Bits of Blog Entries: 2

THIS IS WHEN THE COMMENTING ON CONTACTING HAWAII REALLY PICKED UP .. MOST OF THESE ARE COMMENTS FROM ONE POSTER ..  THESE ARE FROM LEO’S BLOG  ..  AUG. ARCHIVES;

Mi[redacted]:
August 10, 2009 at 10:17 AM

Leo–Is it fair to say that it took more than just a long form Birth Certificate (singular) for the DoH or the AG of Hawaii to verify NB Citizenship based on the following statement? It sounds like it took something supplemental as well, like an amended return with something considered ‘evidence’ of birth place or parental lineage, therefore Dr. Fukino says she has seen the “vital recordS” (plural). Letters from a hospital submitted LATE as proof of birth, for example, are considered ‘vital records.’ I know because I asked that myself.

If already he had a long form BC that verfied NBC, that would be enough to verify it and no other records would have any relevance.

““I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‛i 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.””

[Ed. I can’t answer the question except to say it’s possible. ]

[redacted]Says:
August 12, 2009 at 7:04 PM Re AZ, on November 30, 2007, Obama signed the Arizona “Candidate Nomination Paper” (A.R.S. 16–242), which declared “I am a natural born citizen of the United States.” Since that happened before taking office, he should be accountable in court for the veracity of that statement. Why can’t someone say, hey, he declared what has never yet been established as a fact, and he refuses to produce a certified copy of his vault birth certificate. I demand a trial of truth.

Mi [redacted]Says:
August 13, 2009 at 11:24 AM

LEO, This post is in reference to the state ballot forms that were signed by NP and BO claiming that BO is a NBC or qualified under the Constitution.

I realize the ‘False Claims’ Act generally has to do with defrauding the government of tax payer money, but could it cover the DNC/NP’s false claims, too?

§ 3729. False Claims

(a) LIABILITY FOR CERTAIN ACTS

(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), any person who—

(A) knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval;
http://www.taf.org

claim
1) v. to make a demand for money, for property, or for enforcement of a right provided by law.

In other words and in this case: any person who knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for approval;
(The claim in this case being: NP/DNC/BO making a demand for enforcement of a (Constitutional) right provided by law.)

Hopefully, this is not a completely dumb question that will be met with your stinging criticism. I ask because I was directed to http://www.taf.org by a legal group I was privately looking to get advice from on this matter.

[L. I like it T. How about his paycheck? Isn’t that a claim for money? Who is eligible to bring such a claim? That is the question.]


Mi [redacted]Says:
August 13, 2009 at 4:01 PM

And by the way–Orly never tried to file a UIPA request, at all. I asked the Office of Information Practices in Hawaii, this is what they said:

“We have never received a request for records from Orly Taitz. Previous requestors have cited HRS 92F-12(3), and all were given the same response that you received from DOH. The director will be sending you a letter shortly regarding your appeal.”

HRS 92F-12(3) says this:Government Records that MUST be disclosed “[And] Records where compelling circumstances show an effect on the health or safety of any individual;

Seems like she would have at least tried to argue this provision, to me anyway.

  1. Mi [redacted]Says:
    August 18, 2009 at 7:58 AM

    I disagree. Dr. Fukino used the words “I have seen the original vital RECORDS..”

    They have no choice but to produce MORE than one document now. Why would Dr. Fukino need to look at anything more than ONE long form birth certificate to verify NBC, unless BO’s records were amended?

    One long form birth certificate just won’t do. Besides, even if they did produce just one record–it’s sounds likely there will be a black line through at least one piece of information and something ‘new’ written above it. (This is vital record procedure anyway.)

    We should be holding out for more now.

    “Leo’s prediction that they will produce a perfect HI BC and Fukido and all the HI officials will swear that it is genuine, is likely to happen.”

  2. Mi [redacted]Says:
    August 18, 2009 at 8:10 AM

    Let me reiterate it this way, too: even if they cough up one pristine long form birth certificate–they won’t be able to say “it’s on file in accordance with policy and procedure.’ Their policy is to strike through amended information with ink–not issue a new long form all together.

