I suggest you read the original entry at the pink link below.  It has additional images and information:

click link



UPDATE:  A new image and some new information has been added to the original post – at ABOVE LINK.

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.


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.

Discuss amongst yourselves.


. .

4 Responses to “(9) It’s A Date – INDEX DATA BOOK IMAGES”

  1. Just posted a link to this excellent work at FR.
    Thank you for your dedication to unraveling this mess!
    Love the Debbie Downer post today! Go West!

  2. Hi…so the covers to the indexs have the date range and the pages have the date range but not the page with obama’s name. did the pages before and after obamas page have the date range? i have a honolulu star advetisor article that says they went to look at it and found it on page 1,218 and they mention the date range of ‘1960 and 1964″. Linda Jordan

    • In the Index book with the obama entry there is no date range on ANY of the pages. All of the photos we have seen from that one book lack the date range. However, another researcher has a page from the “same” book, which she says was sent to her by the HI Dept of Health, about the same time these pics were taken, which DOES have the date ranges printed on the page in the correct way. I forget which name she requested, (not obamas) and she was sent a copy from a page in the 1960 – 1964 Birth Index that did have the date range printed. I personally can not authentic that the page she has displayed on her blog was in fact sent by the DOH, but it does look to be the real deal. So, why would the DoH print off a new version? Why leave out the official information of the date range? Why have two different versions of the same book? There should be no required adjustments to a book that is nearly fifty years old. Since it is so easy to print off an entire new “copy”, they cannot have been worried about the “original” being damaged, and so might have exchanged it with a new print off lacking the official date range.
      Just another anomaly.

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: