It’s A Date !

1/23/2012 I HAVE ADDED SEVERAL IMPORTANT UPDATES AT THE BOTTOM OF THE POST (BELOW THE BODY OF TEXT).  ONE ITEM IS FROM BUTTERDEZILLIONS BLOG, AND IS VERY IMPORTANT.  I SHOULD HAVE ADDED THIS A LONG TIME BACK, BUT I SOMETIMES AM HUMAN AND GET DISTRACTED.

The material being posted today is owned by myself and The Interrogator. She does not want her name known, but out of the deepest respect and regard for her, I want you to know how much I owe her.

What this material will show absolutely is that there is more than one reason to be concerned with the actual Birth Index 1960-1964 that the public is allowed to view at the Department of Health, Honolulu HI.

Recently I did a different post about the strange entry immediately above obama’s in the Index book.  That index page will be re-posted here.  What I did not highlight, although I was well aware of it at the  time, is that in the 1960-1964 book, THE HEADER ON THE PAGES DOES NOT CONTAIN THE DATE RANGE.  This is very significant because in the other Index Data books viewed and imaged that day, the date range is at the top.  In all but the book containing obama’s information.

I would like to suggest (insist!) to others out there using any part of the work and materials that are owned by myself, and first published by this blog, in order to support or further their own work, CITE YOUR SOURCE PLEASE.

The rest of the little story about this trip follows the images.

CLICK TO ENLARGE:

Birth Index 1955-1959, blurry but legible

.

Birth Index 1955-1959 clearer, but cut off


.

Marriage Index 1960-1965

.

Death Index 1960-1964

Out of respect for those passed, I have obscured the names

.


obama Birth Index – NO DATE RANGE IN HEADER


.



Some time ago I was wondering how I could arrange for another trip into Honolulu to verify some information that had been provided to me.  And to collect some more material for research.

I must interject here that I am a person who does not like to speculate and call it probability.  There is something in my brain that bends away from that, as if I simply can’t do it.  My youngest boy is the same…to the .nth power.

Having mentioned that, I’ll get where I was headed.  I needed to send another party to Honolulu to verify for me, and to get absolute PROOF for me, that obama’s name did appear in the “Birth Index” 1960-1964, that is available for view to the general public.  Regular readers will recall that the first trip I arranged, for a long time close friend to travel to Honolulu, yielded the stunning information that the Birth Index book did not contain obama’s entry on that day in early March 2010 when my buddy (we’ll call him TsunamiGeno) looked for it there.  He was stunned, so he checked and rechecked.  He then looked for all the other names that were on his to-do list, and when done, went back to looking for obama.  He never saw it in the book that day.  He is the good person that collected the hundreds of pages of microfilm copies (obama birth announcement work) for me from the libraries in Honolulu, and, added to the ones I collected in person at the Library of Congress, I have the largest collection of this stuff in the United States.

I suspected that he had been “gaslighted” with the Birth Index, but I won’t go into that part further right now.  I decided not to publish that part of his experience because I had no PROOF.  I believe to this day that he told the straight story, but I had no images to back it up.  I had sent a micro camera with him, but being of rather poor quality, and requiring a special practiced “knack” to turn on,  he couldn’t get it to run.

Months later, and quite jokingly, I asked a different acquaintance how she felt about making the trip, and she didn’t hesitate to accept.  I have always referred to her as “The Interrogator”, not for the work (she collected) that I have published, but for other work she did while in HI on that trip.  That stuff is not for public consumption.  I have to tell you all, she had nerves of steel to do some of the things she did, to go to some of those places, alone and not sure what to expect.  Much of what I am referring to is work to tie up loose ends and to verify in person if a few little things were really on the up and up.  That stuff can be downright dangerous.  It isn’t important to any of you what she went after, just know that she did do what all of you have been saying needed to be done.  She went, and she went in depth, and she didn’t let fear or possible danger keep her from the work she took on for all of us.  So, for everyone out there hollering that “somebody” ought to just go on to Hawaii and do stuff in person, she did this on your behalf.  She stepped up.  

She had a little help.  I couldn’t afford to fully fund another trip to HI, so three of us chipped in.  We each had an agenda, and to enable mine to be realized I provided The Interrogator with a plethora of cool recording devices.  I had to SEE the things I wanted.  Again,  it is the way my mind functions.  This is why I will never say the newspaper microfilms were indeed tampered with-because I didn’t see it done.

The images above are offered as proof that the Birth Index volume is in fact quite different in an important way.  It is the only one that lacks the date range.  It seems improbable that this would be innocently “overlooked” only in this one book.  To suggest so is ridiculous.  That is why I published images from the other “types” of books that were printed at the same time the 1960-1964 Birth Index was printed, to show absolutely that the obama Index is the only book lacking the one common, expected, usual official information.  The date range.

Update: in a recent exchange I had with a different researcher, I was allowed to see an image which confirms the date range is printed in the 1970-1974  Birth Index book in the Honolulu DOH.  I am not at liberty to publish that image at this time.

HERE IS AN IMAGE FROM BUTTERDEZILLION, WHICH SHE SAYS THE HI DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH MAILED TO HER IN JULY 2010.  THIS IS A PARTIAL IMAGE FROM HER BLOG WHICH I DID A SCREENSHOT OF:

http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/hdoh-has-two-different-versions-of-their-1960.pdf

click to enlarge:

Butteredezillions 1960-1964 Birth Index page

And it clearly shows the DATE RANGE included in the heading. 

This should be the very same book that obamas name is in, yet the images that were taken at the Dept. of Health, Honolulu – by three different people – in person of that “same” book, LACK the date range. 

The two citizen investigators that took images from the actual Birth Index book that is provided to you by the staff at the DOH, did so between July 2010 and April 2011. 

I happen to know that one “citizen investigator” took images with a cell phone just days ahead of a reporter suddenly deciding that the image in the 1960-1964 Birth Index was, for some reason, a thing to take a picture of.  And write a very detailed article mentioning: http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/Obamas_birth_is_easily_verified_but_few_choose_to_do_so.html?id=120561054

One other notable thing the “reporter” mentioned is the “sign in sheet” that anyone wishing to view the Index books must sign.  In addition to that you also have to show photo ID, and fill out a request form.  Overkill, but whatever.  What is interesting about this “sign in book”, is that it was only in use since March 2010.  The first person I sent to the Honolulu Dept.of Health went on March 3, 2010 – and there was NO sign in book.  That was created after his visit.

Screenshot, click to enlarge:

Mark Niesse StarAdvertiser 4/23/2011 article

 

. .


marriage index by bride

The index above shows both of Stanley Anns’ entries.  Interrogator noticed that this Marriage Index was set up differently as to the date range than the other types of Index Books.  For example, the other Index books are dated from 1960-1964, 1965-1969.  The Marriage Indexs imaged and shown on this blog are 1960-1965.

The very interesting thing about the date range of the books that have obama’s mother and father, and obamas mother and Soetoros’ marriages recorded?  You know what that is? 

It is out of sequence.  1960-1965 is a SIX year range.  The next Marriage Index book, would have the date range 1966-1969.  Four years.  So, ALL of the marriage Index books have a five year range, except for the book containing Stanley Anns two marriages, and the second  book covering the rest of the 1960s.

Advertisements

~ by ladysforest on March 6, 2011.

113 Responses to “It’s A Date !”

  1. I try to always give credit to you , butter, and MT. I think you three are on the top of the research going on. If you think it is appropriate, you can set up a donation link. Or reference one that we can use if you have an arrangement with another blog. Whatever the truth is, you guys are really being the true investigative reporters. Although you are not directly cited all the time, I know it is your work that keeps this story alive. When this is exposed it will open up the whole movement behind this man. That is the dangerous part. Those in DC have to know the truth and what that truth is must frighten them, I am talking about the few good ones. I believe they are there but I believe there is no where for them to go. If the system is as corrupted as I believe it is, we are in a serious situation.

    I just commented over at WTPOTUS about the dates. The dates are the key and I although I provided some theory, it is total speculation. Luckily for the rest of us you choose not to 🙂

    • Thanks tdr! Butter has a full set of my newspaper microfilm copies, I did send those to her in case they would help her advance the work she is doing. I do not and never have, worked directly with MissTickley, although many people do make that assumption.
      Neither of those two helped fund the trips to Honolulu. I paid for the first one completely on my own, and I paid roughly one third of the costs for the last trip, and paid for all of the gizmos that I sent along.
      I have never taken or asked for contributions for my part of the work, LOL, because I am a control freak, and don’t want to have to fiddle around with too many investors. Too much input means too little accomplished.

      And yes, I believe the system is corrupt ~ and we are in huge trouble.

  2. This goes so deep that I still can’t imagine what they are covering up. I mean maybe change a couple of things that are embarrassing but absolutely everything appears to be tampered with and at a very high level. It is possible that the microfiche could have been changed out without anyone knowing but the index is another thing.

    I have been once again scouring the internet and saw the latest entry at conservative monster. steve states that he has a real threat against his life….not related to the work on his blog but there were a number of comments there about the manufacturered economic crisis right before the election…and then some…you have to know that BHO is the conduit for something very big…i know you dont speculate but I have these really strong fight or flight instincts and these past two years I have been jumping out of my skin…usually I can get some inkling of what is to happen..in this case I cant seem to put it all together…there is too much background noise. How does what you are finding play into what is happening…i just cant connect the two.

    te depth of deception is incredible….what a sick and twisted crew.

    • I don’t know tdr. Perhaps we are seeing a cascade. Certainly we are uncovering incomprehensible corruption in both parties, court rooms, state lawmakers, ect. I don’t think it can be coincidental – not this much – not so blatant.

      The index indicates sloppy work, just as the original “discovery” of the newspaper announcements turned out to be very sloppy, the images themselves were sloppy. The COLB was sloppy, I mean come on, AFRICAN?

      Not to mention all the crap he wrote about his history in his books being proven beyond doubt to be crap. It’s sloppy. Because they aren’t worried about the public at all anymore.

      • I know..i mean seriously…this is what scares me about him being president…he is completely disengaged…how could the work have been so sloppy?

      • They’re sloppy because it keeps us busy…

        • That has occurred to me also. But there is such a thing as shooting yourself in the foot. 🙂

  3. Great work Lady and Interrogator!

  4. This isn’t speculation. In order for them to produce a book with Obama’s name in it but without a date means that someone specifically changed the computer program or the query process they use to produce those books.

    This is of a piece with their other suspected obfuscation. I was under the impression that this index was for 5 years; that somehow when it was provided, that’s what the person was told. But since the book itself does not SAY what years it covers, then there’s no proof that they lied (or misrepresented).

    So if at some point it’s ever proven that he wasn’t born between ’60 and ’64 or whatever years they implied that index covered, they can always say that the index didn’t SAY ’60 through ’64. Does that make sense?

    The bottom line is that it’s not easy to change the usual process for printing. Somebody did it deliberately, to especially produce a book with Obama’s name, without a date indicating his birth year.

    • Quite right.