  3. Mi S[redacted]ays:
    August 18, 2009 at 8:39 AM

    I have poked around on the web–it looks like Kapiolani Medical Center was built in the 1970s and merged with Kauikeolani Children’s Hospital then. So, if BO’s ORIGINAL Birth Certificate says ‘Kapiolani Medical Center’–we KNOW something is wrong, wrong, wrong.

    It didn’t exist as far as I can tell, in 1961. I would love someone to double check that–I’ve been known to make a mistake or two.=)

    [Ed. That would be wild, Ti. Keep us updated and please elaborate on your research.]

  4. Mi [redacted]Says:
    August 18, 2009 at 9:25 AM

    Here’s the problem: I cannot get the Hawaii Dept. of Health to answer even benign questions about policy and procedure.

    I want to know, “In what cases would an individual have more than one record on file with the Hawaii Department of Health in order to verify that he/she is a ‘natural born citizen?”

    If I am understanding (without their help) correctly, only a ‘change’ with a submitted item of proof (a hospital letter, dna tests, that kind of thing) would cause ‘original birth certificate’ (10/31/08) to become ‘original vital records’ (7/27/09). The ‘proof’ becomes a vital record and filed with his long-form according to the Hawaii Dept. of Health. That much I did get out of them before they clammed up. Of course it makes me think of that letter to Kapiolani from BO on their .org website–but it could be something related to his parents, as well, obviously. I keep returning to the letter because we know that was written in January ‘08–in between the two Dept. of Health statements.

    And here’s how I figured this out on ‘accident’–it’s kind of funny. I asked Janice Okubo on 7/27/09 if they had BO’s ‘amended’ birth certificate on file in accordance to policy and procedure. I THOUGHT I was asking about an ‘adoption’ birth certificate but found out later, I should have asked about a ’supplementary’ birth certificate. ‘Supplementary’ is what Hawaii calls an (adopted) original birth certificate.

    But guess what? An ‘Amended’ record really IS a correct term–but, for a ‘changed’ birth certificate. Inadvertently, I think I asked the right question.

    The larger point that I am unraveling is that BO has AT THE VERY LEAST amended (changed) his birth records. That is the only way, I can see, that more than one vital record would need to be seen ‘that verify’ BO is a natural born citizen. If I am understanding from you correctly–an adoption won’t change ‘natural born citizenship.’ It happens at birth (jus sanguis and jus solis–is that correct?).

    He could still also have an adopted ’supplementary birth certificate.’ But I believe we can say for certain now–his ‘vital record’ was AMENDED and became ‘vital records’. When? Why?

    [L. The more confusion they sew the better off they are for it.]

  5. Mi [redacted]Says:
    August 18, 2009 at 9:35 AM

    I am not sure if I need to remind you, but Okubo sent me the only press release I know of with the 7/27/09 statement, in direct response to my question about the DoH having BO’s ‘amended’ birth record on file in accordance to policy and procedure.

    I didn’t see any reference to that statement on the web until hours later and still, never a press release.

    I don’t know if you remembered me telling you that or not=O

  6. Mi[redacted] Says:
    August 18, 2009 at 9:40 AM

    Oh, and she sent the press release to me at 11:45 at night my time, 6:45 p.m. Hawaii time–kinda late for a Monday night on a gov’ment job, no?

  7. Mi[redacted] Says:
    August 18, 2009 at 9:42 AM

    Here’s the text from the press release for quick reference:

    For Immediate Release: July 27, 2009 09-063 STATEMENT BY HEALTH DIRECTOR CHIYOME FUKINO, M.D. “I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai􀇥i 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.” ###

  8. Mi [redacted]Says:
    August 18, 2009 at 9:51 AM

    The DoH windows are open until 2:30 p.m., administrative offices are open until 4:30 p.m.–nothing concrete of course, but worth a double take IMO.

  9. Mi [redacted]Says:
    August 18, 2009 at 10:05 AM

    What would also be wild is if BO is basing his strategy on Chester Arthur in this way:

    Arthur created phony rumors about his birth place, year etc… in order to obfuscate the REAL issue–his parents citizenship.

