures for adoptive parents to have the
names of the natural parents
shown on a supplementary birth certificate. [Eff. FEB 19 1981] (Auth: Secs. 321-9,
338-2) (Imp: HRS Secs. 338-20,
578-14)
Sec. 11-123-2 Definitions.
As used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires:
“Original birth certificate” means the first birth certificate prepared and filed for the
Page 112 of 138

adopted person at birth or before the

adoption.
“Supplementary birth certificate” means a new birth certificate prepared by the
department of health upon receipt of a
certified copy of an adoption decree or an abstract of it called the certificate of adoption.
[Eff. FEB 19 1981] (Auth:
HRS Secs. 321-9, 338-2) (Imp: HRS Secs. 338-20, 578-14)
Sec. 11-123-3 Application for inclusion of names of natural parents on supplementary
birth certificate.
(a) An application by the adoptive parents shall be filed with the department of health
before names of natural parents are
added to a supplementary birth certificate.
(b) Application forms shall be provided by the department of health. [Eff. FEB 19 1981]
(Auth: HRS Secs. 321-338-2) (Imp: HRS Secs. 338-20, 578-14)
Sec. 11-123-4 Application requirements.
The applicants shall provide the following:
(1) A certified copy of an adoption decree or certificate of adoption;
(2) An affidavit signed by the adoptive parents requesting that the names of the natural
parents be
shown on the supplementary birth certificate;
(3) An affidavit signed by the natural parents of the adopted person consenting to
showing the
affiants’ name on the supplementary birth certificate;
(4) An order from a court of record authorizing the department of health to open the
sealed file
containing the original birth certificate of the adopted person, if such records have been
sealed;
and,
(5) Documents establishing the natural parents if the names of the alleged natural
parents, who
have consented to having their names entered on the supplementary birth certificate,
differ from
the names [Eff. FEB 19 1981] (Auth: HRS Secs. 321-9, 338-2) (Imp: HRS Sec. 578-14)
How about this scenario? Obama is born in Kenya with Obama Sr listed as the father.
He’s adopted in Hawaii with Soetoro as the father and birthplace given as Hawaii. The
original Kenyan birth certificate is sealed. Sometime later (2007?) he applies to have
Obama Sr listed as the father instead of Soetoro, thus ending with a sealed record of his
birth in Kenya (which Fukino then says they have but doesn’t say she’s seen) and an
amended birth certificate which says he’s born in Hawaii to SAD and Obama Sr.
Just throwing out possibilities. It does seem strange that Onaka’s trying to change those
2 specific items, according to the chart I linked to.
[MT: I have been looking at the same thing too. We have got to get those
administrative rules (117) that Onaka is updating...secret rules over there??]
Reply
Page 113 of 138

Nellie said
10/06/2009 at 10:44 am
There’s a specific procedure that has to be followed before a department can

change its administrative rules or procedures. The chart I looked at said that
Chapter 117 is being amended. If that’s true, then Onaka had to go through the
public notices of proposed changes, etc, according to this, adopted in 2005:
§11-1-52 Notices of proposed rulemaking.

(a) When the department proposes to adopt, amend, or
repeal an administrative rule, the department shall
assign a docket number for each proposed rulemaking
under this subchapter.
(b) Notice of proposed rulemaking shall be
published as required by statute.
[Eff 2/14/2005 ] (Auth: HRS §§91-2, 321-9) (Imp:
§91-3, 92-41)
I found this at http://hawaii.gov/health/about/rules/prac_proc.pdf
Can we request Onaka’s records of having followed this procedure? If we can’t

find ANYWHERE the proposed changes he’s trying to do right now, then I
strongly suspect he has NOT followed the laws. I wonder if any of the HI
statewide newspapers have any kind of notice regarding these proposed changes.
beyond baffled said
10/06/2009 at 1:39 pm
What really needs to happen is for Hawaii to release the complete index data for
the birth event. So what is going on in Hawaii? Where is the index data?
Adoption, no adoption, change in father’s name…an index should exist for each
change.
154. Just_Saying said
10/06/2009 at 8:27 am
Mike James at 10:04am: “If all of this is true, it means that Hawaii issues documents that
appear to be true birth certificates, when in fact they contain unverified data. And only
the true insiders know that “filed by” means it is bad data.”
Your “on file” or “accepted” theory doesn’t seem workable in the whole scheme of
identifications.
Page 114 of 138

It will be interesting to hear DoH’s explanations. I certainly appreciate all your work,
TerriK!
.
[MT: I agree. It's VERY confusing. I am looking through the procedure to amend and I
am looking at what other states do. I don't want to post again until I find some more
answers. Without the language saying that the State Registrar has the information that
we see on the COLB on record, I don't see how we can be sure that what's on that COLB
are the facts as the State of Hawaii accepts them.]
Reply
155. Nellie said
10/06/2009 at 10:13 am
I don’t know the implications of this but Hawaii DOH’s administrative policies and procedures,
found at http://hawaii.gov/health/about/rules/prac_proc.pdf
, include this statement regarding documents received by the DOH:
(d) Filing shall meet the time limits prescribed

by statute, rule, or order of the director or the
department, unless otherwise specified by the
department. The date when the department actually
receives a document is the date of filing.
[MT: Which begs the question--did the State Registrar record what's on the COLB?]
Reply
o Nellie said
10/06/2009 at 10:48 am
The same rule regarding the date of filing is given in the section for contested cases, in
which the validity and accuracy of filed documents have to be further verified. It seems
to me that the word “filing” is defined in these rules as strictly the time that information
was received – even if it still has to be verified or authenticated.
Reply
156. Nellie said
10/06/2009 at 10:57 am
Page 115 of 138