    • The index book was identified as 1960-19611964 Birth Index on it cover as were similarly all the other index books I reviewed. Ladyforest should have a scanned image of the cover for this specific index book. (I do, I added them as thumbnails at the end of the post-Ladysforest)

      Your conclusion regarding the query is spot on. I suspect they have a canned report they can run based on the index type and date range that has established print parameters. I think they had to run a custom query that included the 1960-1964 births and Barry. They were sloppy because they did not include the date range in the print parameters for the page header.

      • It may have been simple but it required, what’s the word? Aforethought? Obfuscation aforethought.

        It’s not that hard to do. It’s easy to create a temporary file containing 5 years of births and then add Barry’s name to it before printing from that file.

        About the “duplicate entry”, it’s possible that the person really did have two records in the index.

        If one reads the process for obtaining a late birth certificate to “authenticate” a Certificate of Hawaiian birth, it seems as if the person could already have both a Certificate of Hawaiian birth and also a “standard birth certificate” on file at the point that the person applies for a late birth certificate.

        The procedure for obtaining a “late birth certificate” says that if the person already has a “standard” birth certificate, than that certificate should be amended instead of creating a new “late” standard birth certificate to, in essence, authenticate the Certificate of Hawaiian birth.

        So suppose, in the case of that woman who has a duplicate, that wasn’t done. For whatever reason, they didn’t find her “standard” birth certificate, didn’t update it, and instead made another standard birth certificate. Then when the print program encountered a duplicate, it flagged it as such.

        However, it’s oddly coincidental that Obama’s name just happens to be the next in line on the printout. There has to be a reason why they won’t provide an index for only 1961, especially since they told a reporter that they could and would. There’s also a reason why they won’t provide copies of the handwritten index for 1961.

        • I know of three or four individual who requested redacted copies of the original 1961 Index Data, they were refused flat. TsunamiGeno did request to see it in person, he was refused, and told he could only see the ones that are the laser printed bound things.

          As to Duplicate Mae, well, I don’t want to speculate that she had one kind of BC, then changed it for another and that’s how she happened to become a “Duplicate”. LOL, I guess I’m through “speculating”. There is a distinct anomaly attached to every damn “record” for this guys birth. At one point we must stop speculating. That is why I wanted actual images, you or I could speculate all day long, but the images are from tangible sources that show real anomalies, and will help everyone be on more solid footing when debating this eligibility issue.

          The reason I say that is because the obama clingers will make claims that birthers make everything up under their tinfoil hats. We however, have real material to prove that we do not invent this. We can beat their insults with facts, then bring the focus to the real problem of obama’s dual citizenship birth status. He is not a natural born Citizen.

  5. Something to maybe add to the next FOIA request or trip to Hawaii…

    What paper is actually used for print COLBs.

    Here are the two options:

    http://www.securitypaperstore.com/voidsecureamp8482-basketweave-pattern-g8482.html

    http://www.securitypaperstore.com/designsecureamp8482-basketw8483.html

    One is ‘more secure’ than the other. The void paper (first one) will print the word void in a photocopy. The design paper (second one) does not. What is interesting is the shades of the samples. The void paper looks like most known real COLBs. The design paper is a brighter shade in the sample – much more similar to the Daily KOS fake COLB in color.

    Did someone create a COLB template in photoshop then print it using the less secure ‘Design version’, then scanned it?

    Is this why the lighting in the Factcheck photos is so poor with poor colors? Probably.

    • Wow. Awesome thinking, Mike! I wonder the exact same kind of thing and have made such requests from the HDOH!

      In fact, I left a comment at LF’s ‘Smell-a-vision’ that said this, in part, earlier today:

      “ON the note of the Model Act…

      Alvin T. Onaka is Chair of the Working Group revising and updating 1992 Model Regulations for NAPHSIS. (Hawaii is a member) http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/model_law_membership.htm

      It’s interesting that since 1992, the Model Act that the OIP read in tandem with Hawaii’s vital records statute (OIP Op. Ltr. 90-23) says that every certified copy of a vital record should contain these security features at a minimum:

      (c) All certified copies shall include, at a minimum, the following security features:


      (1) sensitized security paper;

      (2) background security design;

      (3) copy void pantograph;

      (4) consecutive numbering;

      And these features were bracketed, too:
      
[(5) engraved border;

      (6) prismatic printing;

      (7) erasable fluorescent background inks;

      (8) nonoptical brightener paper;

      (9) microline;

      (10) complex colors;

      (11) security thread;

      (12) intaglio print;

      (13) security laminate.]

      Even the Kema COLB from 1991 has security features (p.6) http://hawaii.gov/dhs/quicklinks/peter_boy/pbkjr_vol5_p32.pdf

      In fact, the Inspector Generals report from 2000 states that 34 of the 37 states that issued abstract computer generated certified copies in the year 2000, were issuing them on security paper that was consecutively numbered. That way, each and every sheet is accounted for and there should be a tracking and usage policy followed. I know my son’s abstracted COLB issued a month before Obama’s (not from Hawaii) has a serial number in red indelible ink that bleeds through to the back as well as numerous other security features.(http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-07-99-00570.pdf)

      None of the Hawaii COLBs have any security features and they are not even printed on regulated paper like the published regulations state they should be. They are printed on paper you can buy at dozens of websites. http://www.paperworks.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=GP0411&Category_Code=SEC-SPP&Product_Count=2

      It’s GREAT for use in printing gift certificates, birth certificates…not so much.

      I personally have a hard time believing that Onaka would be asked to Chair the Working Group revising the 1992 Regulations if he hasn’t even operated under the basic security requirements.