    Could Obama be making a REAL issue about birth place seem like a phony rumor in order to capitalize on the Chestur Arthur’s success? The AP article yesterday says ‘maybe’ to me.

    [L. I wonder if Obama ever did a college or law school paper on Chester Arthur. One of my readers originally made this suggestion – and it’s a question loaded with intrigue.]

  10. Mi[redacted] Says:
    August 18, 2009 at 10:20 AM

    It is, you could almost bet that every record that’s been hidden leads to the answers we are looking for: medical records, tax records, birth records and COLLEGE RECORDS.

    I have a feeling there is a HUGE paper trail just waiting to be found. This is BO’s life’s work.

    Like I said the truth will come out–there just too much of it to hide forever. 75 years is the statute of limitations on a lot of these good items. Hopefully, we won’t have to wait that long–but it’s all there and we know right where to look because he has said ‘no’ to so much.

  11. Mi [redacted]Says:
    August 18, 2009 at 10:31 AM

    And one day SCOTUS will be implicated in this, too!=)

  12. Mi[redacted] Says:
    August 18, 2009 at 10:49 AM

    –”But I believe we can say for certain now–his ‘vital record’ was AMENDED and became ‘vital records’. When? Why?

    [Ed. The more confusion they sew the better off they are for it.]“–

    The only pieces missing are whether an amended record is the ONLY way more than one record would be needed to verify natural born citizenship.

    If that answer is yes–then WHEN did that happen? Because we know when Nancy Pelosi certified him as constitutionally eligible. If those dates don’t mesh–I’d say there is a lawsuit there somewhere?

    Am I wrong on that?

  13. Mi[redacted] Says:
    August 18, 2009 at 11:21 AM

    Let me say this, we don’t need to know what’s in his vital records to solve this riddle. Knowing what kind of vital records and when they were filed is all policy and procedure info that we are entitled to know under the Uniformed Information Practices Act and it’s all we need to know in terms of whether to regard BO as president and start filing lawsuits they cannot ignore.

  14. Mi [redacted]Says:
    August 18, 2009 at 11:50 AM

    I just sent this to them–they won’t answer though=(

    This is an informal request for records:

    • I request the blank/voided or ‘unfilled’ forms issued by the Department of Health that Dr. Fukino saw per her public statement below, be disclosed OR a list of those forms & types of records. Please let me know if this is not clear or if there is a more suitable record(s) to be requesting:

    • I request a list of any office supplies used to amend the “vital records” that Dr. Fukino saw per her public statement below, be disclosed:

    • I request a record of receipt by the DoH for any proof that was offered and/or used to amend any of the vital records that Dr. Fukino saw per her public statement below, be disclosed:

    STATEMENT BY HEALTH DIRECTOR CHIYOME FUKINO, M.D.
    “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.”

  15. Mi[redacted]Says:
    August 18, 2009 at 12:47 PM

    Ok, this is unclear to me, now–it sounds like there was a maternity hospital that opened in 1909 and that the medical center alone was built in the 1970s–then merged.

    I just wanted to clear up any errors–which I figured I might have made….

    “I have poked around on the web–it looks like Kapiolani Medical Center was built in the 1970s and merged with Kauikeolani Children’s Hospital then. So, if BO’s ORIGINAL Birth Certificate says ‘Kapiolani Medical Center’–we KNOW something is wrong, wrong, wrong.

    It didn’t exist as far as I can tell, in 1961. I would love someone to double check that–I’ve been known to make a mistake or two.=)”

  16. (Ed. THIS SUMS UP MY FEELINGS:)

  17. Leo,

    Might you post this for the benefit of Mi T: I greatly appreciate and admire your work. You have cracked open some very important areas that “just might” blow this whole thing wide open, but none of us can know – for certain. Hence, please keep this in mind because it does hold THE possibility of distracting some from the one certain matter: Obama’s father was not a citizen.

    [redacted]

Mi[redacted] Says:
August 18, 2009 at 7:33 PM

Here’s what my husband got from them today. So, I think there are ways to get to the bottom of it. The followig receipt would give a date and verify and amendment. So there.

From the OIP:
You also asked if: Could you also tell me if this is a valid request if you haven’t already answered my earlier email?

1.) I request an electronic copy of the invoice and receipt for the fee(s) charged to and paid by President Barack Obama, or anyone claiming to represent him, for amendments made to his vital records.

Yes, you may ask for a copy of the invoice and receipt. If the agency has the documents in electronic form, or can easily convert the documents into an electronic form, then they may send it to you electronically. If no amendments were made, there would not be any such documents and the agency should inform you of that fact.


Mi[redacted] Says:
August 18, 2009 at 7:50 PM

This was included in the last email to the OIP, and I assure you, the lawyer that replied did not disagree with the deductive reasoning:

“Thank you. I understand she didn’t make any reference to an ‘amended’ record, however she did make reference to more than one record “original vital records”(plural). I suppose I understand that to mean there MUST be an amended record and supportive material (vital recordS). Otherwise, why would more than one record need to be seen verifying the President is a natural born citizen and/or born in Hawaii. A simple original long form birth certificate would do it.”

[redacted]Says:
August 19, 2009 at 12:36 AM

Mi T,

Sorry to dissapoint, but there has been a lot of chatter on the web about there being more than 1 vital record, and amended record, etc. since Okubo said “vital records”.

Wht is confusing is that she said “original vital records”: originals are not ammended, are they? Vital records are birth, death, marriage, and adoption, no?

The only case I can see that an original vital record would be ammended and still be called original, is when the first one was incompletely filled out, and the amenmend completes it. If the original filing was a birth at home declaration, which according to HI law could be filed on the testimony of one relative (the mother and father don’t even have to sign or be there to file), then subsequently there might need to be an amenmend, because HI law requires that such a filing be verified by an official by requesting more information etc..


  1. Mi [redacted]Says:
    August 19, 2009 at 8:14 AM

    “The only case I can see that an original vital record would be ammended and still be called original, is when the first one was incompletely filled out, and the amenmend completes it.”

    Think of it this way–the clerk in the office makes a ‘clerical error’ on your birth place. You offer a piece of proof that says you were actually born in ‘X.’

    That ‘proof’ is an original document now–you don’t lose the ‘jus solis’ part of your natural born citizenship because of a clerical error. It’s there when you are born–it’s the ‘original’ information.

    There is a difference between ‘late’ registry and ‘amending’ a ‘name change’ from a court decree and even amending your ‘birth place’ due to a clerical error.

    Do you see the difference now?

    Hawaii statute does go on to say that the amendment & proof may not hold up to scrutiny if used as evidence in court. Now THAT is what I am going after.

    Let me know if I have not explained well.

  2. Mi[redacted] Says:
    August 19, 2009 at 8:17 AM

    [L. Keep going Mi Ti. If you get anything of serious interest I’ll have you publish a story here as a guest blogger – if you’re interested.]

    Yes. And if I find out anything, you better believe I will be here first with it.

  3. Mi [redacted]Says:
    August 19, 2009 at 8:21 AM

    [Most people think I’m not interested in the BC issue – not true. I do want to see it. ]

    I hope you remember just a few weeks ago I showed up here NOT interested in BHO’s birthplace. I was hoping for a one-termer who denied his adoption by Lolo.

    What Fukino said on 7/27/09 brought me to this point. I think I took the exact logical journey you are talking about. My interest is peaked.

  4. Mi [redacted]Says:
    August 19, 2009 at 8:36 AM

    [“Even when a hospital in Honolulu started using an image of a letter purporting to be from Obama acknowledging the facility as his place of birth, the White House refused to confirm the validity of the letter.”
    http://community.livejournal.com/ontd_political/3846944.html

    I think it’s unimportant–if the letter exists, it exists. The WH doesn’t have to confirm or deny anything. The hospital says it’s real (but they are careful to not outwardly confirm the content of the letter either.)

    [L. I think it is important to know the official White House position on the letter. There’s no reason we can’t know that except stonewalling.]