Onaka’s proposed changes to Chapter 117 of DOH Administrative Rules are not listed on the
DOH’s web page for proposed changes at
http://gen.doh.hawaii.gov/sites/har/admrulechange/default.aspx
I’m looking for Onaka’s contact info so I can ask him for docket information regarding his
proposed “updates” (an “update” is certainly an amendment, isn’t it? Or is this more haggling
over the meaning of the word “is”?)
Reply
o Nellie said
10/06/2009 at 11:31 am
The chart now says “New rules in place” for Chapter 117. However, on chapters 120
and 123 it says, “Pending Repeal Upon Adoption of
Chapter 117
Alvin Onaka
(808) 586-4600″
Seems like new rules are being used even though Chapter amendments have not been
legally adopted.
I e-mailed Onaka’s office asking for the docket number for the proposed changes to
Chapter 117, as well as where I can find the required notifications of proposed
amendments. If they’ve not yet been adopted they are still “proposed” and the
procedure to amend them must be followed.
Reply
10/06/2009 at 11:58 am
In regard to Chapter 117 of the DOH Adminstrative Rules, isn’t there a follower of this blog
who can go to the local Hawaii county courthouse or the DOH and photocopy this Chapter??
In a completely unrelated matter, I was able to obtain access to my state’s revised statutes cira
1975 from the archive maintained at my county’s courthouse. Surely the State of Hawaii
maintains the same type of accessibility, especially for rules or laws that are currently on the
books.
Something stinks here and Chapter 117 needs to be obtained stat, before it is obsolete or
amended.
Reply
Page 116 of 138

o Nellie said
10/06/2009 at 12:15 pm
As of yesterday at 12:51PM when I posted about this, the site said regarding Chapter
117 that the rules were in the process of being changed. Now today it says new rules are
in process. Overnight something changed – but nothing new was legally “adopted”.
Somebody is moving very fast. On “contested cases” if an official receives “ex parte”
communication from someone who has not notified other involved parties, the official
must disclose those communications to the other parties. I wonder if proposed changes
to administrative rules falls under a “contested case”.
It looks like there’s supposed to be a hearing on proposed changes once the “rulemaking
procedure” is initiated – which the DOH itself is supposed to do (when they want to
make changes) by assigning a docket number to the proposal.
Reply
Nellie said
10/06/2009 at 12:26 pm
Oops. New rules are in PLACE.
epicurious said
10/06/2009 at 12:34 pm
Where are you finding “new rules are in place”? Every link I have explored
(including those provided you) states “new rules are in process” and it provides
no link to the actual text in Chap 117. If it were in place, it stands to reason that
there would also be a link to the actual text.
Nellie said
10/06/2009 at 1:01 pm
I checked today’s history and saw the site where it said that new rules are in
place. Copied the link to post here and then went back to the site to double-
check but then it said “in process”. So I don’t know what’s going on. I know that
twice today I looked and noticed the different wording, but now it’s not there.
And I haven’t even had a drop to drink today. lol.
Page 117 of 138

This whole thing is a big fiasco. It shouldn’t be so stinkin’ hard to get straight
answers out of public officials.
158. Sharon said
10/06/2009 at 12:14 pm
I have a reply at 12:13 above. Sometimes it is easy to miss in the nesting style. Thanks.
Reply
10/06/2009 at 12:28 pm
The language in the Adminstrative Rules table regarding Chapter 117 makes no sense.
“Converting from Public Health Regulations Chapters 8, 8A, and 8B
to Administrative Rules.”
According to HDoH Administative Rule, Title 11-1, Public Health Regulations was repealed.
How can the an amendment be in process to 117 to incorporate elements from a document that
was repealed in its entirety? Seems to me that “repealed is the same as “no longer valid”.
Reply
o Nellie said
10/06/2009 at 1:31 pm
Yes, as of January 3, 2005. And looking around, other departments wrote up and went
through the process to have their new administrative rules to replace the old ones
approved in 2005. Here’s a site that shows what that process involves. It’s quite
elaborate and DEFINITELY requires publishing the proposed changes.
http://www.lawseminars.com/materials/07SEPAHI/bohlen%20insert%20a.pdf
Reply
10/06/2009 at 1:39 pm
For those that are interested, I have deciphered the difference between a Hawaii DoH
Administrative Rules that are identified as “New Rules in Process” and those identifed as
“Pending Amendment & Compilation”
Page 118 of 138

“New Rule in Process” is a proposed rule that has never been approved and adopted. In this
case, Chapter 117 is just a place marker. I compared other chapters that contain this same
identification and none of them appear in the proposed rule changes table either. This is also
why there is no link to the actual text contained in Chapter 117.
“Pending Amendment and Compilation” is an active rule that is in the process of being
ammended. In almost every instance, there was a corresponding entry in the proposed rule
changes table and there was an active link to the current or active rule.
What appears to be the relevant rule is the DoH’s Public Health Regulations Chapters 8, 8A
and 8B. It is not clear to me if these have been repealed or not. HAR 11-1 repealed Public
Health Regulations Rules of Practice and Procedure. Whether or not Chapters 8, 8A and 8B are
a part of this is unknown.
Only two scenarios remain:
1.) DoH Public Helth Regulations Chapters 8, 8A and 8B are the current rules that the DoH
follows.
2.) If Chapters 8, 8A, 8B have indeed been repealed then there are no active rules regarding the
registration and records of vital statistics/records. This seems implausible to me; scenario 1.) is
more likely. What is interesting is that I cannot find a copy of the “Public Health Regulations”
anywhere on the DoH webite or in the State Archive.
TerryK I think it is equally important for you to ask the DoH for Chapters 8, 8A, and 8B. It
probably contains the answer regarding the difference between “filed by” vs. “accepted by”. If
they say it has been repealed or is no longer valid then the DoH is operating with no governing
rules on the handling of vital records thus scenario 2.) applies.
Reply
o epicurious said
10/06/2009 at 2:43 pm
Information Request – DoH Administrave Rules

