Unstated – Codes In Conflict On Birth Document!
I was able to watch the live stream of the WND/Sheriff Joe presser on the new information they have in the ongoing investigation on obama’s fraudulent long form birth certificate. Turns out that the document itself has clues that prove some of the information should not exist on that form.
Here is a brief breakdown.
At just over ten minutes in, we get to the interesting “new” information.
Here’s the deal. On the White House released “long form” birth certificate that obama gave his personal blessing on – were some penciled numbers. Everyone knew they were official code, yet we had no way to verify what the code numbers meant. It turns out that they (Posse) were able to verify that the codings were vital statistic codings required by the federal government in 1960(s). On locating the mysterious “U.K.L. Lee”, who, due to the excellent work of “Citizen Investigator“ some time back, was discovered to be one Mrs.Verna Lee – the Local Registrar who signed off on obama’s birth certificate, Mr. Mike Zullo with Dr. Corsi’s aid as the interviewer, were able to finally verify, through Mrs. Lee, the coding significance and the procedures that regulated the handling and file numbering of the birth documents in Hawaii during the 1960′s.
In 1960 the birth certificates came to the central location of the Dept. of Health in HI. (Honolulu) They would come in as (regions) or “batches”. Those documents were then looked at by a human being – a employee of the Dept. Of Health, and they were “coded” by hand. With numerals, that meant something to the federal government. This document (of obama’s) would have been coded, and then according to Mrs. Lee, would have later had the coding re-checked by another Dept. of Health employee, then signed by the Registrar. Then the documents were placed in a secured office. At the end of the month the documents were numerical numbered by batch. They were numbered in sequence using date of occurrence, and/or time, whichever occurred first, from a specific batch – for example Kapiolani Hospital would be one “batch”. A regional office/outlying island would be another batch. They were consecutively numbered with a stamper. Get where this goes?
I will cut out a big chunk of stuff here to go straight to the meat. The file number on obama’s birth document (released from the White House) can not have been in the batch from Kapiolani Hospital, the same batch that would have absolutely included the Nordyke Twins documents. The numerical sequence is wrong. Because obama was born one day before the twins, and supposedly in the same hospital, his birth document would have been given a lower number than theirs, NOT higher. This shows that the field (6c) displaying Kapiolani as his place of birth contains erroneous information. In order to have been assigned that number, if born on Aug. 4, 1961, obama had to have been born elsewhere on the island.
Next, the penciled in code numbers. Zullo stated these were more important than anything else.
The number 9, next to the “fathers race” field (line 9), also fathers “place of work” (line 12b), had stumped everyone as to the 1961 meaning and significance.
At about 15 min. in: Zullo tells us that Dr. Corsi went to the HI State Archives and Supreme Court library to do research. They (Posse) obtained information from the 1961 Vital Statistic instruction manual for births. The finding:
“Please note, that the number 9 was the code used to indicate that the answer to a particular question was “NOT STATED”. That put some of the information on obamas BC in conflict with the written (twice verified) code. The code “9″ meant that information was NOT PROVIDED by the applicant.”
The fields 9 (Fathers race) and 12b (Fathers kind of business or industry) were both coded with the number 9, and should have been left blank as the code indicated that the information for those boxes was not provided BY THE APPLICANT.
It was the policy of the HI Dept. Of Health to have the coding reviewed by a second deputy clerk. It is not likely that an error was made, and overlooked by the second clerk.
Of course there is much more. There is information that proves HI registered -as Hawaiian born- persons based solely on the word of the person seeking a birth registration for someone else.
There is the description of Zullos interview with the Deputy Attorney General Jill Nagamine which is interesting. He got nowhere, but decided to draw some conclusions from her responses to him. He got treated the same way every researcher has – she constantly looped back to quoting regulations. I’m thinking that would have been fun to watch.
They should have the full video up now.
Up on Drudge now:
It links to an article which is predictably snarky. Fuck these chicken shit covered “reporters”. They can verify the information to be either true or false all by themselves – yet they do not. It’s because they know damn good and well that the Posse’s findings are completely legitimate.
This isn’t a bad news report – not snarky I mean – from Phoenix Fox 10 news. The embedded video doesn’t work, so I’ll just pop up the link in pink.
H/T reader An American Story – thanks for reminding me about the Daily Pen blogpost on the vital stats coding, etc. While the writer did not include links or screenshots re: the coding, nor any links (in this particular article) to information supporting their account on the handling procedures for the Hawaiian birth documents back in 1961 (which is why I wasn’t inclined to give it my complete trust) , they did provide inserts which support the information released by Sheriff Joe and Mike Zullo yesterday. The material is well written, very lengthy, and while there are inserts as mentioned, there are no images, links or screenshots from the parent source, for example: the 1961 Vital Statistic Instruction Manual for Births mention by Zullo. Pink link is to the Daily Pen article which contains the following snip:
click to enlarge
I found this partial form that I had done a screenshot of well over a year ago – I think it was a sample modern NJ birth reg. form. Anyway – it lists “9″ as Not classifiable/Unknown. As I said though – this IS a modern form.