      I would hope that no one would fault me for not buying the idea that Onaka is laser printing a border on gift certificate paper for use in issuing certified copies, in 2007, instead of using a banknote steel engraved/intaglio border like every other state in the nation with serial numbered paper…

      Here’s one example of a corporate sponsor of NAPHSIS that prints security paper for Vital Records use: http://www.abnotena.com/pg-Vital_Records.html

      Here’s the lengths that Wisconsin goes to in order to obtain security paper: http://vendornet.state.wi.us/vendornet/wais/docs/13642_0.DOC

      I cannot reconcile what I understand from NAPHSIS, IRTPA, CDC, UN, Homeland Security, The State Department, etc… with those COLBs that look like Obama’s.

      “… If Obama put out a bogus COLB, it would make sense that he would and could very easily float others to give it credibility.”

      • All great points! You’ve done your homework. Good show.

        Security thread. That’s interesting. What would that look like? Like the threads running through dollar bills?

    • “Did someone create a COLB template in photoshop then print it using the less secure ‘Design version’, then scanned it?”

      One, Hawaii uses only a paper similar to the DesignSecure for all of its COLB’s dating back to 2001. That fact would be obvious by looking at all the COLB scans that have been made to date.

      Two, what you described is basically what I’ve been reporting on for the past 2 1/2 years. However, the actual construction of the COLB was far more complex than what you described.

      It took me two years to reverse-engineer the COLB scan in order to figure out how it was made.

      The intent of making this forgery in the way it was done was to frustrate any attempts to prove how it was fabricated.

      That is why it is a devilishly clever forgery.

      Yes, it was a Photoshop template but the “security paper” background came from an existing COLB and was not a scanned sheet of DesignSecure.

      Hawaii’s paper is decidedly different from what is shown in the link.

      You can watch the movies I made that show how the COLB was made, piece by piece:

      • When did Hawaii quit using the much more secure paper that includes a voidsecure function?

        See page 6 of this pdf from Ms. T’s blog:

        http://hawaii.gov/dhs/quicklinks/peter_boy/pbkjr_vol5_p32.pdf

        March 3 post from here:

        http://obamasgarden.wordpress.com/

        This 1991 version has many more security functions that anything similar to the fake images and Factcheck document. This image looks like BCs. I have handled a lot of kids BCs as part youth sports and none look like the ‘new version’. They look like this 1991 version.

        When and why did Hawaii go to a far less secure version of the document?

      • Dr. Polland

        Is there any response to the question of when did Hawaii start using what appears to be a far less secure paper for the COLBs.

        Obviously in 1991 they were providing COLBs (Computer Abstracts) based on their own publicly provided sample:

        http://hawaii.gov/dhs/quicklinks/peter_boy/pbkjr_vol5_p32.pdf

        The 1991 document contains features found in many other states vital records document, including the ‘voidsecure’ function were the hidden word VOID becomes apparent during the copy process.

        Is it possible the samples on the internet of the supposed modern COLB are all fakes?

        Thank you.

      • It seems that state of Hawaii does not want this copy of real 1991 COLB in the open. The following link has NOW been protected by a password….

        http://hawaii.gov/dhs/quicklinks/peter_boy/pbkjr_vol5_p32.pdf

        After it was available for years….it is now password protected. Incredible.

      • ladysforest,

        I have the pdf…it is about 56 pages.

        I keep asking – when did Hawaii go from what looks like relatively secure paper for COLBs to the simplistic, apparently far less secure and more easily copied documents that are appear as part of the discussion of the supposed 2007/2008 Obama COLB. No one has yet given a straight answer and now the source is blocked.

        Interesting…

        This link and images from the documents are at MT’s blog…

        http://obamasgarden.wordpress.com/

  6. LF, is there some reason that you aren’t letting my posts through? I notice Mike’s was written this evening, mine were written much earlier and I see they are still in moderation?

    • I’ve been researching today – largely about the stuff in your comments. Your comments (some) are a bit lengthy, and repetitive. So as I had begun my “studies” shortly before you posted, I decided to keep at it. As I said in a comment on WTPOTUS yesterday, yes, there is than one registrar type at the “State Registrar’s” office. I was following up with that stuff. They are (under) the State Reg., a deputy and an associate I find mentioned. They have authority to act as registrars at the “Office of” State Registrar. They are not “local reg.s” as those are a bit different. Location wise. And yes, I found, in several places that an incomplete/incorrect birth certificate reg. form will result in a reg. form being set aside for up to one year unless or until the parents provide the necessary information/documentation to complete. The parents are notified, and if they do not step up, the birth cert. worksheet is sent back to them at the end of one year. Meanwhile the parents get no birth certificate for baby.

      PS. Mike’s comment needed no response :), so he got through quickly . Also, if you post comments across several unrelated threads, off topic on the others, they may not get approved through. Just comment on the relevant thread, and if you are dumping a bunch of info, or whatever, and I decide to check it out, know that it could be awhile before the comment w/ reply gets posted. I do this blogging part time ya know. If I am unfamiliar with what someone is commenting on, I try to be respectful enough to look into it as thoroughly as I have time to do before responding.

      • “bit lengthy, and repetitive.”

        Uhm, ok. Sorry, I guess. I know my comment on donations and your financial contributions wasn’t repetitive to anything I had said. So, I guess I just wondered – why across the board – none of my comments made it through. It doesn’t matter, it’s your blog, you do as you see fit.=)

        But, I didn’t realize that my comments which were full of links and citations needed some kind of other research to publish, they are what they are. I tried to cite everything just so you wouldn’t have to take my word for anything and actually just for your convenience. But, if you feel they lacked in support somehow or needed follow-up, well it’s your blog – that’s certainly your right. But, I didn’t publish anything untruthful. I just meant to share my POV so that you had a fuller perspective of where I was coming from. I am not here to convince you to adopt my opinion, LF. Truly, I got the impression that you felt my research and opinons were somehow unfounded. I just wanted to share that they were not so unreasonable.

        So, I guess I find this response kind of strange, ah well.

        Also, I have not been to WTPOTUS today and I am not sure I was over there yesterday and didn’t have any indication that you had left me any comment there.

        Anyway, great research on this post! It needs no follow-up from me, I like it and support what you do!

        Good luck, LF. I don’t want to hang up your time with my comments, again, I only meant to share what I had found.

        • I appreciate the links, I had already had some of those same links saved for some time. Thing is, I’ve never read through them specifically for this specific topic – and that does take considerable time. I was already in the process before your first comment, so I just continued with my planned activity. I also always try to find as much supporting info out there as possible, takes time.

          As to donations, meh. It’s been kindly suggested to me before. I am a control freak, it costs, and I pay for that privilege. If something wild came up, and I NEEDED to do it I would consider it, otherwise I am fine marching to my own tune.

          And I don’t mind lengthy-repetitive I can do without-but lengthy sometimes means it takes me time to do research or compose a responsible reply.

      • “I appreciate the links, I had already had some of those same links saved for some time. Thing is, I’ve never read through them specifically for this specific topic – and that does take considerable time.”

        I get this 100%. I do this all the time, too.

        It’s like majoring in Vital Statistics without a professor just to research this stuff.

  7. I appreciate your hard work, ladysforest, and especially your attention to detail while trying to give us “nothing but the facts, Maam.”

  8. Ladysforest,

    I sure do appreciate your work in this, and your friend’s work too. Actually there’s a lot of people who have been putting in time on this. I’m reading it as time permits.

    • Hi kittycat-good to “see” you.

      But what do you mean when you say “putting in time on this”? This same exact topic? I hadn’t heard that before, so if you have a link pop it up for me please?

  9. Oh, I meant spending time figuring out this mess. It was just my phrasing. I know Miss Tickly is working on other stuff, so that’s basically what I meant.

    • OK, I thought maybe someone else had managed to get images at the DOH also, I was thinking it’d be cool to see.

  10. Well, if someone else has them too, we don’t know about it yet. And the reason that I said “mess” is because everything about O, all the documentation, the books, everything is a mess. Nothing is real, it seems. It’s all made up.

  11. In order to add one line/name, you either reduce the type size or remove one line. If the other pages contain the date range, you got your answer.

    • The other pages in the book do not have the date range either-I’m going to pop up an image from another page of the 1960-1964 to show that, and to clear up any confusion.
      The date range is on the same line as the identifier, LOL, or whatever you call that, so it would not add an additional line were it to be left off.

      • Unless they inserted a name and reprinted but to keep the pagination the same, they had to remove the date range. If they didn’t, names would drop to the following page and all prior references to that name/page would be wrong.

        • Huh. I know nothing about how all of that works. Another commenter mentioned something about it also. Perhaps someone can really check into that because I wouldn’t know where to begin. 🙂

  12. OK, it’s rank speculation. I apologize, but here I go. Those print outs are probably still written in very old computer code. Probably COBOL. These legacy systems still need COBOL programmers. For example, in COBOL it takes 9 lines of code just to add 2 +2. Clearly, the printout was either created separately or the files themselves were modified. Who and where are the COBOL programmers for the Hawaiian Dept. of Health? Are they consultants? Somewhere they must be emails, some work order, maybe even a contract. These COBOL guys can be so old, it might have been a retiree. Further speculation is that if they were sloppy with that, they were sloppy with this. Paper trail highly likely.

    The guiding principle would be that pinheads are trained to collect and retain all information.

    As for the refusal of access to the 1961 handwritten index, I would raise holy hell for that one. It should be obvious that handwritten index has no Obama, Soetoro or anything associated with him.

    Anyway, hope that stimulates some fruitful thinking…

    • Everyone that asked to view the handwritten index was turned down, I know TsunamiGeno asked first to do that, and they refused then had him fill out the request forms to see the same book the Interrogator imaged. He requested to see, “General”, “Late/Delayed”, “Hawaiian”, and “Foreign”. He was told that they only have one type of Birth Index. We know there is an Index of Hawaiian Birth, I have an image up in one of my posts. The Interrogator asked if all the births were entered in the one Index, and I don’t believe she got a clear answer. I think that is on the video-just near the end-

      https://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/some-tropical-truth

      • I got a clear answer. I was told that it only included births that fell within the “normal” parameters. It did not include foreign or late/delayed births or Certificate of Hawaiian Births (CHOB). I asked if there were indexes for any of these if they were available for viewing. This where the answer was obfuscated. It was not clear from the response I received if the indexes did not exist or if they could not be viewed by the general public.

        The Dept of Heath’s Specific Record Retention Procedure clearly defines that all of the above indexes shall be maintained as a permanent record. The Post and Email was able to obtain redacted pages from the COHB index book.

        The HDoH lied.

        • THANK YOU !!!

          Excellent info to make public. I had thought that to be the case, but didn’t want to state something absolutely as fact. Now, I know on the Lady in Brown video, we hear you asking the question… 8) and we hear a flimsy response.

  13. […] […]

  14. Great job Ladysforest and Interrogator…

    Maybe WND will pick up on this great research and shine some more light on it.

    Keep up the great work!

