If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!


by John Charlton

Regardless of where Obama was born, he never was a natural born citizen of the United States

(Nov. 28, 2009) — The final nail has been driven into the coffin of Obama’s online COLB (Certification of Live Birth), which was released in 2008 by his campaign to bolster his claims of being born in the United States of America, and which has been used as the reason, motive, or simply the excuse by members of Congress and politicians throughout the country, to explain away doubts regarding Obama’s eligibility.

The now infamous COLB alleged that Barack Hussein Obama II was born on Aug. 4, 1961 to Barack Hussein Obama I and Stanley Ann Dunham, in Hawaii.

However, the Department of Health has never corroborated the authenticity of the document.  Rather, in an email to the publisher of The Right Side of Life website, Okubo refused to admit that any such COLB was issued by them in 2007, even though the online COLB bears a 2007 seal.

Todays newest revelation discounts entirely the authenticity of the information on the alleged COLB, which bears the notation “Date filed by Registrar.”  It has been speculated for nearly 3 months, by concerned citizens who have examined the rules of other departments of Vital Statistics accross the country that this designation, “filed by” indicates “submitted to, but not yet accepted as verified.”

This interpretation has now received indirect confirmation from the Communications Officer of the Department of Health, Janice Okubo herself, in her email response to Mr. James H. Roberson, which was published today online at 5:58 PM Eastern Time at Free Republic. The email was originally published at the blog of Attorney Leo Donofrio, which is now defunct.

Mr. Roberson sent his email on Oct. 31, 2009:

The revealing email to and from Okubo reads as follows:

Aloha Dr. Fukino and Ms. Okubo – from sunny South Carolina and Old Dixie,

Conducting research, I have examined a significant number of Certifications of Live Births, issued by your Department, for children all born in Honolulu. The children differ, of course, by which year each child was born, and a large range in years is represented in the population of COLBs examined. All COLBs were printed using your laser printer, and thus all demonstrate the same basic layout format, and page spacings of “form-words” fields (i.e., CHILD’s NAME, DATE OF BIRTH, MOTHER’S RACE, etc. all occupy comparable locations on the page).

Aside from the different “distinguishing” information, specific to each child, that was inserted in the fields beneath the respective “form-words”, all COLBs appear identical except,

1.) Different years seemed to have a different style Border – which I assume was intended to inhibit “alterations” ( say a young teenager wants to make a computer template, and then add a couple of years – so they can buy tobacco or alcohol, etc. The young nippers are amazingly adroit with computers these days.), and

2.) On the lower left side of all COLBs, except for 1, the “form-words”: “DATE ACCEPTED BY STATE REGISTRAR” were printed. However, on 1 COLB the “form-words”: “DATE FILED BY REGISTRAR” were printed, instead.

As I’m sure you’ll agree, “Accepted” and “Filed” carry different meanings, or nuances. For example, “Accepted” indicates that all required forms/information were present (and, nothing looked out-of-order) – as specified by Standard Procedures – and thus this connotes the Certificate of Birth was issued with few reservations as to its validity. On the other hand, “Filed” leaves the hint that perhaps the information supplied may be either insufficient, or questionable as to its accuracy. In this latter case, the Certificate of Birth might carry a less than “full confidence” as to its completeness, authenticity, authoritativeness, or trustworthiness.

Likewise, “Registrar” (which could be either a “local”, or Island, Registrar) might perhaps be different from the “State Registrar” ???

I would be most appreciative if you will help me with the following Questions:

1.) Am I reading too much into the different “Words Choices” ? (I don’t want to sound sinister, or cynical.)

2.) Can you tell me under what circumstances would the above different “Words Choices” be required ?

3.) I have reviewed – without success – Hawaii’s Chapter (Title/Section ?) 11 “Rules and Procedures” looking for a definition of when the above “Words Choices” should be imprinted on COLBs. Could you please provide me with a “path” that I could follow to learn about the wording prescribed to be used on these type certificates / documents ?, and finally,

4.) Would you hazard an educated guess (just a general “ball park” figure would do) as to approximately what proportion of COLBs issued carry the “Filed” vs. “Accepted” classifications ? Less than 1%, less than 10% ? Or, do I have a “bad” population of specimens ?

If you are required to be presented with an “official” UIPA request, in order to provide the above information, then please consider this e-mail as such. Thank you in advance for any help that you can give me.

Respectfully yours,

IN RESPONSE, I RECEIVED from Ms Janice Ukubo the following email:

“Aloha Mr. Roberson,

Under the UIPA, the state is not required to answer all questions posed to it. Unfortunately, we are unable to help you at this time.

Please see attached response to your UIPA request.”

Okubo’s refusal to explain what “Filed by” means, can only be interpreted as withholding evidence that would indict the veracity of the online COLB and the credibility of their department in giving the semblance of truth to Obama’s claim to be born in Hawaii, because there is really no reason in the world to obstruct the request of a concerned citizen regarding what terms, which could be used on official Hawaii Vital Records, mean.

Okubo’s response also now makes her liable for criminal charges of conspiracy to use her office under color of the law to defraud the general public.  Because in the fulfilment of her official duties she is legally obligated  in State Law to explain what terms used on official documents mean, or at least to direct citizens to the published documents which explain these.

The response of Okubo, therefore, it tantamount to saying the online COLB is a fake, because if  “filed” meant that her department accepted the information on a vital record as true, in saying so, she would have indirectly affirmed its authenticity.  In refusing to do so, she has, contrariwise, attempted to hide its lack of trustworthiness, by avoiding the question of how a vital record with this specification might contain unproven assertions.

But numerous general inquiries for copies of such documents have been refused by the Deparment of Health for nearly 3 months.

The Post & Email reminds its readers to click the tags on this report, at the end of this post, to find many more articles with information about this story.

Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. The State of Hawaii has already stated that the Obama COLB posted is not authentic.

    The Stets of Hawaii in an issued e-mil has established the fact that if the COLB were authentic, it would have “State of Hawaii” and “Department of Health” on the embossed SEAL

    Here is the e-mail.


    Now compare the e-mail to what is presented on FactCheck as COLB #3.


    Forgery #1 – The COLB posted on ‘Fight the Smears’ – No Stamp, No Seal, evidence of tampering and forgery. Sandra Ramsey Lines, Ron Polirak, and myself, among others.

    Forgery #2 – FactCheck – Two different COLB’s one with a SEAL, however NOT an Official State of Hawaii Department of Health SEAL

    Forgery #3 – FactCheck – COLB without a SEAL, image of COLB being held up. High resolution and NO indicating of a SEAL.

    So how can there be three versions of a document that Hawaii NEVER issued?



    Mr. Charlton replies: I was not aware of your work on this; this is very informative. Somewhere it was also posted that Obama supporters were engaged in this kind of experimentation to produce face docs days before the COLB appeared on the net. But I lost track of that urls.



    Since this site is moving to a new domain, I have just closed the comments. Hold off commenting till you see the URL of our new site posted in The Post & Email header image at the top of this page. All articles at this blog are being transfered to the new site; and will also remain here as an archived version. As of this moment, no new articles will be posted here.

    Thanks to all the 300,000 visitors who made The Post & Email go from a nothing blog, to a news site just 3 months! Please come and visit our new site on Tuesday, beginning at Midnight…

  2. Hi, N.E. Patriot! So am I!
    As for the “why’s” in here, I would assume that there’s been some payoffs – Obama’s lawyers, since he’s spending millions of dollars on them (and that’s another question, why would anyone spend that amount of money to hide documents about themselves?? Hmmmm!) – they’re either paying them off or are threatening the DOH, and HI Vital Rcds. somehow; his “minions” keep him tightlipped and secure; the people that surround him keep him from being found out. They have scrutinized the American people, the media news keep us from the truth, and this country is facing a monumental “change” that will destroy it because of a usurper in the WH whose power-craving, socialistic and jew-hating behaviors is causing it.

  3. I also called the HI Vital Records department and spoke with a clerk by the name of Sue. When I asked her about the difference between filed and accepted, she said there was none, that the state changed its terminology a while back. Given the lack of integrity the DoH has demonstrated so far, I didn’t give much credence to a statement made by a clerk.

    Couldn’t that be proven or disproven by simply finding two COLBs from same year/period with the two different “terminologies”?

    And why couldn’t you have an attorney subpoena the information requested about the terminologies (without any specific persons connected) on the basis that such requests must be answered and this one was not….beyond the time period noted in HI regs.

  4. The Hawaii registrar, Alvin T. Onaka, Ph.D., was part of a national committee of state registrars who worked together a few years back to standardize the language on certificates. I’m pretty sure that the ‘Date Filed’ language was purposely chosen as the standard terminology and was to take effect in 2003. What isn’t explained is why there’s a typo in the date on Obama’s COLB, in which the space is missing between the day and year. In a database-generated form, there should be no reason for the spacing to not be consistent.

    The other thing to investigate is whether the certificate number on the factcheck certificate was issued to Obama or someone else. This should be verfiable through a request for index data associated with that certificate number (per HRS 388-18(d)). So far, the state of Hawaii has refused requests. Perhaps an enterprising reporter could force this information out to the public. I suspect the number belongs to someone other than Obama and they are trying to avoid exposing the truth.

  5. Mr. Charlton replies: While I have great respect for your conscientiousness on this matter, your interpretation can not be based on alleged documents; we have seen Obama supporters forge numerous COLBs. Just because there are 3-100 on the net does not mean any are authentic. The determination of what words mean on a govt. document must be had in an official statement or publication of the issuing agency. Other than that we have no certitude.

    Since the HI Depart of Health has already refused to confirm that they issued any document to Obama in 2007, there is no reason to suppose anything on it is true, until the Dept of Health, as HI statutes allow, recognizes its duty to divulge the original vital records due to massive public interest.

    Even when divulged, if the original document lack such testimonials to verify that they were not false allegations by a relative to discout a birth elsewhere or under different conditions, then they would also prove nothing. HI Dept. of Health rules state that it is the court, to which a vital record is submitted, which determines its authenticity when this is contested in law. A vital record in itself does not do this, because it is beyond the competance of a Vital Records agency to police fraud in every possible manner it could be committed in such matters.

    However, let readers study the Department’s published rules, and if they find anything let me know.

  6. Interesting – I keep an eye on the affair and I noticed that the Obamatons haunting conservative sites have dimished lately, numbers-wise, and became less confident –

  7. You will all be glat to know the Obama saga and his loss of credibility as a wold leaders after so much hype had led so many people he was about to walk on water is providing satirists will plenty of material to work on.

  8. John, excellent article.

    How about this idea: Locate two persons with Hawaiian COLBs — one where it says “filed” and the other where it says “accepted” — and have each of them ask the DOH the definition of those terms. Seems to me that the DOH would be required to answer a question posed directly by such individuals.

    Another idea: Is there not a lawyer in Hawaii who understands the legal difference between the two terms? Also, along this line, is there a way to scour Hawaiian court cases where these terms were discussed and defined?

  9. I just had a thought.

    Has anybody to date filed a request with HI Vital records, requesting all records/information regarding the FactCheck.org COLB. Who requested it, when it was requested, when and by whom it was issued, who it was issued to?

    Seeing as the supposed COLB is public record, (courtesy of FactCheck and others), I see no reason why HI can deny such a request.

    If they have no records of such a COLB ever being issued, then we will know for a FACT that the ubiqutous COLB is fake and we would have the final nail in the coffin proof of that.

    Every request seems to dance around the content of the COLB or specific information printed on the COLB, but I have not seen (unless I missed it somewhere) any request targeted at the request/issue records of said COLB from HI.

    Am I off-base here?

    Mr. Charlton replies: No that is what you would expect any sane Dept of Health to have done immediately after Obama issued his online COLB. As a matter of fact every govt agency has the duty to confirm or deny public claims that they have issued documents of any kind. If I keep my COLB private, and you get a copy by theft, obviously they have no duty to confirm anything: but if I hold it up to the world, and they do not explicitly confirm it for 16 months; then they are saying in fact that it is a fake, but that they fear Obama will attack them if they admit it.

  10. On Oct. 16th I requested “any statutory laws, procedural instructions, or legal opinions from a court of competent jurisdiction, that are maintained or in the possession of the Hawaii DOH that dictate the application of “Date Filed by Registrar” and/or “Date Accepted by State Registrar” as it appears Hawaii Certifications of Birth.

