Grassroots Commentary

Why Obama's Birth Certificate Can't be Believed

Adrien Nash · Aug. 5, 2013

The reasons to doubt that Honolulu was the location of Obama’s birth are all tied to what is missing.

It begins with the absence of any eyewitness, even the women who gave birth at the supposed same time and place. No one remembers him or her. No photos of proud mother with newborn. Wouldn’t someone have taken one of an only child with her firstborn? Not even one photo of pregnancy – the most dramatic event of Ann’s young life. No hospital claiming bragging rights as the place that a unique president, a Hawaiian supposedly, was born. No public hospital admissions log that the public is allowed to examine. No “half hand written, and half typed” affidavit “vital record” in possession of the H.DoH that anyone has been allowed to examine even though a supposedly real birth certificate image is fully public, nullifying privacy concerns.

No Hawaiian official has ever referred to an original Hawaiian hospital birth certificate for Obama. No Hawaiian official has ever testified under oath as to anything about Obama’s birth record. No Hawaiian official has released a statement that wasn’t couched in carefully written, legally ambiguous language. No statement made by any Hawaiian official can be taken as true because of a state and party and ideological bias toward supporting their favorite Hawaiian son – son of one of the most socialistic, welfare-dependent states of all.

The birth certificate image is couched in mystery, with nothing provable about its origin and legitimacy, but everything cloaked in attorney-client privilege, and deliberately so. Even Obama himself was careful to never once mention the long-form birth certificate that he appeared before reporters to present. It was never even allowed in his presence (plausible deniability).

Not a single unbiased, questioning person was allowed to exam what was supposedly created by the Hawaiian DoH. No one can testify that it was not merely a color photocopy of a digital file that was fabricated on a computer using original Obama and non-Obama sources supplied by an insider in the Hawaiian DOH.

No one can explain why the birth certificate of Virginia Sunahara, born within a day of Obama, was missing from the database (and presumably the archive) when inquiry was first made. Nor why her brother was barred by the DoH and a judge from obtaining a copy of her long-form even though she died just days after her birth, nor why her registration number, seen on her short-form, is totally out of sequence when that would have been impossible under the strict administration of Verna Lee – the registrar at that time.

No one can explain how ink came to be located in the exact perfect position in relation to the letter “a” of the stamped signature of the Registrar, Alvin Onaka, to result in an unmistakable appearance of a smiling face. If moved the slightest amount in any direction the effect would not exist. How great does one’s gullibility have to be to believe in such an unbelievable coincidence when it can’t be dismissed as not being a forger’s covert signature mark?

How can Hawaiian officials be believed when their own website proclaims that the digital cyber-image pdf on the White House website is the official certified birth certificate issued by Hawaii? How can an image on a monitor be a certified document? If they can be so sloppy (stupidly or deliberately) with an official government statement, then what else have they been stupidly or deliberately “sloppy” about? How far are they willing to go in their bending of factuality in order to defend their vaunted native son?

How can an image, or a print from it, be certified by any legitimate authority when it is not signed nor embossed and is nothing more than an abstract? – a digital creation from an unknown and unprovable source?

What business or organization in the world would accept a document or contract of major importance without a signature when every legal document created requires one?

Who would buy a million dollar bridge offered by a Nigerian “businessman” based on trusting in a contract stamped with a facsimile of a signature?

Why does the unauthenticated “Letter of Verification” from Hawaii to Arizona Sec. of State Bennet regarding Obama not bear the actual signature of a human being? How can one have confidence that the secretary that wields the registrar’s rubber signature stamp ever even consults with the registrar?

How is such an inauthentic substitute for a human signature proof that the person it represents is even alive?

How can Obama’s birth place be assured when Hawaii allows and allowed out-of-state births to be registered for the purpose of obtaining a birth certificate, including foreign nationals with one year of residency?

Why did Obama Sr. not capitalize on having an American child when seeking an extension of his Visa in late August 1961? Why would one not conclude that he didn’t know of his birth even though the State Dept. did?

Why is the State Department microfilm record of the Customs cards filled-out by persons entering the U.S. in the first week or 10 days of August 1961 missing from the archive, but no others?

Why is there no evidence of a husband & wife marriage between Obama’s parents, no witness testimony, no photos of the engaged couple, nor honeymoon, nor place of cohabitation? Why did Obama, or his ghost writer, claim that they lived together for two years when they didn’t live together ever? If that can be a lie, what can’t be?

Where was Ann Dunham between February and August of 1961? Who can prove or show that she was not living in her familiar, preferred home-environment of Seattle during many of the later months of her pregnancy? Who can show that she did not want to hand her child over to an adoption agency when that is what a note by a federal official in Hawaii states the parents were considering?

Who can show that she didn’t resort to seeking adoptive parents in Canada (Vancouver) because no parents in Washington volunteered to adopt?

Who can show that the Hawaiian witness (and future adoring teacher of Obama) who heard the statement by a doctor – “Stanley had a baby” did not hear “Stanley has a baby” – or that either statement indicates the place of birth? And why would anyone make such a statement to someone who didn’t even know the person being mentioned?

Why has Obama steadfastly refused to present one of his “two certified copies” to any court under any circumstances? Why has every court folded and caved to Obama even when, in one glaring instance, his lawyer failed to even show up in court?

What naïve fool would assume that Obama-appointed functionaries in the government, including the NSA, IRS, and FBI did not and do not feed his political operatives private information, like that which Harry Reid claimed before the Senate regarding Romney’s supposed non-payment of taxes? If one cannot assume that they don’t, then what else can’t one assume?

What naïve fool would assume that the revelations of Edward Snowden do not reveal anything about how secrets are uncovered and covered-up by government? What naïve fool would assume that key Obama supporters in the Hawaiian government wouldn’t justify “the means” used to provide him a way to present the appearance of having a Hawaiian birth certificate by “the ends” of not seeing his presidential legitimacy crack apart and crumble?

Even if none of these possibilities reflect reality, they definitely could and you can’t tell the difference between the truth and the lie because none of them have been answered.

It's Right. It's Free.