    • Thank you for those kind words, and for the traffic ! 🙂

      • No problem…

        FYI: If they did not know already, they do now… 😉

        Domain Name hawaii.gov ? (U.S. Government)
        IP Address 132.160.235.# (Pacific Network)
        ISP Pacific Network
        Location
        Continent : North America
        Country : United States (Facts)
        State : Hawaii
        City : Mililani
        Lat/Long : 21.4701, -157.9637 (Map)
        Language English (U.S.)
        en-us
        Operating System Microsoft WinXP
        Browser Internet Explorer 7.0
        Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; GTB6.6; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; MS-RTC LM 8; InfoPath.3)
        Javascript version 1.3
        Monitor
        Resolution : 1920 x 1080
        Color Depth : 32 bits
        Time of Visit Mar 11 2011 2:21:40 am

        • OH ! You mean the OFFICIALS visited you? Oh my ! They must be mad at me now. I guess they won’t ever answer another question I ask them.

          Wait, they don’t get questions from me. At least not since December ’09 – and they never answered me then, or acknowledged my inquiry at all. Never mind.

          Thanks for the heads up.

  15. “OH ! You mean the OFFICIALS visited you?”

    Yep, they monitor my blog several times a week…

  16. Did anyone notice the font is smaller on Obama’s name than the other names? Also look close at the E in HUSSEIN. It is not the same as the other E’s in the other names. Also the A’s are slightly different. The height of the font on all the other names is higher than the height of the font in Obama’s name. It is so obvious I don’t know how anyone can not notice it.

    • The thing is though, that because the scans were not the highest quality, I don’t think we can really do comparisons on the font. This was not copied on a copying machine, or scanned in the customary way.
      I have a couple of scans from that page, but only posted this one in this “article”. And really, due to the quality of the copy itself, I don’t feel we can use these to compare the fonts. Would that it were so, but this is what we have to work with.

  17. FYI:

    Video: Obama Eligibility Researcher & Genealogist Discusses His Research On Obama’s Purported Newspaper Birth Announcements

    http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/03/video-obama-eligibility-researcher.html

  18. AS OF 8:00 PM, 3/10/11, I HAVE RECEIVED ONLY ONE, LET ME REPEAT THAT, I HAVE RECEIVED ONLY ONE COMMENT BY AN OBAMA CLINGER. IT WENT ON A RANT AGAINST BIRTHERS WITHOUT EVEN DEBATING THE TRUTH IN THE IMAGES.

    A SINGLE NEGATIVE COMMENT OUT OF 2000 VIEWS ON THIS POST.

    8)

  19. […] Ladysforest, blogging at My Very Own Point of View, […]

  20. WOW!!

  21. You’ve got him now!

  22. Linked at http://www.alipac.us/ftopic-137238-days0-orderasc-4078.html

    Thank you, ladysforest, for your diligence and attention to detail.

    One day you can tell us about how you operate while being known to the FBI, the DOJ, DHS, and the CIA. The rest of us work behind anonymity that allows us to sleep at night, not having our front doors knocked down without a knock.

  23. I note that each page is numbered. If for, for example, each page contains 40 names and you add a name to the top of page 1218, the last name on that page will move down to the top of page 1219 and so on and so forth down the rest of the book.
    This will result in one name on each subsequent page having an incorrect page reference. To prevent it, remove a line from the header on each page. This will require you to add an extra blank line on all pages in the book except page 1218. There is no was to prove or disprove this unless you have a copy of any page from the earlier book.

    • Oh, it’s getting clearer now!

    • Or, simply delete one name on page 1218. If I understand things correctly, this document is not used for any legal purposes…it is for information only. Who would bother to check it?

      • I don’t believe it is used in any “legal” sense, no. The books are “official” documents though.

  24. Obama Birth Announcement Forged
    http://www.hoaxofthecentury.com/ObamaBirthAnnouncementForged1.htm

    Clearly the font is smaller with different letter types. Looks like the page was substituted with the error of a year range missing. His claimed father was Barrack. That list should be
    OBAMA, BARRACK HUSSEIN, JR.

    Above in the list a few names is III and below is JR. A bad forgery.

  25. Does that mean the page with “Obama” has one more line than the others?
    Including the ones in the same year group where they also took the top row off?
    I didn’t count them so far.

    BTW [temp. redacted, currently researching]

    I HAD NOTICED THAT, AND WE ARE TRYING TO FIND OUT EXACTLY WHAT THAT MEANS – SO FAR NO LUCK. WHEN I WAS TRYING TO LOAD THESE INTO MY BLOG FROM THE LAPTOP WHERE THEY WERE STORED I COULD NOT ACTUALLY SEE THEM, THE LAPTOP SCREEN WAS CRASHING REPEATEDLY. SO, I HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT THE MANY IMAGES THAT ARE NOT POSTED HERE WHEN I DO HAVE TIME.

    I FOUND SOMETHING ELSE ALONG THOSE LINES ALSO. LAST NAME DAVIS. FEMALE. 1960-1964. BUT THERE IS A DIFFERENCE WITH THAT, OR RATHER, THOSE. THESE DO NOT SEEM TO BE COMMON. BUT SO FAR NO WAY OF KNOWING WHAT IT MEANS.-Ladysforest

    I haven’t done the counting yet. 🙂 Have out of town guests, and have to do a party tomorrow.

  26. Researching the paper is huge. I had brought this to Polarik’s attention back in ’09. What I pointed out was the fact that you can tell a papers thickness by the creasing and embossing. I had commented on that here as well http://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2009/12/21/lawyer-misrepresents-the-facts-what-else-is-new/#comments

    Greg

    • Sorry Greg, you went into spam.

    • Greg,

      I had to go check the paper out after seeing the word void all over that 1991 COLB that is from the actual HDOH website. Obviously they used a voidsecure type paper. And your point on the thinness of the security paper is a good one. Also, the security paper is supposed to allow the laser printing process to adhere better than normal paper. The Factcheck photos are almost washed out.

      Finally it was posted at FR today a full set of pages that should put this to rest. The Factcheck photos are definitely frauds. And they are done inside the Obama HQs in Chicago.

      Post #65 here:

      http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2688174/posts?q=1&;page=51

      This shows the direct linkage of elements that are not from an original HDOH print process between the Daily KOS image and the Factcheck photos, showing the Factcheck photos are merely photos of a cleaned up printed version of the Daily KOS image. That explains the lack of a seal on birth_certificate_3.jpg and the incredibility poor lighting for the rest of the front facing docs.

    • Greg: this reply is a tad late, but I need to point out that You referenced here something you wrote in December 22, 2009 about pointing out something to me that I had already written in my 160-page, 202 image, Final Report, Obama’s Born Conspiracy, on November 22, 2008 – the culmination of the work I began on June 12, 2008.

      http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2136816/posts

      I had real paper COLBs at the time, so I knew exactly how thin they were.

      Greg, you wrote about the creases in the paper and how thin it is on December 22, 2009

      http://nobarack08.wordpress.com/2009/12/21/lawyer-misrepresents-the-facts-what-else-is-new/#comments:

      However, in a run-up to the final report, on November 4, 2008, in an axamination of the Factcheck photos, I made the following statement:

      You can also see that the crease in the paper where the printout was folded is way too thick to be real COLB security paper (which is as thin as cheap copy paper)

      http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2123682/posts#42

      I did not get this information from you, unless you told me on Free Republic as a FReeper before I ever mentioned it.

      Greg – they say that “like minds think alike” and I sure could have used you like mind back in June 2008 when I started this research – which is still ongoing.

      The only things that I have changed in the 2 1/2 years since the final report was published are that (1) Photoshop CS3 was used to produce the original forgery, (2) Janice Okubo’s COLB and the border from another were used, (3) Factcheck printed out the PSD file onto transparent film and stuck it on “security paper” rather than printing directly on it, and (4) the Seal that appears in photos #2, and photos #4 through #6 were impressed into the film-on-paper mockup by an insider within the DOH sometime during the week of August 9.

      Now I also know the identity of that insider as well as the actual chain of custody of all the images and photos.

      Other than that, my final report is still the bible of COLB analysis. Too bad more people like yourself did not read it.

      BTW, Ladysforest – that includes you. You might also be interested to learn that I know how the microfilms were reshot and spliced for the bogus birth announcements, which I also said were forged the day they came out.

  27. well this is getting pretty interesting. we all know lucas smith claims to have a BC from kenya. He call into the CFP blog talk show which was hosting mario and kerchner and stated he was willing to testify in front of congress under oath regarding the legitamacy of the kenyan bc. Hagmann was on the show, the investigator who has done alot of research on bho, volunteered to further research the kenyan BC and provide some additonal background to add to its authenticity. lucas is going to contact mario first for some legal advise and then work with hagmann on the kenyan bc.

    hmmm….i always was curious about that bc but i thought lucas might have been had in kenya. he discussed ow when he was in kenya they all spoke about the how bho was born there which prompted him to obtain the copy. he said he would be willing to expose all the financial transactions to prove that he actually paid what he said he paid to get the document.

    http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/03/breaking-canada-free-press-radio-lucas.html

  28. Your person didn’t get to see the original index books and didn’t get to see the dates on them? Some HDOH clerk printed the sections asked for, put the pages in folders and dated the folders.

    Did your person ask to see the covers of the index books to verify the dates on them?

    Clerks always think you should believe everything they tell you and that all the information they give you is valid and correct.

    I always tell them I need to SEE where they got the information I asked for and am paying for. I am paying money. Show me the book and the pages.

    Ask for more than you really want. Go in on a Friday when they are getting ready for the weekend. Have pages of the applicable laws printed out and highlighted and show it to the clerk. If necessary, ask for the supervisor.

    • The original (handwritten) index data books were asked for by both of the researchers. They were both denied access. Many people have requested, via correspondence, that the Dept. of Health provide even a redacted page or two from the original index data books – those requests have been refused or outright ignored.

      There is no charge to vein any data that is available to the general public. The researchers dealt with several different clerks, one was a supervisor, and the answer was always, “NO”.

    • newssleuth, have you had the pleasure of dealing with the Hawaii department of health? They don’t care about any stinking rules! 🙂

      • True dat!

      • Not for 20 years or longer by now. I am getting old now but I wasn’t then. I was sent to Mexico and Hawaii. I don’t remember where I went first.

        I think most of the clerks got their jobs through family connections, through their Aunties.

        Once in a while, I am so happy to finally get the documents I ordered, I forget to double check them to make sure everything is there.

        I have been in the car, half way home, with my partner driving and the documents on my lap, when I start reading through them and notice that a date is missing or a whole document page is missing or even a whole filing in a court case is missing. Then I have to go back and get the clerk to recopy the pages with the dates cut off or make copies of the missing pages or documents.

        It’s like the victory of success closely followed by the agony of defeat.

  29. I assume this is common knowledge around here. But if not…

    FOI How to guide for the state of Hawaii…

    http://www.state.hi.us/lrb/par/pub/foi.pdf

  30. your number of hits is growing! congratulations.

    • I feel grateful for the readers I have, and appreciate them all tremendously.
      LOL, if it multiplies by 100 I’ll graduate to being a “junior blogger”.

  31. Just saw your link in American Thinker… and am impressed at your tenacity regarding this matter. For the life of me I can’t understand how people don’t see the real issue – the NBC status. I really don’t know where he was born, but if his father is BHO Sr., then BHO II owes dual allegiance to another country which goes against what the Founding Fathers tried to convey in Article II, Section I, clause 5 of the US Constitution – IMHO.