    I would prefer to receive the requested information electronically, but can have someone available to view them at the DOH Office if needed.”

    A similar request was submitted to the AG and the Lt. Governor. -The Lt. Gov. and AG have responded, indicating that they do not maintain the requested records.

    Dr. Fukino has yet to respond. A follow-up was sent on 11/2, and a third request was sent on 11/23. –I did receive a delivery response from the server, but still nothing from Dr. Fukino, or the DOH.

    On 11/5, I submitted a formal request for assistance from the OIP (on their form). -I still have not received any response.

  11. JC what’s the deal with TerriK and Donofrio. I see Leo has apologized to you and I hope in this that communi K’s have been restored. Is there a plan where you can keep us updated as to his activities? He no longer wants to blog but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t want to keep up the fight, or does it?

    Mr. Charlton replies: It takes a lot of daily time to maitain a blog with an active comments section; and I can understand when other concerns intervene and one cannot keep it up; these blogs of Leo and TerriK have been extremely helpful fora; I hope they are restored or at least published in other media. They have become part of the national conscience….

  12. The DOH data base needs to be hacked along with e-mails from all indicted in this scandal. As we have now seen in climategate it’s the only way to get the truth from these idiots.

  13. While I do not disagree that the DoH may have indirectly answered the question that Barry’s online COLB lacks veracity, the OIP informed me over a month ago that the DoH is not required to answer general questions.

    I made a similar request however I did not ask a question. I requested inspect and copy the DoH’s rules, regulations, standard operating procedures or general statement of policy in regard to the definition of a birth certificate and/or COLB that is identified “Date Filed By the State Registrar” and the definition of a birth certificate and/or COLB that is identified “Date Accepted By the State Registrar” as well as the criteria for a filed certificate to become an accepted certificate.

    The DoH did not respond within 10 business days so I filed a complaint with the OIP and received a nice non-response to the effect that due to volume of requests the OIP was going to assist the DoH and that it needed more time to address my response and complaint.

    I eventually received an acknowledgement from the DoH in which it indicated it needed more time to respond. The DoH can take up to 20 business days from the original receipt of the request to respond when it acknowledges it needs more time.

    After 25 business days and still no response, I contacted Ms. Okubo to remind her that the DoH had exceeded 20 business days and to please respond. She responded by pasting a link to the recently posted Public Health Regulations Chapter 8, 8A and 8B. No where in this document is “filed vs. accepted” defined.

    I replied and informed Ms Okubo that the PHR Chapter 8, 8A and 8B was not responsive to my request and asked her to please send me a copy of the relevant documents. I have yet to receive a response.

    I followed up on my complaint at the OIP and received a response from acting Director Cathy Takase that the OIP needed more time.

    I also called the HI Vital Records department and spoke with a clerk by the name of Sue. When I asked her about the difference between filed and accepted, she said there was none, that the state changed its terminology a while back. Given the lack of integrity the DoH has demonstrated so far, I didn’t give much credence to a statement made by a clerk.

    Why is the DoH being evasive and non-responsive to request for information it is required by law to disclose? This should be a no brainer, straightforward answer especially if there is truly no difference between filed and accepted.

    Inquiring minds want to know….

  14. Yep, just like climategate.

    No data, no definitions, no backup whatsoever. Does anyone doubt that they’ve discussed “accidentally losing” the underlying info?

    But how dare anybody question the veracity of their claims.

    It really couldn’t be any more obvious that whatever they are hiding is explosive.

    Leo’s blog sounds like he’s going for the dc circuit court thing. That’s great, of course, and I hope it happens soon. But what happened to holding the hawaii doh’s feet to the fire. I’d really like to see them held to account for what they’ve been pulling.

  15. The noose is tightening around the Hawaii Department of Health. If Okubo and Fukino want to come clean, they have very little time in which to do it. For them to continue their dithering and protecting Obama, they are sealing their own fates.

    Why would they be willing to face jail time for an imposter president? Why not just hold a press conference and come out with the truth???

  16. Hi John,

    Just as I finished reading the story above, I found myself thinking the words “What a rotten lot”. My late Father used to say that about people like these.