  5. Mi[redacted] Says:
    August 19, 2009 at 8:49 AM

    I think it’s also important to reiterate that the press release referring to the “original vital records” was sent to me in direct response to my question to the Dept of Health about whether they had seen that BHO’s ‘amended’ birth certificate was on file in accordance to policy & procedure. That was earlier in the day on 7/27/09–the press didn’t have this statement until the middle of the night between 7/27 and 7/28.

    I read their answer as an affirmative one.

    [“The only case I can see that an original vital record would be ammended and still be called original, is when the first one was incompletely filled out, and the amenmend completes it.”]

Mi [redacted]Says:
August 19, 2009 at 10:23 AM

Holy crap. I just did a little reading and you have to file a UIPA records request to make CORRECTIONS to your vital records!!!!!!!!!!!!

Read this from the UIPA manual:

CORRECTION OF PERSONAL RECORDS
An individual has a right to correct or amend factual errors,
misrepresentations, or misleading entries in his or her personal
record. Part III sets out the procedures for correction.

So I immediately sent this:

Dear Dr. Fukino and Mr. Tsukiyama,

I am not sure which department should get this UIPA records request, please see that the right person addresses it.

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.”

1.) I request an electronic copy of any and all UIPA requests made by President Barack Obama or anyone claiming to represent him for access to his personal vital records so that he could make ‘corrections’ to his vital record information.

2.) I request an electronic copy of the ruling(s) or opinion(s) of those record requests.

This request is a Hawaii UIPA (Uniform Information Practices Act) request under section 92F-12.

Mi [redacted]Says:
August 19, 2009 at 3:40 PM

Leo-

This from the OIP:
“Yes, you may request other people’s previously filed UIPA requests to agencies under the UIPA. Please refer to OIP Op. Ltr. No. 90-37 (which you may access on our website) which discusses their general availability and the possible exceptions or exemptions that may apply. Because a UIPA request is to be made directly to the agency that maintains the record desired, OIP will generally not have a copy of a UIPA request made to an agency. Accordingly, a request for access to a UIPA request filed with an agency and any response made by the agency should be made to the specific agency…”

I would love for you to read the opinion letter they refer to in terms of ‘disclosure of other people’s UIPA requests.’ If I am reading it correctly, UIPA requests ARE subject to disclosure–except for significant privacy information ‘DOB, first and last name, current address, ethnicity, SS#’–I think that may be the only possible relevant info in this case.

http://hawaii.gov/oip/opinionletters/opinion%2090-37.pdf

Mi [redacted]Says:
August 20, 2009 at 2:27 PM

Just an fyi, the OIP verified that a UIPA request for previously filed UIPA requests filed under part III would be heard on a case-to-case basis because there is no precedent. Generally, the state does look to FOIA for guidance but FOIA doesn’t have an ‘absolute’ rule on this either. Therefore, the following argument was added to the UIPA request sent yesterday:

Since President Obama’s UIPA request(s) is not covered by HRS §338 and OIP Op. Ltr. No. 90-37 sets out only a general rule that UIPA requests made under Part II for general records will generally be disclosed subject to redaction under an applicable exception under section 92F-13, Hawaii Revised Statutes; and in that letter is a paragraph that references FOIA and states “that the U.S. Department of Justice has GENERALLY concluded that individuals have a protectable privacy interest…” rather than saying “ALWAYS concluded” I ask that you will consider my UIPA request on it’s merits.

In particular, I would like to argue that I am referencing indirectly Dr. Fukino’s public statement (7/27/09) that she saw ‘original vital records’ (plural) by requesting the President Obama’s UIPA request(s). Using deductive reasoning, I see that the only way MORE than one record would verify birthplace and natural-born citizenship is if there were evidence filed in an amendment that would correct factual errors made when his original birth certificate was filed. I am not having luck with verifying the deductive reasoning I used with the Hawaii DoH because they won’t answer simple procedural/policy questions even when I don’t reference any specific individual. However, the typical person (I use that term loosely) would have only a single long-form birth certificate to verify both birthplace and natural-born citizenship. Let me know if I have not explained that clearly.

Furthermore, I am curious about ‘clerical errors’ and feel the public has a right to know when a clerical error is made by the state. I don’t seek any of the significant privacy information and do not seek the incorrect or correct or corrected information–just a record that the state made an error. Even if it was 48+ years ago.

Mi [redacted]Says:
August 20, 2009 at 4:21 PM

PLUS this section of HRS §338 is important I think:

HRS §338-17 Late or altered certificate as evidence.
The probative value of a “late” or “altered” certificate shall be determined by the judicial or administrative body or official before whom the certificate is offered as evidence. [L 1949, c 327, §21; RL 1955, §57-20; HRS §338-17; am L 1997, c 305, §4]

If he’s offered any of his altered or amended certificates as evidence before a court OR Congress OR the Senate–the accompanying documents should be examined, too.

I don’t see where he’s exactly done that though, he’s used FactCheck as evidence instead–how probative is that?

[L. This section is cute. It means if the vital record were altered or amended, Fukino doesn’t have to consider that. Just think about thay. She could be looking at a piece of paper which is all crossed out and amended with magic marker, but as long as she’s not bothered then there’s no probative value and she accept such altered documents for whatever purpose.]


  1. Mi[redacted] Says:
    August 21, 2009 at 12:01 PM

    This is how I worded my additional argument that BHO waived his right to privacy. I wish I was better at getting a point across without being too wordy but I am all I have to work with. Also, I will make a nice neat kit so that others can make their own UIPA requests:

    “Dear Dr. Fukino-

    …President Obama clearly waived his right to privacy concerning his UIPA request(s) to access and amend his own vital record information.

    On July, 27, 2009, you either had the authority or were given permission to tell the public that the DoH maintains “original vital records” that verify his natural-born citizenship and/or that he was born in Hawaii.

    He or you waived his privacy concerning his UIPA request because now the public knows that the President added other vital records to his ’single’ original long form birth certificate making them plural: “original vital records.” There are only two pieces of information relevant to natural-born citizenship: birth place and parentage. Amendments were made to one or both of those pieces of information and you told the public so on 7/27/09 when you made this statement:

    “I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‛i 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.”

    In other words, you said this:

    “I…have seen the original vital records…verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen.”

    A single document could verify that an individual is a natural-born citizen and born in Hawaii. For the President, it took more than one. Therefore, it took an amendment to his record and evidential support which is also maintained by the DoH as original vital record(s). You can only make corrections with respect to information relevant to birthplace and/or NBC status by making a UIPA request for access.

    The word ‘original’ indicates no new birth certificate was issued, rather the original was marked up with corrections, which is what happens according to statute to amended certificates.

    Your statement is public now–the public has the right to ask for records surrounding this statement but not for information significant to privacy. The president’s identity and the fact that he filed a UIPA request or an amendment are public knowledge–they are no longer private. The President’s privacy was waived on this matter and I hope you will consider this as you deliberate my UIPA request. You will not be violating privacy by disclosing his UIPA request with the proper redactions.”

  2. Mi [redacted]Says:
    August 21, 2009 at 12:04 PM

    [In other words, you said this:

    “I…have seen the original vital records…verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen.”]

    Geez, when I see it like this–she IS saying specifically those records verify BOTH citizenship AND birth place.

    We can say definitively he changed his BIRTH PLACE. Look at that!!

    [L. I don’t follow you. Elaborate.]

(Her answer to Leo:)
Mi [redacted]Says:
August 21, 2009 at 5:20 PM

On second thought, I don’t think it’s necessary to pin down from her statement what exactly was amended–that’s a close parsing of her words. But I strongly lean towards that now.=)

[Ed. I don’t follow you. Elaborate.]

[Did you follow with this version–take out the nbc wording:

“I…have seen the original vital records…verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i”]

The vital records (plural) verify he was born in Hawaii. You would only need one record to verify where you were born….]
Mi[redacted] Says:

  1. Break it down further–he amended his birth place:

    “I…have seen the original vital records…verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i”]

    “AND I…have seen the original vital records…verifying Barack Hussein Obama is a natural-born American citizen.”]

i[redacted] Says:
August 21, 2009 at 1:08 PM

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 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.

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.”

I redacted the names in case the authors would prefer.

FROM MISST’s BLOG:

[redacted] 1 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.


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: