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

HAWAII DOH FURTHER ATTEMPTS TO HIDE INFORMATION BY MISUSING STRAIGHTFORWARD DOJ TERM

by thinkwell, contributor and participant at The Post & Email

Reverse side of the official Hawaii Statehood Medal

(Apr. 10, 2010) — In her blog, Butterdezillion states that the Hawaii Department of Health has recently been using a new tactic to justify further restrictions on information that they will release. They ominously claim that they must “Glomarize” their responses if the mere act of confirming or denying the existence of a record would inadvertently release other “protected” information. This term was unfamiliar to me, so I did a little research and found the following link that may be of interest to you (for the term’s historical origins, Wikipedia “Glomar Explorer”).

This links to a reasonably tidy Department of Justice definition of “Privacy Glomarization” as is being questionably applied against Butterdezillion and Terri K by Obama’s co-conspirators at the DoH in Hawaii.

The way I read it, Glomarization cannot be used to protect anything the existence of which has already been established. Also, the policy states that Glomarization “is justified only when it is determined that there is a cognizable privacy interest at stake and that there is insufficient public interest in disclosure to outweigh it.” Certainly there is a great, very legitimate public interest in knowing whether a putative President indeed meets Constitutional muster with regard to his or her natural born citizenship. And, it can be reasonably argued that Obama and his Hawaii minions have effectively waived any privacy rights by what has already been disclosed via their various public statements, including Obama directly having made reference (via his legal stooges) to his online purported Certificate of Live Birth in at least one of the many court challenges to his legitimacy.[1]

In fact, this principle is explicitly stated in the Glomar policy: “if the third-party subject of a request has provided the requester with a waiver of his privacy rights, then privacy exemptions cannot be invoked on his behalf as regards that requester.” And: “there is a weighty public interest compelling disclosure of records which reflect formal and final agency determinations of official misconduct by senior government employees.”

Obama, at least for now, most certainly qualifies as a senior government employee, so it would seem that “Glomarization” actually reinforces existing Hawaiian DoH Freedom of Information Act policy.

Glomarization is just another inappropriate and most likely illegal smokescreen being used by the Hawaiian DoH to do more evil in thwarting the legitimate requests of citizens to obtain basic qualifying information about a public servant in We-the-People’s employ. I know life isn’t always fair, but I do so look forward to the day of reckoning for the wicked usurper of the White House and his flying monkeys in Hawaii.

Maybe the time is ripe for a direct FoIA request for Obama’s CoLB to be the bucket of cold water that finally melts through the wickedness. If this FoIA request is thrown at them along with a proactive reference to DoJ Glomarization policy and Obama’s own claim to the legal legitimacy of his online CoLB and the Hawaiian DoH’s own official policy regarding non-confidentiality of previously publicized information, that might just make the heads of the Hawaiian DoH lawyers explode. Just a (pleasant) thought.

________________________________________________________________

[1] It was in a footnote on page 2 of “Hollister v. Soetoro – Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint” that Obama’s attorneys referred to the online CoLB: “President Obama has publicly produced a certified copy of a birth certificate showing that he was born on August 4, 1961, in Honolulu, HI. See, e.g., Factcheck.org, “Born in the U.S.A.: The truth about Obama’s birth certificate,” available here (concluding that the birth certificate is genuine, and noting a contemporaneous birth announcement published in a Honolulu newspaper). […]”

Join the Conversation

28 Comments

Your email address will not be published.

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

  1. Very well-stated, thinkwell. Thank you for bringing out these points.

    It was Cathy Takase herself who said in an OIP Opinion Letter that there is no privacy interest in something that has already been disclosed. Another OIP Opinion Letter clarified that “already disclosed” is if the person has already published the information. That matches this situation to a T – since, as the HDOH says on their own website now, Obama has published his COLB online.

    1. Nellie, thinkwell missed something from the Justice Department. And it means that Hawaiian Health Department using Glomar answers to Hawaii Freedom of Information questions still won’t protect Obama –

      Quote–Only through the CONSISTENT APPLICATION of this masked response to third-party requests, regardless of whether responsive records do actually exist, can the privacy of those who are in fact mentioned in law enforcement files be protected. For example, if an agency provided a “no records” response to its first nine requests for third-party investigatory files, it could not then respond to the tenth request — where records in fact do exist by “refusing to confirm or deny” without, in effect, DISCLOSING THE VERY FACT SOUGHT TO BE PROTECTED.

      Butterdezllion wrote in her blog that the Hawaii Freedomm of Information Office said –

      Quote–OIP has generally advised DOH that OIP has recognized that, what is called under federal FOIA law, a “glomar” response, which may be appropriate when merely acknowledging the existence, or nonexistence, of a particular record WOULD REVEAL INFORMATION protected by statute.

      Because HHD have been sending out Glomarr answers–saying Access To Record IF ANY Denied–with other answers–like No Such Record Exists–then partial Glomarization can’t work. To make Glomar ansswers stick they need to send out Glomar answers to EVERYTHING about Obama. But that’s not legal–for anything not covered by privacy–and it looks very suspicoious when everything is supposed to be normal about Obama’s records. Of course HHD could of said No Such Record Exists to every question. But that would be illegal and worse for them just the proof the requestors wanted.

      So HHD is between a rock and a hard place. Hawaii Freedom of Information law and the truth. You better believe that when HHD send out a Glomar answer to some question they REALLY DO HAVE what was asked for. Otherwise the easy answer would be No Such Record Exists. HHD mind games fool nobody. We have already worked out Obama was not born in Hawaii and is an illegal alien.

      Nellie, Obama’s COLB is a bad fake. I don’t see as you say that HHD on their website have announced that Obama has put up his COLB. They only say that –

      Quote–Index data consisting of name and sex of the registrant, type of vital event, and such other data as the director may authorize–are some of–Quote–The only disclosures pertaining to those records that can be made in accordance with Hawaii law.

      Then they list Birth Index, Obama II, Barack Hussein, Male. Suprise, suprise, the HHD webpage says nothing about the noncertified copy of a birth certificate with all the same information as the original. They absolutely do have the power to release that to ANYONE.

      And what happened to as they say Such other (index) data as the director may authorize? Hawaii Freedom of Information says that if information was available before that law came in it will always available. Until recently birth certificate numbers were available with index data. So why is the director not putting up the number of Obama’s registration from 1961? You know, the one we’re supposed to see on the COLB? She’s been asked enough of times. And it would make Obama look good. But she can’t because it’s a fake. That number belongs to SOMEBODY ELSE. That’s why they are hiding it! We already figured Obama was not registered in 1961. And if HHD registered him in later years he would only have a number from that other year. Somebody got Obama a number from 1961 that wasn’t his for the COLB pictures to trick the American people and HHD said nothing. I wonder why.

      HHD are helping Obama stomp the Constitution. Next Chief Illegal Alien Obama is going to fasttrack at least 12 million other illegal aliens into citizenship. They will be feeling very grateful when they vote now they can bring over all their new US citizen children. What a powerbase.

  2. I believe I’ll fabricate a background for myself from forged documents and run for President of Kenya. When they claim I don’t meet the qualifications, I’ll just start screaming “RACISM”!

  3. Did anyone else receive a letter recently from the State of Hawaii, Dept. of Human Services? Signed by Pankaj Bhanot, Division Admistrator? Whited out above the return address is, “LIHEAP”. Also, they must be on a shoe string budget, the mailing label is cut out from plain white paper & 3 pcs of scotch tape used to adhere it. Letter thanks me for my letter of March 1, 2010 (the petition?), says they (DHS) referred my ltr “to us”, says issue of Pres.Obama’s cert.of birth needs to be addressed to DOH, Dr. Fukino & will forward the ltr for her review. 3rd paragraph says , “due to confidentiality, the DHS is not able to confirm or deny that any records exist for Pres. Obama or his family. You will need to obtain a “consent to release” before any information can be released”. Leaves his ph# (808) 586-5230.
    cc’d are: Dr.Fukino, DOH & Lillian B. Koller, Dept. of Human Services
    This letter is dated April 1! It came almost 2 wks after Sen. Fred Hemmings ridiculous letter.

  4. Communism,sums it up short and sweet! but these people need to realize this is America! It is all going to come out in the end,the truth shall set us free,and they shall all be held,prosecuted to the full extent of the law. It won’t be pretty. If they weren’t trying to cover up a lie,it wouldn’t be so hard on all of them. Their nonsense is comical at this point. Get ready for the ride folks cause its gonna be rough!! We the people can guarantee this.

  5. Does anyone see there is no effort being made to comply with any law that would open their benefactor to prosecution? The term conspiracy has meaning indeed and we are being treated to a healthy use of one. The question is why are the courts delaying the obvious finding they must legally make when the longer they wait the greater the damage to the law they pretend to uphold? Maybe the answer is they don’t intend to ever reveal the illegal act and instead await a government response that stifles dissent by some means we will not like or accept willingly.

  6. The news out of Kenya mentioned by James is startling and important. The official website for this information, from the parliament of Kenya itself, is here:

    http://www.parliament.go.ke/parliament/downloads/tenth_forth_sess/Hansard/RDRAFT25.03P.pdf

    The key words again are: “how could a young man born here in Kenya, who is not even a native American, become the President of America?”

    The speaker of these words is a cabinet member of the current presidential administration. He is the Minister of Lands for Kenya, Mr. James Orengo. He is a lawyer and a former presidential candidate himself. Orengo won his seat in parliament in 2007 on the Orange Democratic Movement Party of Kenya (ODM) ticket, which is currently headed by Raila Odinga, the man Obama campaigned for and his erstwhile “cousin.”

    At some point, one must decide that these Kenyans are either misinformed, lying, or telling the truth. Why would this cabinet member be lying? National pride? How could he be misinformed, since he is allied with Obama’s “cousin”? I find it very hard to ignore this. Unless other information appears to conclusively negate these comments, I find them incredibly important.

    1. I hope the Hawaii Department of Health officials can see that the charade is over and that they can be prosecuted for their part in the cover-up.

      Still not a single mention anywhere on Fox or the main stream media of the latest on Obama’s ineligibility..

      1. On a Fox site today I tried to post a simple statement of how the DOH has confirmed in 2 different ways that the Factcheck COLB is a forgery, providing a link to my blog where I said the documentation could be found. Fox wouldn’t post that.

  7. Guess What? The Kenyan National Assembly on March 25, 2010 has just leaked out that Obama was born in Kenya:
    http://www.bunge.go.ke/parliament/downloads/tenth_forth_sess/Hansard/RDRAFT25.03P.pdf

    Page 31: “If America was living in a situation where they feared ethnicity and did not see itself as a multiparty state or nation, how could a young man born here in Kenya, who is not even a native American, become the President of America? It is because they did away with exclusion.”
    ———————
    Mrs. Rondeau replies: That statement from page 31 is even more explicit than the one from the previous Kenyan Parliament minutes which called Obama something like “son of this soil.” This is outrageous!

    1. You bet. It confirms everything:
      Michaelle Obama’s Remark
      The Kenyan Ambassodor’s Statement.
      Sarah Obama’s Statement
      The numerous “Kenyan-Born” news accounts.

  8. Barkle Steve Obama supplies big federal mainland money to HI. They will not comply unless prosecuted, or someone from the inside realizes they will be going to jail. Doing jail time for a false BC, amazingly stupid. Better to be a witness.

  9. Okay, it’d be embarrassing to Obama if his real father was Frank Marshall, but the NBC issue would be gone. Is Hawaii protecting Obama’s feelings of shame by declaring that he is a natural-born-citizen, but not disclosing that Obama, Sr., was not his father?

    1. just-saying: This is not plausible because Frank Marshall and his son look absolutely nothing like Obama, nor act like him, they have a very distinctive set of features and gestures. But, Mark Ndsandjo, Obama’s brother does look/act like him a lot.
      Ndsandjo is Ruth’s 2nd husband’s name. They are hiding her maiden name. Emory Univ. has Mark Ndesandjo married to a woman named Chloe but all the lamestream reports show him married to a Chinese woman.
      They are hiding data about Ruth and Mark, and Mark has addresses all over the USA. Something is very wrong about this picture.

      1. Why would her maiden name be useful? Then one could make a FOIA request?

        Surely any private eye can get hold of this information.

        I’m interested in your thoughts, but you didn’t respond the last time, tminu

        JM

      2. Sorry if I didnt’ respond at some point.
        Now that the Kenyan Parliament says he was born there, along with Michelle, I don’t find myself caring to whom as much. But I was always suspicious of the dearth of information about Ruth.
        Here is a Kenya Nat’l Assembly Official Report dated March 25, 2010. On p. 31, 2nd paragraph, the Minister for Lands, James Aggrey Orengo, who is a member of Parliment (Jan 2008 to date: MP for Ugenya Constituency) confirms Obama’s birthplace as Kenya and that he is not even a native American.

        http://www.bunge.go.ke/parliament/downloads/tenth_forth_sess/Hansard/RDRAFT25.03P.pdf

    2. In that case he might be a nbc (if he really was born on US soil) but he is an imposter – he is not what he claims himself to be. Voters voted for BHO jr, son of BHO sr. He is not BHO jr so he must be removed and be prosecuted for his crimes!

  10. The Hawaii prosecutor needs to prosecute Fukino for disclosing Obama’s vital information without his express permission, and she is guilty of a misdemeanor (less than one year in prison).

    Conversely, if he gave her permission, she needs to show that permission and now disclose his vitals as it’s already been granted by the party of interest. The privacy excuse is DEAD.

  11. The DOH can claim there is ‘insufficient public interest” because they’ve identified that 99% of the requests come from the same four people…thats what they told me. Also, the law says they cant release Obama’s records..just like you couldn’t call Texas and demand they give up my birth records for any reason…need a court order unfortunately.

    1. Impossible. A person must wait at least ten days before resubmitting the same request, so that would make a grand total of 12-16 a month, TOPS, according to your/their version of things.

      Besides, a UIPA request by this publication already revealed the DOH gets no where near as many requests for Oblather’s vital records as they claimed.

      But, if they are going to claim there is, indeed, a huge public interest (or even a scintilla), then they need to release an uncertified copy just as the law allows them to do and just as UIPA dictates they do.

    2. But obozo is a public figure for whom there is no ‘privacy’ as it is for you the ordinary Joe from Taxas. Obozo allegedly has posted his short-form COLB so he has waived his privacy!
      We the people are his employer and have every right to demand proof of his citizenship and eligibility.
      If you were the employer would you accept an online digital image of a prima facie COLB posted by an unauthorized non-governmental website (wouldn’t you require a hard copy of the genuine bc?) (McCain provided a hard copy of his bc, why can’t obama?)
      Would you go digging for the newspaper birth annoucement and accept it as proof of his place of birth when he refuses to show you a hard copy of his genuine bc?
      Oh yea the idiot obots will! The lame stream media will. The congress critters will!
      Insane is what this is!

    3. That claim is undermined by the fact that the DOH posted a separate page on its Web site to deal with public questions about Obama’s birth records.

    4. What Fukino isn’t telling you is that her own administrative rules say that she can send a person’s non-certified COLB to anybody who asks for it. HRS 338-18a, which she keeps citing, only applies to disclosures that are NOT already authorized by law or department rules. That disclosure is already authorized by the rules so 338-18a doesn’t even apply to it.

      I have pointed that out to Okubo at least 3 different times and she just keeps spewing out the same rotten, unlawful garbage.

      This very authorization is one of the reasons that Fukino illegally hid the administrative rules – to keep the public from knowing that any one of us could ask for the genuine document that Obama posted a forgery of. But if she released the genuine non-certified COLB for Obama as authorized by the rules and thus required by UIPA, we would all immediately see that Obama is a liar who was not born in Hawaii.

      The fact of her cover-up of the rules, all by itself, would make this story about equal to Watergate. Add all the other crap she and Obama’s folks have done and it’s way, way larger than that.

      The fact of the matter is that we could make short work of this whole mess if the HDOH simply followed their own rules.

      And regarding Fukino’s claim that there isn’t enough public interest because 99% of the requests come from 4 people – has this gal looked at ANY of the petitions people have signed? And the standard – as Fukino should know – is SCINTILLA. If there is a SCINTILLA of public interest disclosure is required.

      I would be very interested to see a copy of the HDOH’s response to you, if you are willing to share that (with your name redacted, of course).

  12. The only reason to hide behind Howard Hughes’ “Glomar Explorer” is because they wish to help BHO keep information illegally from the public.

    Can a state be guilty of and tried for treason???

  13. The Hawaii DoH is claiming they are getting hundreds of e-mail requests regarding Obama. It is so disruptive and overwhelming for their facility to respond to these requests, that they want a law to protect them. It would have to be a pretty significant disruption to justify such a law.

    So how can they claim that “there is insufficient public interest in disclosure to outweigh” the privacy interest at stake?