I have suspected almost from the beginning that the “birther controversy” is an engineered crisis, a political smear fueled and fanned by professionals, with an army of dupes to carry the message. We’ve seen efforts to create fake grass roots movements already and the phenomenon even has a name, “astroturfing.” Joseph Farah or WorldNetDaily probably deserves much of the credit, saying himself that “we essentially created it.”
Political misinformation campaigns and dirty tricks go back to the founding of our country; however, there is a basic sea change with sophisticated computer software and the Internet. The automation of dirty tricks is a matter of great concern to me.
The latest technique that has surfaced is “persona management,” software that can maintain multiple online identities (complete with IP addresses, email addresses and accounts on social networks), undetectable by sophisticated analysis, allowing a single software operator to appear as many people in online forums. A few agents can look for all intents and purposes like a movement. Today, this type of sophisticated manipulation is in the domain of large corporations, but perhaps it is being used by political operatives as well.
The Daily KOS has written about this, and I highly recommend their article, UPDATED: the HB Gary Email That Should Concern Us All.
Thanks to Sef for the tip.
Good you pick that up first.
I was expecting (and still am) the birthers to use this to back up their claims of the “Obots” that are “after them” and whatnot…
Well, the birthers have always shown that the only thing they excell at is sock puppetry…
News Flash! You can’t trust what you read on the internet.
For the last several years I have come to believe that the world is suffering from information overload. Anyone can find something to back up their point. Too much of the information you find prominently is there because of financial, political, or religious interests where the prominence is driven through fraud, misdirection, or zealotry. A good example are the many professional organizations which advertise that they can get whatever you want to become the top listing on searches.
Agreed to a general extent.
There is a difference, just as there is anywhere in the world…even with info in the “pre-internet” days.
Some sources have been around and built up a reputable reputation and are much more trustworthy than others.
Most of the polticial/etc. propoganda hack sites are quite obvious in their agenda if someone spends just a moment to look at them objectively.
It really isn’t that hard to distinguish reputable sources from clearly biased ones. It really isn’t that hard to distinguish official sites from mere amateurs slinging opinions.
Unfortunately, too many people are lazy or merely gullible and not good at being able to understand or make those objective distinctions (they lack critical thinking skills) or worse – intentionally self-selecting info which only confirms their own biases and ignoring everything else.
G,
You’ve hit on the key skill for using the web – determining the quality of content. I believe that it may be possible to identify the tactics used by these fake personae to disrupt discussions and project false consensus.
My reason for mentioning this was so that Dr. C. could be aware of the potential existence of such s/w & take appropriate precautions if they became necessary. I have no direct knowledge if this s/w actually exists.
The good Doctor wrote: I have suspected almost from the beginning that the “birther controversy” is an engineered crisis, a political smear fueled and fanned by professionals, with an army of dupes to carry the message. We’ve seen efforts to create fake grass roots movements already and the phenomenon even has a name, “astroturfing.”
First, a question: Precisely who do you believe would benefit from such an engineered crisis?
Secondly, I believe that the whole thing started more organically, without help from anyone consciously pushing it forward. Once it was on a roll, though, people on both sides began to propel it along.
Regardless of who started it or promoted it, at this point, the birther movement is nearly uncontrollable. As the birthers become more blatantly racist and scream more loudly than ever for an overthrow of the government, they become more of a force to be reckoned with (notice Boehner just this week refusing to repudiate them).
Boehner and Company are playing a very dangerous game in refusing to repudiate these nuts.
According to a newsreport, Koch Industries are busing their bought-and-paid-for “grassroots” movement to support their bought-and-paid-for governor in Wisconsin.
To quote the article:
What’s really pathetic is those delusional teabaggers who don’t realize that they are going to be protesting against their own interests–against good-paying jobs; against half-way decent benefits; against the very American right to organize for a better life. What’s really sad is that the people populating this “grassroots” movement are so brain-washed they don’t see that they’ve been made dupes of corporate America.
I couldn’t agree more.
I agree that original birther rumors were not engineered; they came from pro-Clinton bloggers. Legitimacy was added by Phil Berg’s lawsuit.
However, I further believe that the birther business would essentially have died out following the election without professional help, with WorldNetDaily being the most visible player. Belief in the numbers we’re seeing simply cannot be attributed to a few piss-ant birther web sites.
Energizing the fringe is the benefit of it all. That leads to funds and votes.
Without WorldNetDaily, I think the movement would have died out, and I do not think for a moment that Joseph Farah has any doubts that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.
So basically it was just a matter of Farrah wanting to make money off hard-working morons?
I want to add some additional clarification and expand on what Dr. C said, because it is important that the details of the “birth” and “life” of the Birther movement don’t become lost in the mists of time.
It is true that the group that initially generated the Birther myths and brought them to “national attention” was initially mainly associated with a loose organization of players that would become known as the PUMAs. Berg being the primary PUMA “lawyer” starting up the lawsuit angle. Although Berg was no stranger to conspiracy mongering, as he also was quite involved in a bunch of junk “9/11 Truther” lawsuits, so he has an extensive history of being off the deep end.
However, the PUMAs and the early forms of what became Birthers didn’t start to coalesce into something of substance until the May-August timeframe of 2008. There were some significant actions and a few key “players” that seeded the PUMA-Birther angle going back a number of months before that, even back to late 2007.
At a campaign strategy level, Mark Penn of HRC’s campaign appears to have been one of the key driving forces seeking to cast Obama as “the other” in people’s minds. On online forum discussions that would eventually move over to formative PUMA sites, there were several people “feeding” this “otherness” conspiracy to that susceptible crowd that were not likely actual HRC supporters themselves – quite a few bloggers following these discussions in the early days started noting that some of them seemed to be “outside actors” either from existing fringes of the right or even more common – connected to Stormfront , who started “contributing” to help stoke the fires. So it seems clear that there were a few keyboard players out there who saw an opportunity and had an agenda to manipulate people’s fears, hatreds and paranoia and push bigotry from long before there was any official Birther movement.
Moving on to the topic of post-election “professional” help to keep the birthers alive, WND is clearly one of the largest players with a long history of a clear agenda of political propaganda against the “left” and using sleazy lies and scaremongering to con their followers to donate money to them. That seems to be their entire business model.
Certain other existing RW propaganda outfits were also players driving this – Gary Kreep’s USJF comes to mind. Although most would not view them as a “media outlet” for propaganda spreading, one should not overlook how active Kreep and his organization are on making frequent appearances on various low-end radio and cable tv shows – often ones associated with right wing or evangelical causes. They also supposedly have a fairly extensive and active email distribution list.
Most importantly, let’s not forget the whole cast of characters behind the Terry Lakin case and circus show . From the beginning, it was fairly evident that Lakin wasn’t just some crazy Birther operating on his own. He was clearly coached and goaded into taking his foolish actions by some clear players with a moneyed agenda behind them. From the various members of the Hemenway family (Margaret, John, etc) to the “Defend Our Freedoms Foundation” to “American Patriot Foundation” to “Safeguardourconstitution” to Paul Rolf Jensen – there seems to be a whole network of operatives behind the scenes that were fronting and financing this circus show debacle from the outset. The better-quality production values and frequent web videos and press releases from the get go of Lakin’s appearance on things made it pretty clear that he was just a patsy and that there was an organized group of others with money puppet-pimping him out there and pulling the strings behind the scenes. If anyone ever wanted to do good investigative journalism on those currently trying to engineer and finance the Birther movement, they would be wise to follow the connections and money behind these web of players that fronted willing dupe Terry Lakin as their sacrificial lamb for their cause.
That is only part of it. Farrah is not just a mere con fleecing the gullible to support himself.
He has a long history of being a political propoganda ideologue with a clear and sinister agenda to use Orwellian tactics to try to drive or shape events and opinions.
I think your qualifier ‘some’ was inappropriate – ‘lots of’ would have been better… 😉
That was very insightful. I think you hit the nail on the head that the organic development of the birhters has been manipulated by various people with different agendas from the beginning. Someone should write a book on the birther movement – do you need something to do with your time now that you’re retired, Doc? You seem to be one of the best ‘birther historians’ around… There’s plenty of drama to make for a compelling story – and all of the mind-numbing stupidity, too!
There are others better than I, and I already have enough birther in my life.
I’m not sure that I agree with the former, but I can sympathize with the latter… Someone should document this, though – I think once the 2012 election is in the books (and President Obama will never be running for office again) and the vitality of the movement has ebbed and the last few hard-core birtherstani left are longing for the glory days when the SCOTUS was denying cert and the paypal buttons were paying out there should be some kind of historical record of this attempt by bigots, racists, and seditionists to lynch our first black president…
The birthers are all excited about another cert conference on March 4 for Hollister v Soetoro.
They think that this is the one that will bring down the entire government, otherwise why would the Supreme Court be agreeing to a second cert conference!
John Hemmingway is convinced that if Kagan and/or Sotomayor recuse themselves because they were appointed by the evil non-citizen Barack Obama, that the Rule of Four at the Supreme Court will magically morph into “The Rule of Three” and Alito, Scalia and Thomas will finally be free to bring Obama low.
The ignorant birthers don’t realize that every properly-filed petition to SCOTUS gets scheduled for a conference, regardless of whether it has any merit. The only thing it signifies is that it will soon be over for good.
I remember that Mario got all bent out of shape when Dwight Sullivan at CAAFlog told him that it was a certainty that SCOTUS was going to deny his cert petition in the Kerchner case. Dwight explained to him that the failure of any justice to request a response from the respondent meant that the petition had been dead-filed, but Mario refused to believe him.
I don’t think that’s right. I recall seeing writs filed multiple times to different justices until one finally distributed it for conference.
However, the case is still doomed.
Just to be clear, the Petition for a Writ of Certiorari in Hollister v Soetoro was denied. This is a second conference most likely called to deal with the Motion from Hollister to have Kagan and Sotomayor recuse themselves.
Hollister argues that Supreme Court rules require the Justices to act on a motion to recuse which they didn’t do in their “no comment” denial of the Certiorari petition.
This is a conference on a motion for rehearing.
There will always be a “conference” on a motion for rehearing or a petition for cert. The stay applications that get brought from one justice to another are a different sort of pleading, hence a different procedure.
The birthers might want to actually check the rule for rehearings. If a response is not requested, they petition will not be accepted (except for some extraordinary circumstances, which this is not, despite the birthers say).
Also, though I have not seen the request, I fail to understand what intervening circumstances now exist that were not there the first time (he asked for recusal at that time).
Supreme Court Rule 44
Thanks for the excellent follow-up information Expelliarmus and Northland. I expect to see your words showing up on birther blogs that still allow non-birthers to post!
To all the “Chicken Littles” or should I say “Chicken Hawks” that keep saying that the sky is falling, and the Unites States will fail, never bet against the United States of America, we are coming back and you and the rest of you phonies are wrong!
The Birthers just HATE and can’t debate, where is there proof you might asked? Up where the sun don’t shine, HA, HA, show some proof birthers or people will continue to see you as dumb, stupid or racist, maybe all three. Can you blame them?
> They think that this is the one that will bring down the entire government, otherwise why would the Supreme Court be agreeing to a second cert conference!
Don’t some birther sites (Citizen Wells?) already spin the even nuttier meme of “SCOTUS has already ruled Obama is ineligible and they’re just waiting for the right time to publish it”? I neven cease to be amazed by the gullibility. Actually, I’ve been thinking for quite some time about setting up a blog with more “secret insider infos” just to see how many birthers would fall for it…
I am so happy that our President has completely ignored these birthers people who don’t have any facts in hand but just lies that FoxsNews AKA FakeNews spread with the blessing of the GOP (Gay Old Party). I enjoy seeing the birthers fail in our US Courts, dullards, win a case or as they say “put up or shut-up”.
Dr. Palawox is not under investigation as it was speclated by pro Obama media:
http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/hawaiinews/20110224_Answers_sought_on_Palafox_issue.html
Let’s look at the timeline of events:
Abercrombie nominated Palafox as Director of DoH.
Abercrombie launches a search for Obama’s birth certificate.
Abercrombie admits in an interview that “written down” something was found as Obama’s birth registration, then stops talking about the issue.
Abercrombie asked Palafox to step down, rumors of federal investigation into Medicare reimbursement were placed by the media.
Finally the truth comes out – there is no investigation.
Abercrombie refused to comment for the news article. Protecting the reputation of Dr. Palafox is not important to him.
He does not want to talk about it because it is all connected to Obama’s birthplace story. He should never have fired Dr. Fukino – she performed well in protecting Obama.
Your fiction: “Abercrombie refused to comment for the news article. Protecting the reputation of Dr. Palafox is not important to him. He does not want to talk about it because it is all connected to Obama’s birthplace story. He should never have fired Dr. Fukino – she performed well in protecting Obama.”
Why are you lying?
“I have suspected almost from the beginning that the “birther controversy” is an engineered crisis, a political smear fueled and fanned by professionals, with an army of dupes to carry the message.”
According to the National Review, it’s an engineered crisis from Democrats and the media.
“Democrats, Media Keep Birther’ Story Alive”
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/260536/democrats-media-keep-birther-story-alive-doug-heye
The comments are entertaining.
Funny that Heye wrote this article just a few days after Karl Rove said almost exactly the same thing on O’Reilly’s show.
This is the new GOP talking point to get from under the birther cloud….I have seen this theory pushed on other sites….That it is the Drms and progressives that are pushing the birther issue to somehow make the GOP look bad….The usual blame the messenger theory being used by Rove and others…Remember the death panels accusation? Same theory…
Birthers generally assume that the Governor was looking at the State’s birth registry rather than the distinct State Archives. Based on the difference between Fukino’s statement and Abercrombie’s statement, we may conclude that Abercrombie was not looking at the birth registry.
Can I just mention something in passing?
I am not convinced that President Obama is a great President, and haven’t really decided how good he has been yet.
But for all of the smears and ugly, ugly rumors that have been spread about this man- I notice one thing:
He is happily married to his original wife with two healthy kids without a hint of sexual scandal. That has got to irritate his opponents who spread so many rumors about him.
No whiff of criminal scandal- regardless of Birther claims.
The only thing he is serously open for attack on are his political decisions- and that should be fair game.
Like Newt 😈 Gingrich, a paragon of virtue and fidelity. 😕
Don’t forget Mark Sanford, Mark Ensign, Larry Craig, Mark Foley, Vito Fosella, and Rudy Gulliani….All GOP paragons of marital fidelity and virtue….
It’s a little soon.
Wow….how clever of the Dems to figure out a way to get all those Republican state legislators to introduce birther bills in their states. I wonder why they couldn’t use the same strategery to get them to introduce tax increases on the top 5%?
Speciated? I hope you mean “speculated.”
And once again you read things into a newspaper article which aren’t there. The article does not rule out the possibility that Dr. Palafox is under investigation. Here is what the article actually says:
In a letter to Abercrombie on Friday, Slom (R, Diamond Head-Hawaii Kai) said he has spoken with federal sources that say Palafox is not under investigation. The senator had no information about a potential state investigation, and the state Attorney General’s Office has declined to comment on Palafox.
If Senator Slom’s information is correct, all it means is that Dr. Palafox is not under investigation by the Feds. But, as the article makes clear, that doesn’t rule out the possibility that he is under investigation by the state. So you are not being truthful when you claim “there is no investigation.” In fact, you have no idea if there is a state investigation, and we only have Senator Slom’s word for it that there is no Federal investigation.
Has it is occurred to you that Abercrombie may be refusing to comment because there is an investigation and he doesn’t want to compromise it by commenting publicly?
This of course is the same type of crapola which you put forth before about Abercrombie. You take what he says out of context, twist the words around to fit your preferred interpretation, and then declare your interpretation as fact. That approach may fool some people, but it doesn’t fool anybody here.
> we only have Senator Slom’s word for it that there is no Federal investigation
Pah, you know that birthers readily believe anyone everything if it seems to support their confirmation bias and only pull the “liar/untrustworthy/used-careful-wording” card if it doesn’t.
Yes, birthers believe that all politicians are liars except when the politicians say something which the birthers like.
You ignored Abercrombie’s motivation for doing the search in the first place – he wanted to do a favor for Obama and resolve the birther controversy.
Where else could he have searched for birth registration records – either DoH office or hospitals directly? Those places contain records Abercrombie was looking for.
He corroborated what Tim Adams said last year – there is no long form birth certificate from Kapiolani.
You’re quoting Tim Adams? Really?
Why are you lying?
By law, the Governor wouldn’t have had access to birth registration records (and certainly not hospital records). He could ask the Department of Health, but that wouldn’t have given an answer of a record he could release. It stands to reason that he found something else, like a notation on Obama’s drivers license application that a birth certificate was presented as proof of age.
Abercrombie never said there was no long form birth certificate, nor did Tim Adams ever give us any reason to believe he had access to any information except an office rumor from an office that didn’t have access to anything either.
This confirmation bias thing is amazing.
If you are going to use that defense for Abercrombie – please tell me why is he refursing to publish the full birth registration index (including registration number and date) – that information is under Abrecrombie’s control.
In addition, you are ignoring Mike Evans’ testimony about conversation with Abercrombie.
Is this below the testimony we are ignoring, nc1?
Celebrity Journalist: I Never Spoke to Hawaii Gov About Obama Birth Certificate
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/26/celebrity-journalist-says-he-never-talked-hawaii-governor-obama-birth/
“A celebrity journalist now claims he misspoke when he said last week that Hawaii’s governor told him he was unable to find President Barack Obama’s original birth certificate after a search of state and hospital archives.
Mike Evans told FoxNews.com on Wednesday he was remorseful and embarrassed that he appeared to have given the impression that he had discussed the search for Obama’s birth certificate with Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie.”
NOW will you drop the lie that Abercrombie said there is no birth certificate?
He didn’t fire Fukino. She resigned as all political appointees do when the administration changes.
> you are ignoring Mike Evans’ testimony about conversation with Abercrombie
A sane discussion does not work if you selectively choose to believe one side (Mike Evans, even after he retracted his statement) and not the other (Governor Lingle, Dr Fukino, …) without any reasonable basis on which to distinguish between the two.
It’s like saying “I’m a Lakers fan, so I believe Shaq everything and Dwayne nothing”.
Nobody could really be this bereft of logic and common sense. Surely nc1 has got to be deliberately pretending to win a bet or something?
Then again maybe someone really could be that stupid. This line of argument from nc1 is becoming almost surreal.
Surreal it is then……now we all know a little about what it must be like to wake up and find you’ve been transplanted into a Salvadore Dali painting.
Perhaps because the governor has no authority to do so? Read the statue you posted so very often here, and show us where it authorizes the governor to do anything?
The read it again, and show us where it says what information has to be included in an index?
It is a discretionary power given to the director of the DOH, and what information is currently defined as part of the index has been released. Get over it.
She really is that stupid. It’s a typical birther tactic. Repeat the same discredited information over and over again wait a few weeks then repeat it again.
I doubt this datum ever came up in discussion. It is certainly not the silver bullet Abercrombie was looking for to silence the birthers.
A Governor can’t “refuse” to do something that he hasn’t been asked by anyone to do in the first place.
nc1 has repeatedly been asked who asked Abercrombie to do this and when….without an nc1 reply so far.
Let’s think about it. Does Abercrombie even know that the COLB number was originally viewable then redacted or that nc1 and other birthers think this redaction is in some way significant to a cover up? Everything about Abercrombie so far screams out to me that he probably isn’t even aware of any of that aspect, far less that he has ever actually been specifically asked by any birther or other party to publish the birth index registration.
What nc1 and some others seem to fail to realise is that loony tunes theories llike this birth index registration number cover up are only registering on the radar of a very small knot of people in the first place. Just because we are grudgingly giving it some attention for good measure on here doesn’t mean that it is widely known.
You claim to have a law background. Let’s see: The DoH director has a discretion to disclose this information – Obama does not have to be consulted. The previous DoH director released the bare minimum data, which must be released upon request. The rest of the birth index information CAN be disclosed. Nothing prevents Abercrombie from doing it.
Abercrombie cannot claim with a straight face that no additional information can be released. He promised it. He promised to defend the honor of Obama’s parents. Why did he change his mind?
Most likely reason: registration number 10641 does not belong to Obama.
A full birth registration index release would be much stronger evidence supporting the official birthplace story than the “written down” thing Abercrombie mentioned in the newspaper interview.
The same lawyers who told Abercrombie that birth certificate cannot be released know that birth registrtion index can be released. Many requests have been sent to Hawaii DoH – the staff there is fully aware of the law.
Why did Kenya write Obama’s birth info in Hawaii’s birth index and vital records?
If you had confirmation of this detail, will you vote for Obama in 2012? Will you be satisfied that he was born in Hawaii and is a natural born citizen of the United States of America?
Do you have another birther request in your back pocket?
Why don’t you listen both versions of Mike Evans’ story and compare them.
In the first version his thoughts flow freely, he spoke fast, he mentioned talking to the governor the DAY before. Interesting thing is that he mentioned investigators using a search warrant to check hospital records. Do you really think that a journalist is that stupid to go public with such claims without it being the truth? How did he come up with all these details? He gave multiple interviews and only after few days changed his story.
The second version is quite different. He paused often to think what to say. It was very obvious that somebody got to him and asked him to recant the whole thing. The two versions of the story are so different – he did not get confused.
Unfortunately neither gov. Lingle nor Dr. Fukino gave interview to someone knowledgeable about Obama’s birthplace story – it would be interesting to hear what they have to say.
Unattended birth registration by a relative.
You know the second request – passport and consular information about Obama’s mother in 1961. If Obama told the truth about his birthplace, he was not included in his mother’s passport when returning from abroad in 1961.
This should be public information – yet government officials hide it from US citizens.
> neither gov. Lingle nor Dr. Fukino gave interview to someone knowledgeable about Obama’s birthplace story
Why would that have changed the fact that they confirmed he was born in Hawaii?
You somehow dream that if some interviewer had said “but then how did he travel to Pakistan in 1981?” or brought up other birther myths, they would suddenly change their story to “fit external facts”. That’s not what officials do.
If I ask an official about my birth records stating I was born in 1971 and then said “but my parents were in Japan for the entire year of 1971”, the official would not say “oh, then we must have it wrong” or “well, our records are not really reliable anyway, now that you ask” or “gee, um, let me… let me make a call… uh… uh-huh… yeah… I will tell him… OK, please go away” or anything of that sort.
Folks,
Why feed the troll..?
We all know that NC1’s responbe to all factual rebuttals is
a. LALALALALALALALA I can’t hear you
b. But, But, But, But…..(insert irrelevant item here)
So NC1, I have been spending a lot of time trawling the nether regions of the internet, looking for the spoor of birthers.
I have seen your droppings liberally spread throughout the Birfer universe yet amazingly not a single, solitary occassion where you persist in demanding every more specious elemetns around the identity of any other President.
Why is that?
Do you have GWB’s birth certificate?
Do you have GWB’s kindergarten records?
Do you have GWB’s birth announcements
Do you have etc etc etc
What is it about this President that so pisses you off I wonder.
Is it that unlike the last dolt he actually EARNED his place at an Ivy League
Maybe it’s because unlike the last dolt he can actually articulate a sentence, in real time that meets the norms of grammar and punctuaton?
Maybe it’s because unlike the last dolt he didn’t invade 2 countries ’cause God told him to.
Or just maybe it’s because he’s a Democrat and black
Again you have no proof his mother even had a passport in 1961 or that they traveled overseas in 1961. You’re just guessing.
Another guess with no proof
I did listen to Mike Evans story his first story if you paid attention he said he spoke to Governor Abercrombie’s office. Notice he didn’t say Governor Abercrombie himself. This is a common sales tactic to try to give some authority to one self. Saying you spoke to the governor’s office when in fact you spoke with a staffer. He never once claimed he spoke directly to the governor in his original story. It’s simple, Evans isn’t a real journalist but is a gossip columnist. Do you take everything a site like TMZ says as gospel?
And then you’d be asking for confirmation of the paper the COLB was printed on. Then further confirmation of what type of printer, which staffer mailed out the COLB, etc.
If Obama told the truth, his mother didn’t return from abroad in 1961. In any release of Stanley Ann Obama’s passport records, information about any living person (i.e. Barack Obama) would be removed since such records are private. We may get to see this first hand if the passport issuance card for Stanley Ann Obama in 1965 is found.
Alright, look. We’ve reached an impasse. You believe that Hawaiian law allows the release of information. The State of Hawaii disagrees.
There is only one way to resolve this impasse, and repeating your argument ad nauseum is NOT it!
Sue the State of Hawaii already, or drop the argument. If you don’t have enough faith in your interpretation to bring a suit on it, your interpretation isn’t worth the electronic bits it’s written on.
Any evidence, any at all, is better than no evidence.
You have zero evidence that Obama was born anywhere other than Hawaii.
Therefore, any evidence beats that.
Please show where the is required to release anything? The statute says the director “may release” not shall, must, or will. It also says index information may be release, but does not madate that the registration number even be kept as part of the index. The state of Hawaii has released the index information. So let’s see, what is more likely, a massive conspriacy that has gone on since 1961 and has not left a single shred of evidence, that all started when a very pregnant middle class 18 year old, decided to take a very long and expensive journey to give birth in Africa, a place where she knows no one (but will get to meet her husband’s other wife), or perhaps the state of Hawaii no longer keeps the registration number as part of the index, and thus is not subject to release?
See, you have yet to show that the registration number is required to be kept on the index, is currently part of the index, or that the governor can request it’s release. Burden of proof is on you. I’m not wasting my time researching this. The one statute and AG opinion you’ve shown doesn’t do it. Think just maybe the folks in Hawaii do know the law, and you don’t? Of course not. Every birther is a grad of Yale law school, and knows the law better than everyone else. It’s just the conspiracy that has them batting .000.
and as has been asked many times before….what evidence do you have that she even had a passport in 1961, much less that she even travel abroad in 1961?
Perhaps government officials aren’t hiding anything….perhaps it just doesn’t exist?
> Then further confirmation of what type of printer, which staffer mailed out the COLB, etc.
Sure, without such information birthers could never be sure someone didn’t sneak anything into Hawaii’s files – such as a printout allegedly from 1965 that was printed with ink not available before 1980. (After all, many forgeries were discovered because of such clerical errors.)
And since they’ve already decided to disbelieve anything which contradicts their confirmation bias, I can imagine they will become very inventive in finding new ways to “have doubts” in unpredictable places. After all, no-one can really be sure of anything 100%.
Compare the 9/11 truthers. Some say that the planes were holograms, so even if they saw the planes themselves that day, being on the street in NYC, they can still claim there were no planes.
Likewise, if any birther had, by any chance, actually been a witness of Obama’s birth as he popped out of his mom, said birther would make up an explanation why he did not really see what he saw.
And, after all, there’s always the Birther Hail Mary “even if Obama was born in Hawaii and is an NBC, how do we know the guy sitting in the White House really is that Hawaiian-born Obama and not some identity thief?”. I wonder when we start seeing that one more often.
Well there was the meme for a while (think it got a lot of play at Freeperville) that Da Ebil Usurper WOULD release one of them thar mystical “long forms” just once THEY (the eponymous THEY) had gotten hold of the right kind of printer from the early 1960’s as well as unused paper stock of the period.
It seems to have died a well deserved death when the ever more shiny and popular Super Vattel started to gain (vacant Birfoon) mind space.
Well we’ve already been told by birthers that they hacked the database storing the documents and also Brennan covered up his passport records
Once again……who made these “many requests” for the birth index registration number and when? What answer did they get and from whom.?…..Give us some details of even just one of these many requests and the Hawaii reply bearing out what you say.
I’m not saying these haven’t happened but all we have so far is you saying they happened. You’ll appreciate you don’t so far have the kind of truthfulness record on here that would greatly encourage anyone to ust take your word for it.
===================================================================
I understand that Hawaii law does not mandate the release of the full birth registration index. I also understand that the law does not prohibit the release of full birth registration index either.
Hawaii law left the decision to DoH director. Therefore, the law does not require Obama’s consent prior to release of full birth registration index.
Now let’s talk abour Abercrombie. Few months ago he stirred the pot by publicly announcing that he was going to resolve the birthplace issue. We know that he wanted to publicly release Obama’s birth documentation.
Why did he back down? If the law prevented him from releasing the actual birth certificate, that was not the case with the full birth registration index.
Claims that he could not release any information because of Hawaii law are half-truths, at best.
We know that registration number and date are part of the birth registration index. Those two items were specifically mentioned in the opinion letter written by Hawaii OIP office lawyers when describing the law as it was in 1990.
“..Subsection (d) of section 338-18, Hawaii
Revised Statutes, provides:
(d) Index data consisting of name, age, and sex of the registrant and date, type, and file number of the vital event and such other data as the director may authorize may be made available to the public….”
“…However, records of vital events which occurred more than 75 years ago, and index information concerning vital events, are open to inspection by the general public, since access to these records is neither “closed or restricted by law.” Haw. Rev. Stat. § 92F-11(a) (Supp. 1989).”
http://hawaii.gov/oip/opinionletters/opinion%2090-23.pdf
The subsequent law change omits the date and file number as data that must be released – it left the decision to include these items to the DoH director. As we have seen in Dr. Palafox’s case, the director of DoH is at Governor’s disposal.
If Governor wants this information to be published the DoH director will publish it since no law prevents it.
Your question about registration number not being part of the index is silly. The whole purpose of birth registration index is to have one unique record identifier that does not change over time. This allows you to link the physical file in the storage area with index cards that sit in the office. After conversion to electronic database recordkeeping the registration number is the most logical choice for “foreign key” – the link between related database tables. I am sure you are familiar with the concept of account number on your utility bills. It is a necessity for efficient record keeping.
My statement “If Obama told the truth, his mother didn’t return from abroad in 1961.” covers several scenarios favorable for Obama:
1. His mother did not have a passport in 1961.
2. His mother had a passport but did not travel abroad in 1961
3. His mother had a passport, travelled abroad in 1961 but did not return with a newborn baby.
http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2010/09/22/the-great-birth-index-fiasco/
Butterdezillion is one of the more demonstratively insane birthers, probably two steps below someone who plays with there own poo in the streets as far as someone whose advice I would consider. She misunderstands the simplest things, and sees secret signals everywhere. She is so far down the rabbit hole of insane conspiracy that light doesn’t reach her dreams anymore.
Entertain her madness at your own peril.
> If Governor wants this information to be published the DoH director will publish it since no law prevents it.
Funny, I just saw some more moving goalposts about this over at the Pest and eFail:
“ch says:
Tuesday, March 1, 2011 at 6:32 PM
It would be interesting to ask the Hawaii Department of Human Resources for a copy of their employee regulations and in particular, what are their laws regarding state employees being publicly involved in elections, and in particular what laws would regulate a director like Fukino making statements about unseen documents to help a candidate win a race. States have laws against this kind of bizarre behavior. What are Hawaii laws. It does not matter how Fukino left her position….she did what she did while she was in that position illegally.”
( http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/02/28/is-andy-martin-a-natural-born-citizen/#comments )
So when finally the DoH publishes what you want it to publish, you’re gonna turn around and claim that was also breaking the law because it is “helping a candidate win a race”?
Here is what you keep getting wrong. First off, the 1990 statute you keep clinging to is meaningless. It has been amended. It’s part of the past. Let it go. Secondly, the language of the obsolete 1990 statute doesn’t say anything has to be released. It says that information “may” be released. Some, or all could be withheld at the Director’s discretion. The current law states, “Index data consisting of name and sex of the registrant, type of vital event, and such other data as the director may authorize shall be made available to the public.” Obviously the state felt the need to change the statute. Part of that change was to remove the registration number from that list of what they describe as index data. Feel free to look up the legislative history if you like. I don’t know why, and I’m not particularly interested in why, and don’t really care to find out why. The opinion letter you link to is equally meaningless in that it is based on a since amended statute. However, the statute as it is written today is pretty clear on what the State is supposed to release. The Hawaiian Statutes do not separately define index data. The fact that something may have been considered part of the data in the past doesn’t mean they continue to treat it as such presently. Point is currently the statute does not include the number as part of what they list off as index data, and the Hawaii DOH does not have a current policy of releasing the number (unless you can show otherwise). Can the governor release that information? Not the way the statute is written. The statute gives the governor no power to do anything. Can the Director change the policy of what is released? Well, I don’t know enough about the Hawaiian DOH, and the administrative procedures of the state of Hawaii to tell you what the process is. Could he change it by fiat? Perhaps. But it may also require a change in administrative rules, public notice of changes in the rules, and permitted public comment. I really don’t know, nor do I care to figure it out. Perhaps the state DOH thinks it’s too much effort to change policies just to please some malcontents that still won’t be satisified even if they have the info. I don’t really know, but you have come nowhere near proving your claims that the governor can just have the information released. I know it may be inconceivable to you, but perhaps it the folks in Hawaii who have the law right, not you?
Not as silly as your insistance that it has to be include without any evidence to support it is. The index data is whatever they decide to include in it. Furthermore, the state DOH is pretty clear on the matter, “Index data consisting of name and sex of the registrant, and type of event is made available to the public. The director, in accordance with HRS §338-18(d), has not authorized any other data to be made available to the public.” Another flaw in your reasoning is that you assume the Director can selectively authorize the release of certain data only as it applies to the President, and not as it applies to everyone. Perhaps the state is more interested in protecting the privacy of its citizens rather than giving a group of malcontents additional information that still won’t satify them that the Presidnet was born in their state.
There won’t be any way to determine from State Department or Homeland Security records the difference between the 2 and 3.
Actually, the only thing you are likely to learn is whether Obama’s mother had a passport in 1961. The State Department is not going to have any record of her travels, if any.
You realize, I hope, that if she traveled overseas in 1961, the U.S. government would have no record of her departure or her destination? At best they might have a record of her proposed destination, if she applied for the expedited issue of a passport. Passports typically aren’t stamped upon departure, they are stamped when entering a country. If Stanley Ann had a passport in 1961 and used it for foreign travel, it would have stamps in it, but the State Department did not have that information. In those days it would have required immigration agents to manually enter the information into a log each time a passport was presented. They may have more information now, since bar codes are now used, but that wasn’t feasible in 1961.
Presumably the U.S. Custom Service would have had records, because she would have been required to fill out a customs declaration upon her entry into the U.S. However, I have heard that Customs kept those declarations for only six months. Whether that is accurate or not, I think it’s safe to say that they are unlikely to have any records 50 years after the fact.
The likely scenario is that the State Department will eventually respond to the FOIA request by reporting that there is no record of Stanley Ann having a passport in 1961. But that won’t satisfy the birthers, will it? You’ll just say that the records were scrubbed or that the State Department is lying. Hey, everyone else is in on the conspiracy, so why not the State Department?
I’m sure you will agree that releasing the certificate number will not persuade anyone where Barack Obama was born. Therefore, this item would not fulfill Abercrombie’s goal. In fact, this datum is obscure, I doubt it was even considered.
Number of people in the ENTIRE WORLD who are clamoring for Gov. Abercrombie and the Hawaii DOH to either change, ignore, or violate the laws on the books to release Obama’s birth index number: 2
nc1 and butterdezillion
You have all the proof you need that Obama was born in Hawaii already, and you admit you still won’t be satisfied by this info being released (nor would either of you vote for him). Nobody cares what you two demand. Move on.
I never got to see Bush’s court records for his expunged arrest for cocaine possession, where he performed community service.
If Obama supporters truly believed in Kapiolani birth story they would be asking for the release of full birth index. Confirmation of registration number and date would be much more persuasive than the “actually written down” thing mentioned by Abercrombie.
The birth index already HAS been released.
Every time information is released, birthers make up some new lie or fiction to find fault with it. The “birth index” is just one example — when the index data was posted on the Dept. of Health web site, birthers decided that it was “missing” the registration number.
> Confirmation of registration number and date would be much more persuasive
Come again? When has anything (especially anything coming from Hawaiian officials) ever been “persuasive” to any birther?
Are you prepared to pay me $10,000 if Hawaii “confirms registration number and date” and you continue your claims that this is not enough? Because that is the last thing you are waiting for if I understand your claims of today correctly (which will be long forgotten tomorrow, of course, when the goalposts are on the next planet, or galaxy).
> If Obama supporters truly believed in Kapiolani birth story they would be asking for the release of full birth index.
If birthers truly believed in a foreign birth, they would have used their mouthpieces’ PayPal donations to pay a legitimate investigator (not a convicted forger like Lucas) to actually come up with proof of foreign birth instead of deducing “facts” from reading bird’s intestines (such as the alleged “Pakistan travel ban”).
Or they would have put their money together for a reward of, say, $50,000 or $100,000 for anyone who can bring conclusive, forensically tested, court-proof evidence that Obama was born abroad.
That would make much more sense if you actually believed in the crap you’re spewing, instead of whining in your echo chambers, trying to “educate” constitutional experts that your fringe redefinition of legal terms actually holds any water, or bolstering the pockets of the con artists who thrive on your gullibility in best televangelism style.
==================================================================
State Department had almost three years to respond to FOIA request and so far, released incomplete documentation. Why?
Her passport records are public, there is no reason for State Department to drag ther feet in responding to this request.
If Obama’s mother returned from abroad with a newborn baby, the baby would have been registered in mother’s passport.
====================================================================
Information released by DoH is meaningles for the purpose of verification of Obama’s COLB.
FULL birth index needs to be released, not just name and sex. The law does not prevent Abercrombie from releasing the FULL birth registration index (including date and registration number).
Abercrombie promised to prove birthers wrong. Here is a chance to prove that COLB is an official document and not a forgery. Why did he back down?
We know the answer to that one; thank you you Mike Evans.
Not necessarily.
If she gave birth to Obama in Kenya and wished to then promptly return to USA it’s highly unlikely that she would have written to USA and returned her passport by mail to have her son added to it then sent back to her. Apart from anything else that would have been a potentially very lengthy operation in many respects. It’s far more likely that she would have visited the nearest US consulate and requested their advice regarding her re-entry to USA with a baby which did not exist when she last left USA and which had no passport.
It’s likely that the US Consulate would have taken reasonable steps to reassure themselves that such a baby now existed, that the baby had been born to her in Kenya, that she was legally permitted to remove such a Kenyan born child from Kenya (this may have involved the father’s particpation or agreement) and that the baby was about to travel with her to USA.
Once they had done that it’s likely that they would have given her some kind of formal stamped/signed consular document stating what she had reported to them and what they had been able to verify and that she would then have used this document, in conjunction with the appropriate Kenyan birth registration document for the baby (without which I doubt the consulate would have entertained her request in the first place) and her own passport, to gain exit from Kenya and entry to USA for them both.
To the best of my knowledge it has never been a duty of overseas consulates to add new born babies to passports themselves. I don’t think they have ever been authorised to do so or even have the practical means to do so, though I’m not absolutely certain.
Assuming that in this hypothetical scenario she then gained entry for baby Obama to USA (she may have had quite a few related red tape hoops to jump through both before and after gaining his entry) she would then at some undetermined point in the future have to decide whether and when to add him to her own passport or get him his own one.
Having already reported him to consular officials and thus by extension to passport issuing authorities and to immigration officials this would result in his Kenyan place of birth being annotated if and when he was ever added to her passport.
How are you saying things like this when you haven’t even established that Obama’s mother ever left the United States before 1961? You must first establish that, before you can make any claims about her “returning”.
The following is from the Hawai’i Department of Health’s FAQ on Obama’s birth records:
“Index data referred to in HRS §338-18 from vital records in the State of Hawaii is available for inspection at the Department of Health’s Office of Health Status Monitoring at 1250 Punchbowl Street in Honolulu. The public will be asked to provide identification and sign in to inspect the names and sex of all births, deaths and marriages that occurred in the state. Data are maintained in bound copies by type of event with names listed alphabetically by last name.”
In other words, anyone can go to the Hawaii Department of Health and with proper ID, they can read the entire 1961 Index File for themselves.
Then sue them.
The fact that you haven’t proves that you don’t believe this.
You don’t have the courage of your convictions. If you aren’t even convinced enough of your interpretation to bring suit, then why should we be convinced?
Still clinging to the discredited Mike Evens, after he admitted he never spoke to Abercrombie? This does wonders for your own reputation here.
Dr. Fukino has already verified Obama’s COLB in sworn testimony. Why do you need a second verification?
Yes thanks Mike Evans for destroying what little credibility you had as a gossip writer. Evans original testimony showed he never spoke with Governor Abercrombie
The COLB is not a forgery. Nobody has ever claimed that it is a forgery. He has nothing to “back down” from. There is no issue here. You are free to disagree with me on this point, but only if you have evidence on which to base your assertions. Because you would be accusing an individual of a crime, your evidence will need to be sufficient under criminal rules in Hawaii, at a minimum.
Is the document legitimate or do you have evidence which could convict Dr. Fukino or some other individual of the crime of Forgery of an official document?
Ron Polland has maintained that it is a forgery basically from the beginning.
Well, if he brings a criminal accusation of forgery against Dr. Fukino in a criminal court in Hawaii, I’ll acknowledge that. Not before. Anything short of this is equivalent to tacit affirmation of the validity of the COLB.
Actually, no.
Under the laws at the time and the facts that would have been presented, a baby born in Kenya to Stanley Ann Obama and Barack Obama Sr. would not have been a US Citizen, and so would not have appeared on anyone’s US passport.
Two years.
Birth indexes in Kenya are public records, by the way.
Well, Ron Polland certainly qualifies as a Nobody! 😉
1. Clinton did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.
2. George Tennent assured Bush that the evidence that Iraq had WMDs amounted to a “slam dunk case.”
I don’t think that income tax is Constitutional, yet keep paying it every year. Why – it is easier to pay protection racket to the Government than fight it in corrupted justice system.
Either the COLB is a forgery or the official birthplace story (Kapiolani Hospital) is a lie.
The COLB (Date Filed and registration number) does not fit the Kapiolani birth claim.
There is a separate recent thread where Dr.C tried to establish steps related to Obama’s birth registration. You can read my posts there to get the idea why the registration number on Obama’s COLB is questionable.
> Birth indexes in Kenya are public records, by the way.
But you’d expect the birthers to claim they were “scrubbed” or that they are even more unreliable than those of Hawaii (remember this comes from the same kind of conspiracy nutters that claim the 9/11 terrorists were “goat-herders” and “cave-dwellers”).
And since we always expect the most inconsequential reasoning from birthers, it would be a natural answer to say “yes, we believe some Kenyan politicians over the Kenyan birth records, but not Hawaiian officials over the ‘hidden’ Hawaiian birth records”.
Or, even more simply, “absence of evidence is evidence of absence”. So the fact there is nothing in Kenyan birth indexes to support an Obama birth there is “proof” they were manipulated. *sigh*
Oh good lord so because some politicians lie, those appointed by politicians must automatically be liars too. What a ridiculous premise. So once again NC1 you’re giving yourself an out, an excuse to use if the index with the certificate number is released because you can just go back and say “Clinton did not have sex with that woman” “George Tenet said it would be a slam dunk case”. So then you can claim once again that the entity you want to release the information is lying because politicians lie.
Goody for you. The courts have ruled repeatedly that the income tax is Constitutional, but, again, you know things the courts don’t and are too cowardly to actually test your understanding in court.
We get it, you’re a true believer. The rest of us, however, need evidence, which you are unable to provide. Simply repeating your interpretation of the law is unconvincing, since the fact remains that the world and your interpretation are not lining up. You still pay taxes and Hawaii still doesn’t release the index number.
So, why don’t you just spare us the repetition?
Or the more likely reason is that the COLB is legitimate and the President was born where he claims, in Honolulu and Kapiolani Hospital. And we are all still waiting for some sort of legally admissible evidence that suggests otherwise….Stating that you think some number is incorrect is not evidence. And if you want to compare the Nordyke numbers, you have never proven to us that those numbers are legitimate or that their BC’s are legitimate. I don’t remember any birth index information supporting their birth nor any statement confirming that they were born in HI. Until then using their purported BC’s is not true evidence.
Or you’re wrong in your conclusion that the index number doesn’t fit the facts.
We’ve established that you lack the courage of your convictions enough to sue the State of Hawaii.
Here’s a much simpler task. It will just take a trip to the library or the Hawaiian statehouse.
The State of Hawaii allows inspection of records older than 75 years. Go look at those records and take a representative sample and see if the index number always corresponds with filing date in the manner you suggest.
Take a representative sample, say, 1,000 sequential birth records.
Go to it. Prove to us that the sequential birth index numbers corresponds, 100% of the time, with filing date. Or whatever. There are no errors, omissions, typos, misfilings, or anything of the like – because you’ve claimed that the index number CANNOT possibly be correct.
I will start reading your posts after you have testified under oath as a witness to the crime of forgery that you allege. Do you possess evidence of a crime or don’t you?
The registration number on President Obama’s birth certificate actually constitutes strong circumstantial evidence that he was born at Kapiolani Hospital. The certificate number is separated by only a few digits from the Nordyke twins’ numbers. That alone makes it overwhelmingly likely that they were all born at the same hospital, and their paperwork was sent to the State together, since it is the Department of Health that adds the numbers. There is simply no rational basis for believing that President Obama was born anywhere but Kapiolani Hospital on August 4, 1961 at 7:24 pm in the city of Honolulu, on the island of Oahu, within the borders of the United States of America, which as everyone knows, makes him a natural born citizen, and therefore, since he was duly elected, our legal President.
We are far past that option. Once someone makes the claim that the document is literally *a forgery*, he is obligated to confront the perpetrator of this crime by pressing criminal charges. Of course the standards of evidence for criminal cases tend to be higher, and there tend to be serious consequences to a person who falsely accuses another of a crime, so for me this is where the whole “birther” thing ends, and why.
Which is still far less persuasive than the actual image of the document, the birth announcements, all the other prior statements, and the sheer lunacy of the time line for a foreign birth.
So why should we waste our time asking for something that is pretty much meaningless and will fail to sway a single person one way or the other?
Actually, no, the law does prevent Abercrombie from releasing anything more than has been release. Saying it over, and over again doesn’t change the fact that the law states what must be released (which has been), and that the Director has not authorized public release of peoples registration numbers. So you are wrong.
Great…so you confirmed that you don’t discriminate when picking stupid things to believe in. Congratulations!
You did not think this one through, did you? Why is Obama’s Date Filed three days earlier than Nordykes’? If registrations were sent at the same time from Hospital to the DoH office, the Date Filed should have been the same not three days apart.
Based on Date Filed Obama’s number should have been more than a 100 lower than Nordyke’s.
You see, something does not add up.
However if the official birthplace story was a lie and his birth was reported as unattended birth, it is possible that COLB data is correct.
Go ahead, nc1 and figure out why the Nordyke’s doesn’t match up. Maybe it is a fake?
Ah, so you’re one of those Anti-Tax nuts as well. Why am I not surprised. Are you a sovereign citizen too? Should you start adding weird punctuation to your name or append “in esse” to your posts? LMAO!
Careful NC1…the black helicopters are on their way to get you and throw you in a FEMA camp…
If you replace the word Either with Neither, your sentence would actually describe the most likely scenario.
Yeah, we’ve read your posts there. Just because you post unfounded nonsense based on bad assumptions doesn’t give it any credibility.
If anything, your own references to your prior failed logic demonstrations are just highlighting your lack of credibility to the world.
Only in the gaps of your swiss-cheeze mind. That issue has been addressed endlessly on other threads, where you’ve repeatedly been corrected. You are nothing but a broken record ignoring the answers that have been given to you time and time again. Go re-read the previous threads and try to learn something for once.
Prove it.
Show me the unbroken sequence of birth index numbers versus date filed for an entire week and how no birth in Hawaii is ever recorded before a later filed event.
First, there is no “Date Filed” on the Nordyke certificates. There are two accepted dates, one by the Deputy Local Registrar and one by the Registrar General.
We do not know which “accepted” date was transcribed into the database when the records were entered electronically (and today labeled “Date Filed”), but I would think they would use the earlier of the two. Therefore, we cannot say that different dates filed imply necessarily that the state received them on different dates. They could have been signed by the deputy local registrar on different dates.
The Nordykes have the same date for both local and state registrars. In fact, the date stamps look identical. Is possible that hospitals close to the DOH didn’t have there own local registrar? Queens Hospital is essential across the street from DOH and Kapiolani is about a mile away.