From: epicurious
Sent: Tue 10/06/09 11:41 AM
To: janice.okubo@doh.hawaii.gov
Dear Ms. Obuko,
I am trying to determine which Department of Health Administrative Rule pertains to

the registration and records of vital statistics. According to HAR Title 11, Chapter 117
is the governing rule but there is not an active link to Chapter 117 and it is identified as
a “new rule in process”. I interpret this to mean that Chapter 117 (as well as several
other chapters that have this notation) have not been formally adopted at this time.
Page 119 of 138

Chapter 117 also contains a reference to converting Hawaii Public Health Regulations
Chapters 8, 8A and 8B to administrative rules. I cannot however find a link to the
aforementioned public health regulations and chapters contained therein, as in this case
Chapters 8, 8A, and 8B.
When I review HAR Title 11 Chapter 1, it states that the Hawaii Public Health
Regulations (PHR) “Rules of Practice and Procedure” have been repealed and I assume
replaced by HAR Title 11-1. What is unclear is if the PHR was repealed in its entirety
or just the rules/regulations now contained in HAR 11-1.
My questions:
If HAR 11, Chapter 117 has not been formally adopted, is PHR Chapters 8, 8A and 8B
still the governing administrative regulations and rules for the registration and records
of vital statistics?
If HAR 11, Chapter 117 has not been formally adopted and PHR Chapters 8, 8A and 8B
have been repealed, then which administrative rules/procedures is the DoH following
regarding the registration and records for vital statistics?
If HAR 11, Chapter 117 has been officially adopted, please provide me information
where I can obtain a copy or a link. If this is not possible, please send me an unofficial
copy via email.
If PHR Chapters 8, 8A and 8B are still the governing rule/regulation, please provide me
information where I can obtain a copy or a link. If this is not possible, please send me
an unofficial copy via email.
If neither HAR 11 Chapter 117 or PHR Chapters 8, 8A or 8B apply, please provide me

information where I can obtain a copy of the relevant administrative rule/regulation
currently governing registration and records for vital statistics. If this is not an option,
please send me an unofficial copy via email.
I look forward to your response. Thank you in advance regarding any information or
guidance you are able to provide.
Regards,
epicurious
Reply
161. Bdaman said
10/06/2009 at 1:40 pm
Page 120 of 138

Nellie, I have no doubt you seen it. You can bet that they are reading every comment, every
word and every post. You all/we are getting close and they know it. I think somehow we need
to use Craigs List to post an add in Hawaii and get people in the Dept. to start recording data.
Reply
162. Nellie said
10/06/2009 at 1:58 pm
http://www.librariesanddirectories.com/lib/table.php?id=rm6613
This is RM Library. If anybody has a subscription to it, the page I clicked on to get to it said it
has the “Text of Health Dept Rules for the State of HI”. I wonder if Chapter 117 would be in
there, or if there would be anything like what you saw regarding Nevada’s procedures. Does
anybody have a subscription to this service?
Reply
163. Kay said
10/06/2009 at 2:01 pm
Great idea Bdaman!
Reply
164. Kay said
10/06/2009 at 2:03 pm
Does anyone live in Hawaii???
Reply
165. Kay said
10/06/2009 at 2:05 pm
Not trying to sound ignorant here but can some tell me exactly what they want so I can e mail it
to my sister-in laws brother who lives in Hawaii..
Please do it simple…
Reply
Page 121 of 138

o Benaiah said
10/06/2009 at 2:34 pm
One’s Father) and/or GINA LENEE KHOUW (Child One’s Mother) to see if they have
the “initial” COLB for Child One, as well as the “second” COLB for Child One, which
was “accepted by the State Registrar” on September 17, 1996, and designated by the
court as the “original” COLB. Perhaps they would be willing to publicly share redacted
versions of these COLBs with Child One’s name being redacted…
[7] On the briefs [The following are the attorneys that were involved in the Inoue
matter]:
[9] A. Debbie Jew (Oliver, Lau, Lawhn, Ogawa & Nakamura) for Plaintiff Appellee.
Mother’s Maiden Name is Gina Lenee’ Butera. The initial Certification of Live Birth
did not identify a father for [Child One]. Gina, with Egan’s consent, arranged for
another Certification of Live Birth to be issued which identified Father’s Name as Egan
Hajime Inoue. The second Certification of Live Birth indicated that the date accepted by
the State Registrar was September 17, 1996.
states that “Data pertaining to the father of a child is prima facie evidence if: (1) The
alleged father is: (A) The husband of the mother; or (B) The acknowledged father of the
child. . . . Data pertaining to the alleged father acknowledging paternity of the child is
admissible as evidence of paternity in any family court proceeding, including
proceedings under chapter 584.”
[81] The Court finds and concludes that upon the issuance of the original Certification
of Live Birth which was accepted by the State Registrar on September 17, 1996, Egan is
Reply
o Benaiah said
10/06/2009 at 2:43 pm
Page 122 of 138

One’s Father) and/or GINA LENEE KHOUW (Child One’s Mother, whose Maiden
Name was GINA LENEE’ BUTERA) to see if they have the “initial” COLB for Child
One, as well as the “second” COLB for Child One, which was “accepted by the State
Registrar” on September 17, 1996, and designated by the court as the “original” COLB.
Perhaps they would be willing to publicly share redacted versions of these COLBs with
Child One’s name being redacted…
“Accepted by the State Registrar” on a COLB in the State of Hawaii apparently has
legal significance in the State of Hawaii. It would appear that “Accepted by the State
Registrar” is determinative of parentage in the State of Hawaii, as well as determinative
in determining one’s legal name.
Please see paragraph 81 of Inoue v. Inoue, 185 P.3d 834, 118 Hawai’i 86 (Haw.App.
01/31/2008), below which states, “The Court finds and concludes that upon the issuance
of the original Certification of Live Birth which was accepted by the State Registrar on
September 17, 1996, Egan is [Child One]’s legal father and her legal name is [Child
One] Inoue
[14] Defendant-Appellant Gina L. Inoue, now known as Gina L. Khouw

(Gina)[Child One's Mother], appeals from the Divorce Decree filed on June 9, 2006
(Divorce Decree), as well as several related orders entered by the Family Court of the
First Circuit (family court).*fn1 Gina challenges a number of the findings of fact and
conclusions of law entered by the family court. Most notably, Gina contends that the
family court erred in holding that she was equitably estopped from denying that
Plaintiff-Appellee Egan H. Inoue (Egan) was the father of Child One for the
purposes of determining custody. Egan was indisputably not Child One’s
biological father. Gina was pregnant with Child One when she met Egan, and she did
not identify him as Child One’s father when she first obtained a birth certificate for
Child One. However, Gina and Egan subsequently were married, and Gina, with
Egan’s consent, obtained an amended birth certificate for Child One which
identified Egan as Child One’s father. Moreover, both Gina and Egan treated Child
One as the daughter of Egan. The family court found that Egan was Child One’s “legal
father,” and that Gina was equitably estopped from contending otherwise.
[72] IV. Discussion
[73] A. The family court did not err in concluding that Egan was Child One’s “legal
father,” and that Gina was equitably estopped from contending otherwise.
[76] Egan and Gina are the parents of three minor children. The Certification of Live
Birth issued by the State of Hawaii for each child indicate the following:
Page 123 of 138

Mother’s Maiden Name is Gina Lenee’ Butera. The initial Certification of Live Birth
did not identify a father for [Child One]. Gina, with Egan’s consent, arranged for
another Certification of Live Birth to be issued which identified Father’s Name as Egan
Hajime Inoue. The second Certification of Live Birth indicated that the date accepted by
the State Registrar was September 17, 1996.
states that “Data pertaining to the father of a child is prima facie evidence if: (1) The
alleged father is: (A) The husband of the mother; or (B) The acknowledged father of the
child. . . . Data pertaining to the alleged father acknowledging paternity of the child is
admissible as evidence of paternity in any family court proceeding, including
proceedings under chapter 584.”
[81] The Court finds and concludes that upon the issuance of the original
Certification of Live Birth which was accepted by the State Registrar on
September 17, 1996, Egan is [Child One]’s legal father and her legal name is
[Child One] Inoue.
Reply
o Benaiah said
10/06/2009 at 2:50 pm
Perhaps someone in the State of Hawaii could contact the attorneys in the Inoue matter,
Robert M. Harris and Sara R. Harvey, attorneys for GINA LENEE KHOUW (Child
One’s Mother), and A. Debbie Jew (Oliver, Lau, Lawhn, Ogawa & Nakamura), attorney
for EGAN HAJIME INOUE (Child One’s Father), to see if they would be willing to
share their insights regarding the following statements by the Department of Health of
the State of Hawaii:
“Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of
Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital
records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health
has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies
and procedures.”
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen
the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health
verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American
citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in
October 2008 over eight months ago.”
Page 124 of 138

[7] On the briefs [The following are the attorneys that were involved in the Inoue
matter]:
[9] A. Debbie Jew (Oliver, Lau, Lawhn, Ogawa & Nakamura) for Plaintiff
Appellee.
Reply
o epicurious said
10/06/2009 at 3:17 pm
Kay,
What we need is a copy of one or more of the following:
Hawaii Administrative Rule Title 11 Chapter 117 Vital Statistics, Registration &
Records. This may not have been formally adopted at this time.
If HAR 11 Chapter 117 is unavailable due to its status, then the next record request
should be the Hawaii Public Health Regulations Chapters 8, 8A, and 8B. From what I
can glean, these are in the process of being converted to HAR 11 Chapter 117.
If neither Chapter 117 or Chapters 8, 8A and 8B are available, then the request should
take the form of the relevant rule/regulation governing registration and records for vital
statistics.
What is important is for your in-laws not to be stonewalled and offered Hawaii Revised
Statute 338. This is readily available and we already know what it contains. We need
the governing aforementioned administrative rules, not the statutes.
I recommend that you ask your in-laws to visit their local Hawaii Health Department
office and request hard copies of the documents I have outlined. They are required by
law to provide public access and copies if requested.
Reply
166. Nellie said
10/06/2009 at 2:27 pm
Page 125 of 138

Kay, I agree with Epicurious that somebody should try to get hands on “Public Health
Regulations”, Chapters 8, 8A, & 8B.
I also searched the web a long time yesterday looking for that document and came up empty.
Epicurious, it seems like if they’re saying NEW rules are in process they’ve got to have some
current ones.
I wonder what would happen if somebody spoke to one of the low-level secretaries at the Vital
Stats Office.
BTW, I e-mailed the story to biggovernment.com and they rejected it.
Reply
o epicurious said
10/06/2009 at 3:00 pm
They do: Public Health Regulations Chapters 8, 8A and 8B.
Title 11 Chapter 1 states that Public Health Regulations “Practice and Pocedure” was
repealed. It is not clear if the PHR was repealed in its entirety or if only a portion
thereof was, specifically the practices and procedures now contained in HAR 11-1. I
have asked Janice Obuko for clarification. If it was only the portion now contained in
HAR 11-1, then PHR Chapters 8, 8A, and 8B are still the governing regulations.
If it was repealed in its entirety, and Chap 117 is still in draft thus not adopted, then the
governing regulation is unknown to us. I have also asked for clarification on this as
well.
Reply
167. Nellie said
10/06/2009 at 2:40 pm
I just sent this e-mail.
Dear Mr. Onaka:
My understanding is that Chapter 117 is a place-holder for the administrative rules that you are
creating to replace “Public Health Regulations”, chapters 8, 8a, & 8b. “Public Health
Regulations” was repealed on Jan 3, 2005.
Page 126 of 138

What regulations are you using in the interim, when were they authorized, and where did they
come from? Hawaii law requires administrative rules to be available to the public. I am
requesting a copy of whatever administrative rules your department is currently following.
I believe the usual requirement is 10 business days for responding to public requests for
information. Please reply to let me know if you foresee any delay in responding or if you need
any more information from me.
Thank you.
Nellie (contact info redacted)
Reply
o epicurious said
10/06/2009 at 2:49 pm
Sent a similar email to Janice Obuko, see my reply to my latest post.
Reply
Nellie said
10/06/2009 at 2:59 pm
You’re doing great work, Epicurious.
I saw on an old FR thread that BP2 had requested Chapter 117 and PHR
Chapters 8, 8a, & 8b and had posted about it back in late July. At least 2 months
later, I wonder what he heard from them.
There is no way this kind of BS-ing around should be tolerated from civil
“servants”. I’m still waiting for any response from AG Mark Bennett, who I
contacted around the same time.
168. azgo said
10/06/2009 at 2:54 pm
Does this help any!
HAWAI`I REVISED STATUTES

TITLE 8. PUBLIC PROCEEDINGS AND RECORDS
CHAPTER 91
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
Page 127 of 138

“[§91-2.6] Proposed rulemaking actions and rules; posting on the lieutenant governor’s Internet
website.
(a) Beginning January 1, 2000, all state agencies, through the office of the lieutenant governor,
shall make available on the website of the office of the
lieutenant governor each proposed rulemaking action of the agency and the full text of the
agency’s proposed rules or changes to existing rules. The Internet website shall provide
instructions regarding how to download the information regarding proposed rulemaking actions
and the full text of the agency’s proposed rules.
(b) Each state agency, to the greatest extent feasible, shall:
(1) Ensure that all information pertaining to that agency that is contained on the lieutenant
governor’s website is current and accurate; and
(2) Advise individuals contacting the state agency of the availability of the proposed
rulemaking actions and the full text of the agency’s proposed rules
on the lieutenant governor’s website. [L 1999, c 301, pt of §2(1)]
§91-3 Procedure for adoption, amendment, or repeal of rules.

(a) Except as provided in subsection (f), prior to the adoption of any rule authorized by law, or
the
amendment or repeal thereof, the adopting agency shall:”
more…
http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:aLkxnGwc8QQJ:hawaii.gov/dcca/areas/oah/main
/hrs/hrs_oah_91.pdf+HI+chapter+91&hl=en&gl=us&sig=AFQjCNGxWi9Njwt5TLgZylt5eHfv
72xiyQ
Reply
169. Kay said
10/06/2009 at 2:57 pm
Thank you Nellie…

Just in case I can get him to physically go get the admin rules…Where does he go?
Also maybe Misstickly can add a donation button on here so we can pitch in and buy a
membership for
http://www.librariesanddirectories.com/lib/table.php?id=rm6613
or any other costs for getting research materials…
Just a thought..
Reply
o Nellie said
10/06/2009 at 3:05 pm
Page 128 of 138

Here’s contact info. I’d suggest that he call somebody in these offices and ask them
where he can physically see the current Administrative Rules that the DOH uses.
Administration Directory
1250 Punchbowl St.
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
Phone (808) 586-4400
Fax (808) 586-4444
Director
Chiyome Fukino, M.D.
Phone (808) 586-4400
Fax (808) 586-4444
Deputy Director
Deputy Director – Susan Jackson
Phone (808) 586-4412
Reply
azgo said
10/06/2009 at 3:11 pm
Try this!

CHAPTER 91
I left a comment at 10/06/2009 at 2:54 pm

- in moderation
10/06/2009 at 3:08 pm
Miss Tickly, with all due respect, I think you should minimize the strategising on this forum.
The folks in Hawaii and in WDC are listening too closely.
IMHO.
Reply
o epicurious said
Page 129 of 138

10/06/2009 at 3:38 pm
I think are all anxious to help out in any capacity in order to get to the bottom of this. I
jumped into the fray as I see TerriK’s efforts as well as Leo’s as the most likely ones to
succeed. I have been following this controversy ever since Berg filed his first lawsuit in
Aug 08 and just want to know the truth regardless of the outcome.
I will back off if TerriK wants to pursue the matter without assistance.
TerriK, please provide some direction and I will adjust accordingly.
BTW: I could care less if the DoH or DC is listening. This should serve as notice to
them that we the people will pursue the truth by whatever legal means available. This is
not about Obama, its about adhering to the Constitution.
Regards,
epicurious
Reply
Kay said
10/06/2009 at 4:31 pm
ditto that epicurious!
o Nellie said
10/06/2009 at 3:57 pm
Miss Tickly can check her sitemeter to find out who is looking at the blog – where
they’re at, what link they clicked on to get here, their IP address…
It would be interesting to see if the Hawaii.gov folks are here.
Reply
171. Kay said
10/06/2009 at 3:12 pm
You have a point there highlander…

But how else can we all help?
Reply
Page 130 of 138

10/06/2009 at 3:25 pm
Is it possible to have a private blog? I am not computer savy, but is there a way to be members
only????
Reply
173. Kay said
10/06/2009 at 3:37 pm
I doubt it justlooking…no doubt an ivestigator or czar for that too..
Reply
10/06/2009 at 3:47 pm
TK,
Have you thought about contacting Judicial Watch? They went after Hillary’s eligibility.
Reply
10/06/2009 at 3:53 pm
It would be nice if WND would donate their P.I. guy to get needed research & docs from
Hawaii.
Reply
10/06/2009 at 4:49 pm
It seems to me that there is a flurry of activity going on at DoH in Hawaii, and we’re not part of
it. So, you have to ask the question, why is all of this activity going on right now? Is Miss
Tickly getting too close, and are the doors to DoH being closed?
Page 131 of 138

I don’t trust government because it is typically motivated by money, fear, or embarrassment,

not by doing the right thing, or by doing the legal thing. So, I am not inclined to think that the
walls being re-built at DoH are for our benefit. We don’t have an insider to help us understand
what is going on. If we did, the story might be different.
Scary part? I’ll bet Obama has an insider.
So, is it better to be safe than sorry? Didn’t our Founders have to be cautious about their plans?
How can we-all help? Use secured e-mail to correspond. Stay off the blogs.
I know Leo would disagree with me on these points because he believes that discovery would
reveal all of this info anyway. I just don’t want Obama opening Christmas presents early. Let
him wait. Let us get a jump on him for a change.
Reply
177. naturalizedcitizen said
10/06/2009 at 5:57 pm
I am not sure if anybody previously mentioned the following aspect of terms “Filed by” and
“Accepted by”.
The COLB document issued by the Hawaii DoH is a computer generated printout. As such the
document contains static and dynamic data. Dynamic data is stored in a database record for
each individual.
The “Filed by” and the “Accepted by” must be a dynamic data, otherwise this field in the
document template would have to be typed every time a copy is to be printed and left to the
discretion of the clerk.
This means that the two terms are NOT equivalent (I had some discussiouns with anti-birthers
where they claimed that both terms mean the same). The state treats these two statuses
differently.
[MT: I am looking at exactly this right now...=)]
Reply
178. Marjo said
10/06/2009 at 6:16 pm
We need to organize and work in a fashion that makes sense. Have different people look at
different things. I’m retired, I have plenty of time to donate. First, let’s gather ideas.
Reply
Page 132 of 138

o epicurious said
10/06/2009 at 6:25 pm
Agreed. We need to coordinate our efforts rather than running in 15 different directions
and making redundant requests.
Also, despite what I said earlier it might behoove those who are interested in helping to
work in a secure collaborative space and let TerriK post the findings/results on the blog
for others to see.
TerriK is the owner of this blog and she should drive if and/or how she wants to us to
assist her. I have not seen any responses from her today regarding this matter.
I am going to cease and desist until we get clarification from TerriK.
[MT: I am just doing a lot of research on my end--I would love for you guys to do
the same. Like 'naturalizedcitizen' just mentioned, right now I am looking at
Electronic Birth Certificate (EBC) systems because I read that Hawaii is virtually
all electronic and from the look of the COLBs along with the points
'naturalizedcitizen' makes, it's worth understanding who can enter what data and
changes, and at what point can a COLB be issued. Seems there was a glitch in NJ
(I think) and local officials could no longer issue changed (amended) certificates
after 2008. I am trying to figure out if 'glitches' like that could produce what we
see on Obama's certificate.
Anyway, I want to do thorough research before I put something together and just
when I think I have covered things...I realize there's more to understand.]
Reply
Marjo said
10/06/2009 at 7:22 pm
Miss Tickly, I sent you a private mail via FR……
179. azgo said
10/06/2009 at 6:51 pm
In case you missed my comment at 10/06/2009 at 2:54 pm

I was caught in moderation! (very lonely place)
Page 133 of 138

I believe this chapter lays out the procedures for rule making.
—————————–
Does this help any!

CHAPTER 91
“[§91-2.6] Proposed rulemaking actions and rules; posting on the lieutenant governor’s Internet
website.
(a) Beginning January 1, 2000, all state agencies, through the office of the lieutenant governor,
shall make available on the website of the office of the
lieutenant governor each proposed rulemaking action of the agency and the full text of the
agency’s proposed rules or changes to existing rules. The Internet website shall provide
instructions regarding how to download the information regarding proposed rulemaking actions
and the full text of the agency’s proposed rules.
(b) Each state agency, to the greatest extent feasible, shall:
(1) Ensure that all information pertaining to that agency that is contained on the lieutenant
governor’s website is current and accurate; and
(2) Advise individuals contacting the state agency of the availability of the proposed
rulemaking actions and the full text of the agency’s proposed rules
on the lieutenant governor’s website. [L 1999, c 301, pt of §2(1)]
§91-3 Procedure for adoption, amendment, or repeal of rules.

(a) Except as provided in subsection (f), prior to the adoption of any rule authorized by law, or
the
amendment or repeal thereof, the adopting agency shall:”
more…
http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:aLkxnGwc8QQJ:hawaii.gov/dcca/areas/oah/main
/hrs/hrs_oah_91.pdf+HI+chapter+91&hl=en&gl=us&sig=AFQjCNGxWi9Njwt5TLgZylt5eHfv
72xiyQ
Reply
180. yo said
10/06/2009 at 7:05 pm
Isn’t it amazing that all the research and speculation going on at this blog right now has to be
done simply because the state of hawaii dept of health won’t be forthcoming about their own
laws and help citizens to understand their practices and procedures. They would rather be
evasive with citizen questions.
Yes, simply amazing.
Page 134 of 138

Reply
181. naturalizedcitizen said
10/06/2009 at 7:56 pm
To prove that the field containing the phrases “Filed by…” and “Accepted by…” is not part of
the template we need one of the following documents:
1. A COLB document issued prior to September 2003, that has the same wording as Obama’s
COLB. We could compare it to the COLB posted on this blog (Fig 3) and conclude that at the
same time DoH issued two COLBs with different wording, meaning that the status data is part
of the records and not part of the document template.
or
2. The same conclusion could be confirmed if we had a COLB issued after the June 2007
containing the phrase “Accepted by…”
Reply
182. kay said
10/06/2009 at 8:16 pm
I was just told that ALL of MSM is attacking O..

On poor work ethics, anyone hear….
Funny I got an email from my O loving uncle today and seems like his attitude has done an
about face also
Something is going on!
Reply
o vrajavala said
10/06/2009 at 9:49 pm
Kay,
got a link?
Reply
183. kay said
10/06/2009 at 9:30 pm
Page 135 of 138

This has got to be the best explanation …or easiest to comprehend article on the NBC issue I
have ever read..
h/t drkates blog..
http://thebirthers.org/misc/logic.htm
Reply
184. Claudia said
10/06/2009 at 9:42 pm
why has this board gone sooooo silent today?
Reply
10/06/2009 at 10:49 pm
I hope it wasn’t what I posted earlier today about keeping strategy discussions off the
blog.
I meant to suggest using caution with regard to whatever strategy was being proposed,
just so that it would not give away pending actions on Miss Tickley’s part to the Obama
crowd.
I think this is a great topic and needs to be addressed. So, if I dissuaded anyone from
contributing, I apologize.
Please continue to contribute.
Reply
10/06/2009 at 11:23 pm
Dear Fellow Contributors,
Please do not confuse HRS Title 8 Chapter 91 PUBLIC PROCEEDINGS AND RECORDS
with Chapters 8, 8A, 8B contained in Hawaii’s Public Health Regulation. They are not one and
the same. No one to my knowledge has been able to find this on the web or obtain a copy. I
emailed J. Okubo today with a request to obtain the PHR.
Page 136 of 138

Just wanted to clarify in case someone thought they are one and the same. PHR Chapters 8, 8A
and 8B should define how the DoH handles the birth data it receives for registration and record
generation.
Reply
o epicurious said
10/06/2009 at 11:54 pm
One more note: Give the run around that the DoH has given, it is pausible that PHR
chapters 8, 8A and 8B contain the rules regarding what constitutes a “filed” birth record
and an “accepted” birth record. This is the crux of TerriK’s initial observation.
I find it interesting that no electronic copy of the PHR is available to the general public.
HAR Title 11 Chapter 117 (which intended to be a combination of PHR Chapter 8, 8A
and 8B) is meaningless as it has not been formally adopted at this time.
Personally, I think Obama requested a formal altercation (father and father’s race
perhaps?)and as of June 2007, the State Registrar had not accepted it. It was at that time
in a “pending mode” until the Registrar accepted it or received additional evidence.
Obama may or may not have provided the additional satisfactory evidence. For all we
know, he did and the birth record has since been accepted.
The DoH is wringing its hands right now. They cannot make this stuff up without risk
of exposure. Are they really willing to fall on the sword for Obama? I doubt it, the truth
always comes out sooner or later.
Reply
186. kay said
10/07/2009 at 12:04 am
Claudia…I just think that Miss tickly is very busy.

She is digging around …trust me I’ve watched her in action since TD’s blog…busy lady with a
great brain!
Reply
187. Lisa C. said
10/07/2009 at 1:07 am
Another possible angle of obfuscation to consider.
Page 137 of 138

The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands notes (below) that the DOH “no longer issues
certificates of live birth” and then requests that applicants to be considered for the DHHL
program “produce certified copies of birth certificates, certificates of Hawaiian birth, or no-
record certifications.”
They also differentiate between birth certificates, certificates of live birth and certifications of
live birth.
What is a certificate of Hawaiian birth and should Obama be able to provide one? Could his
COLB as currently provided by him still represent a “no-record” certification?
That is, when all is said and done, could he have provided bits and pieces of data enough that
the authorities deemed the totality to be a record (or “records” if amended as we suspect)
without any independent corroboration from anyone other than Obama?
“Department of Hawaiian Home Lands accepts both Certificates of Live Birth (original birth
certificate) and Certifications of Live Birth because they are official government records
documenting an individual’s birth. The Certificate of Live Birth generally has more
information which is useful for genealogical purposes as compared to the Certification of Live
Birth which is a computer-generated printout that provides specific details of a person’s birth.
Although original birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth) are preferred for their greater
detail, the State Department of Health (DOH) no longer issues Certificates of Live Birth. When
a request is made for a copy of a birth certificate, the DOH issues a Certification of Live Birth.
If the DOH does not have a birth certificate on file for any of your parents or grandparents, you
must obtain a “no-record certification.” A “no-record certification” tells Department of
Hawaiian Home Lands staff that the DOH searched its files and cannot find the records
requested. At a minimum, the DHHL asks that applicants produce certified copies of birth
certificates, certificates of Hawaiian birth, or no-record certifications for the following
people….”
There seems to be no end to the layers for such a simple thing that every kid seems able to
provide to get a driver’s license, yet alone a passport.
Reply
Page 138 of 138

Miss Tickly - Our Worst Nightmare Confirmed

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Miss Tickly - Our Worst Nightmare Confirmed

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Miss Tickly – Our Worst Nightmare Confirmed

OUR WORST NIGHTMARE CONFIRMED: Obama’s

By MissTickly (aka ‘TerriK’)

THE KEY: ‘FILED by Local Registrar’ vs. ‘ACCEPTED by State Registrar’

MOVING ON WITHOUT HAWAII’S HELP

In viewing the U.S. Vital Statistics System found here:

Budget Bureau’s recommendations in 1943:

“Instead it proposed the creation of a cooperative vital records system,

Using the state of Nevada’s clearly posted procedures and policies

This is highly irregular, no?

IF THE U.S. HAS STANDARDIZED MUCH OF THE POLICY AND PROCEDURES

• What does a ‘Filed by Registrar’ COLB indicate?

• What does an ‘Accepted by State Registrar’ COLB indicate?

THIS IS SIMPLY OUTRAGEOUS. BREATHTAKINGLY STUPID. IT’S RECKLESS.

Excuse me? It is just beyond words.

• ‘Foreshadowing’ (first indication of admission)

• ‘TerriK Investigation: Part 2′ (statutory admission) http://tinyurl.com/y963eo7

FIRST STEP IN FILING AND REGISTERING A BIRTH IN NEVADA IS

filing of list of deceased persons with public administrator.

[NOTE: UPON COMPLETION OF THE FIRST STEP, THE FILED ‘APPLICATION

“NRS 440.230 …..Filing by deputy county health officer”

• Now add it to this:

“NRS 440.190 County health officer as registrar.“

SECOND STEP IN FILING AND REGISTERING A BIRTH IN NEVADA IS

THIS STEP MUST BE COMPLETED FOR A BIRTH CERTIFICATE OR INFORMATION

“NRS 440.150 EXAMINATION AND SUPPLEMENTATION OF CERTIFICATES. THE

“COMPLETED RECORDS” – MEANING ONE WHERE ENOUGH EVIDENCE HAS

IT IS AT THIS POINT THAT A FILED CERTIFICATE APPLICATION OF ANY KIND HAS

It is now “ON RECORD IN ACCORDANCE TO STATE POLICY AND PROCEDURE.”

HAWAII STATE REGISTRAR OFFICIALS ISSUED PRESIDENT OBAMA’S

“…reproductions of original records and files…“

PRESIDENT OBAMA’S COLB IS A REPRODUCTION OF A ‘FILE.’

DISTRACTIONS, ROADBLOCKERS AND SMOKESCREENS

While conducting my investigation I encountered a FReeper that pointed me to her own

INDEX DATA & WHAT IT MEANS

Send everything in separate e-mail requests to: janice.okubo@doh.hawaii.gov &

INDEX DATA (http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-440.html#NRS440Sec280):

RESOLUTIONS & CONCLUSIONS

If so, the information used is insufficient proof, unsubstantiated, unrecorded

COINCIDENTAL & BIZARRE CONGRESSIONAL MOVES…OR NOT, shhhhhh…

From FReeper ‘BP2’:

HER ANSWER TO ME RECEIVED AT 11:45 p.m., July 27, 2009:

AND, we would have seen clearly that:

What are Hawaii’s standards for approving a filed application to amend/correct

And please spread this analysis FAR AND WIDE.

Thank you! MissTickly (aka TerriK)

268 Responses to “OUR WORST NIGHTMARE CONFIRMED: Obama’s COLB

1. Joe The Blogger said

“Dear Dr. Fukino–

Yes, I get it.

well I’ll just get stronger readers.

Do you think Andrew Breitbart at biggovernment.com would run with this?

[MT: Feel free to pass it on wherever=)]

Thank you, MissTickly!

o Captain Steve said

Great work TerriK. I do think you broke the code.

awwww good job terriK!

[MT: Couldn't have said that better myself!]

[MT: You are wonderful, too. Thank you, I needed that.=)]

8. Jimmy The C said

Very good post with sound logic and analysis.

Re: “MOVING ON WITHOUT HAWAII’S HELP”

Comparisons of NRS and HRS

I’ll stop here, but the list goes on.

[MT: Yeah, wouldn't that be cool. wicked cackle]

Captain Steve said

Mary Beth said

beyond baffled said

beyond baffled said