    On a side note, I worked and lived in Hawaii for six years. That place is crazy corrupt from everything I’ve ever heard from my local friends. I can’t imagine you being able to pry any info from these people who are deeply in the tank for progressives/Obama-ilk.

    Historians are going to have a field day with this horrible period in our history.

    Keep up the good work and I pray you help find the truth in all things surrounding this matter.

    Bill

    • Thanks Bill. Ummm……we actually didn’t exactly pry things from the Dept. of Health. There are other ways [ahem].

      I am just extraordinarily fortunate that I am acquainted with people who are strong, fearless and patriotic. It took teamwork in many ways – and I owe much to the other members who helped go out there and “get” material that no one else had tried for.

  32. You are not making sense. You realize that when someone prints a computer printout of a database, they are responsible for what appears at the top of each page. Just because they included a date range at the top of the page when they printed one set, doesn’t mean they included that information when they sent the print job for another batch to the printer. Seriously, this proves absolutely zilch.

    • Seriously, you prove zilch.

      These are OFFICIAL records. Why, in your opinion, would the other Birth, Death, and Marriage index books have the date range – EXCEPT the book that has obama’s entry? Why is that?

      Lets posit that none of the books had the date range and someone dropped a stack of them, the binders became loose upon hitting the floor, now all of the pages were mixed together and they would have no way to know which page belonged to which book. F**king bummer!

      We know that it is not against the rules for the staff to remove one particular page – we know these are cheaply bound – so that scenario could happen very easily. But that is not why the books are dated. Do you REALLY believe that a Vital Stats office would overlook only this one book having the official REQUIRED information?

      Then I suggest you do something important. I suggest you contact the Dept. of Health in Honolulu yourself and ASK them. Go ahead. While you are at it you should check with your local Vital Stats office and ask them if this is how official books are normally kept. Check with a Genealogist – a real one – and ask them about it. Go ahead.

      Do you know why I suggest that you do this………………….? Guess.

  33. […] name.  The difference between the 1960-64 birth index and others was the topic of a recent finding disclosed by a […]

  34. […] […]

  35. Great work!

    I’ve sent Gary Wilmot (giveusliberty1776) over here to contact you regarding the latest AP deceptive reporting on this…April 23 2011…keep up the terrific work and contributions! 🙂

    • Thanks Dr. Kate! Sorry for the delay in posting this through- was away for the weekend and just got back.

  36. I just read a post on Real Clear Politics regarding Chris Matthews’ “interview” with Pat Buchanan. Very interesting. Here is some corroboration for you from a 4/23/11 article in cleveland.com:
    http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2011/04/in_hawaii_its_easy_to_get_birt.html

    You have something here…my guess is the person that was supposed to “fix” things in HI goofed and did not put that date range in the document.

    • Oh, that “reporter” stooge for the Honolulu DOH. I was wondering when they would try this. I read that the other day and had to shake my head. What an investigator, huh?

  37. You know, Obama made a trip out there just before being inaugurated. It might be of interest to know who has Admin rights on the database for these records. It would not be too difficult to audit the changes to the database going back to 2008 or earlier.

    • Ordering an audit……..boy, I tell ya, if that ever happened I don’t think I’d believe it. I’ll bet they have a massive system crash moments before the audit. 🙂

  38. Final comment for the night…could it possibly be that the Database Administrator that added Obama did so under duress and left the date off as a clue should it ever become an issue?

  39. I truly treasure your piece of work, Great post.

  40. […] […]

    • http://www.alipac.us/f31/barack-obamas-citizenship-questioned-129743/index524.html#post1310249 is a copy of the exchange above between ladysforest and MinutemanCDC_SC on October 29, 2012 at 6:35 pm. Relevant posts on that page are #5231, #5232, #5235, and a fourth is #5239, which reads in part, with added text in brackets:

      “Because of her age, Anna Dunham Obama had zero effect upon her son’s citizenship status. Under the INA of 1952, as in effect in 1961, she had to be at least 19 years old to confer her U.S. citizenship to her foreign-born child with an alien. She gave birth 117 days before she turned 19.

      “[The previous day, Dr. James O. W. Ang’awa in Mombasa, Kenya, signed the CPGH Certificate of Birth,] Madelyn Dunham (or perhaps her husband) applied to the DOH in Honolulu on Aug. 7, 1961, to register a birth outside a hospital for citizenship. [The DOH then forwarded to the Honolulu Star-Advertiser and the Honolulu Star-Bulletin Stanley Armour and Madelyn Dunham’s address, 6085 Kalaniana’ole Hwy., though neither Barack Obama II nor Barrack Obama, Sr., ever lived there.]

      “[Sec. of State Clinton flew to Kenya on August 3, 2009, for an official seven-nation Africa tour. On the way, she made an unofficial and unheralded stop in London, where she had the record of Barack Obama II’s Kenyan] birth expunged from the Royal Archives. But there remains a record there for [Barrack] Obama Sr., that he had a son born in the British Protectorate of Kenya in 1961. At that time, Obama Sr. had been in Hawaii continuously for approximately two years. He was, by all accounts, too broke to go anywhere off the Islands.”

  41. Little update: The link to the Mark Niesse article did not take you to said article, so I used the “Way Back Machine” (link) http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/Obamas_birth_is_easily_verified_but_few_choose_to_do_so.html?id=120561054

    I clicked the link the archive provided and it did take me to the article.

  42. […] (8/13/2013) I was looking over my post on the Birth Index Data books; It’s A Date   and I tried to click a link to a relevant “news” article in the Honolulu Star […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: