If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
“HALF TYPEWRITTEN AND HALF HANDWRITTEN?”
May 18, 2011
The following letter was sent to the Director of the Hawaii Department of Health and will be received by her tomorrow.
Loretta J. Fudddy, ACSW, MPH May 18, 2011
Director of Health
State of Hawaii Department of Public Health
1250 Punchbowl Street, Room 325
Honolulu, HI 96813
Dear Ms. Fuddy:
I note you were recently contacted by a letter from the personal attorney of the current holder of the Oval Office to arrange for her personal pickup of “two certified copies of his original certificate of live birth” and she further notes that a previous “Certification of Live Birth” had been requested by him and provided as “legally sufficient evidence of birth in the State of Hawaii”. She also notes the “longstanding” DOH practice is to provide nothing but that “short form” document when a certified copy is requested and requests a “waiver” from this “policy” while noting the “burden” placed upon the DOH by “numerous” requests for her clients birth record. Another letter on White House letterhead was included with a similar request/authorization for the person’s “original certificate of live birth”.
Your letter in response states your authority to do so and grants the request as an “exception to policy” while stating that you hope that this will end the “numerous inquiries” that have been so “disruptive to staff operations and have strained State resources”. You also claim to have witnessed the copying of the two documents and attest to their “authenticity”. You also in your letter indicate the document is called “original Certificate of Live Birth” rather than the terminology as used in making the request “original certificate of live birth” (which is a generic rather than a specific identifying term).
It seems notable to me that not only does the attorney attempt to endorse your retention of information but she also attempts to vouch for the accuracy and sufficiency of the information (before ever having seen it) – both of which actions seem strange and at odds with reality. What the attorney deems “legally sufficient evidence of birth in Hawaii” may be correct insofar as HI and its needs, desires, and laws are concerned, but that is not the issue here. As you surely should know the United States is composed also of 49 other states (or possibly 56) and the HI-intensive meaning certainly means nothing to these other states. Their interest, instead, is the legally sufficient evidence under the U. S. Constitution of an individual being a “natural born Citizen” a horse of a completely different color from a law crafting “citizenship” by a State for their own internal purposes even while they were only a Territory and striving to gain as many “citizens” as they possibly could; thereby engendering all sorts of “creative” natality laws, documents and requirements. No single State may, by decree, determine the meaning of part of the Constitution to be adhered to by all other states.
Unlike attorney Judith L. Corley I am writing you on behalf of the American People as I know them and have known them for many years. My “Letter of Authorization” is, quite simply, a request for the honest and complete truth which has yet to be evinced from the State of HI about the simple matter at hand which you must surely know is not a request for any sort of a document created administratively by the DOH that shows (per HI laws) that a person is considered a “citizen of HI” and has a birth certificate of some sort (allowed to be created administratively rather than medically by HI law) showing him to be born at a particular hospital even if not actually born there with a doctor other than the doctor who delivered him or who, as the former Director Fukino phrased it, was a “natural born citizen” . This generating of an actual sort of “birth certificate” document can be (and has been) done legally under HI laws but that does not mean the person was in fact born in the State nor does it preclude the facts that there might actually be a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth or even an actual Birth Certificate from another country or even some other document retained in his natal records for reference or even a Late or Amended Certificate. No qualification as to the actual title or titles of these natal source documents used to cobble together the “White House Birth Certificate” (or WHBC let’s call the Aug. 27, 2011 version) has even yet been mentioned or identified by the DOH. Even knowing what these source documents are might be imperative toward determining actual Constitutional eligibility. The question was never “is the man a resident of HI” (or even of the US) or anything like it so endowing him with a HI birth certificate is of virtually no value and it is pointless to pretend that it has any merit in the subject at hand in view of HI laws in effect over many, many years.
We The People could not care less about the man’s HI citizenship, natural born (in reality, possibly native born) or otherwise as Director Fukino expressed (since that relates only to your state but is not universally accepted even within it for all purposes as is widely known) but did not clarify. She was in no respect qualified to state that term under the meaning of the Constitution of the United States of America as it relates to a requirement of Presidential eligibility. Unfortunately many Americans have taken her statement to mean exactly that and it may be that such was her intent. It is abundantly clear that the former Director (though a medical doctor) took upon herself – intentionally or not – the cause of American legal justice along with an interpretation of what constitutes a natural born Citizen mentioned in the Constitution, through a birth which she did not witness, about 50 years after it occurred, in a location she did not witness and cannot verify, while also proclaiming the person’s successful fulfillment of Constitutional eligibility requirements. To my knowledge she is also not a Constitutional legal expert.
Hopefully you will not make a similar attempt nor will you or your State continue in the shortsighted attempt to hide behind the pretense of “identity theft” or “personal privacy” since to think anyone would even attempt to successfully assume the name Barack Hussein Obama (if that is even his legal name which is actually not now known) and use his bank accounts/credit cards, etc. is a veil of thin cloth, indeed. His actions in his present office are not muted or covered with as great a degree of secrecy as is the information you suppress so artificially. Claiming the right to jealously guard certain bits of data created long ago is total foolishness as we are continually bombarded with his current foibles and misadventures daily. This man now holds the most powerful office in America and there is considerable evidence that he may not be qualified to do so under the requisite clause of the Constitution. This is not a political matter, nor a racial one, nor a single State matter, nor a personal one but it IS a legal matter and those of you who work to obstruct the honest concerns of literally millions upon millions of Americans are doing at the very best a massive disservice to your country and your fellow citizens, are hindering the legal process, and you may be in some respects committing treason.
Even the Governor of your State had attempted to find the truth but was only able to conclude there was no actual, original, delivery-doctor-certified, long-form (call it what you will), real hospital Certificate of Live Birth. The specific document meant here was defined even in 1961 by the Federal government Vital Statistics professionals as you must surely know and it requires a number of entries for things such as the newborn’s height, weight, and other birth and later-life metrics as well as various attestations which are greatly missing from the generic original birth certificate data used to respond to Judith Corley’s request. It is beyond ludicrous to believe that a single provincial State agency in one state can decide wily-nily what other citizens may know about the individual in such an office since he is, after all, accountable to ALL citizens and not just those working in your Department even if you may think that to be the case.
In addition to your own Governor, others have attempted to track down this information, not found it, and even Kapiolani Hospital itself has said it had no records of admission of the man’s mother or a record of his birth. This leaves the obvious conclusion that in the vital statistics records in HI the material exists having been created under the auspices of your Department, perhaps, using the “unusual” laws of the State intended to solve long-ago problems with natality and population growth. It is apparent that the man was born someplace and that, yes, various documents that are authentic exist in addition to the bits and pieces that have been extracted from these vital records to prepare the two copies sent in response to this particular request. If you believe you are constricted by your own State laws from releasing the rest of this information perhaps you could ask your own Governor or Legislative bodies to change the law at least for this instance. Doing so would be a clear public service.
Since the request was made by the person himself to provide the “original information” it does not follow that it is “fair game” to provide only certain of the information and not all of it. It is time for the State to “fess up” as it were and provide ALL the information rather than merely the politically-selected bits desired by someone who is actually occupying an office he has never shown himself to be legally qualified to hold – and your release of this latest WHBC data posted on April 27, 2011 does not begin to fulfil that requirement. In fact, with the information released, there is clearly much more withheld that actually points to the likelihood of his ineligibility, deceit, and a need to withhold a great deal of information since this current release leaves many salient point dangling, inadequately addressed, or totally ignored.
It is preposterous to believe that you as the Director of DOH can restrict this information forever from the American people since it is their inherent right to have as complete a set of knowledge as possible about their top political leaders. It is the well-being and perhaps the lives of millions of us that you are attempting to constrain by your provincial, narrow views and that is completely and totally unacceptable and I’d think you would realize that. Your State – along with many others – benefits greatly from tourism and it would indeed be a shame to have an internal decision such as this make the State a pariah and looked down upon in years to come because you chose to withhold such vital information from the rest of America for such narrow reasons.
I therefore ask you on behalf of many, many millions of Americans of all colors and creeds and political persuasions and individual pursuits and outlooks – and even some too young to yet vote – to release a complete set of all information in your vital statistics files about this man so that history may judge both the man and your State correctly. Doing otherwise shall forever redound to your discredit as both a State and as individuals. Keep in mind that former Director Fukino has stated that she has seen the material and that it consisted at least of “half typewritten and half handwritten” information. We have yet to see documents that are so described. It’s time to turn over all the cards in what up to now been a shameful game of Three Card Monte.
And I’d add for all of the Americans on whose behalf I speak … PRETTY PLEASE!! After all, the documents in your vital records files are “original” also and that’s what was authorized for release. It did not delineate releasing only specified items of your own choosing to only an elite few.
I am selecting a list of different officials in HI to forward a copy of this letter to in an effort to perhaps inform them of the views of many Americans in this matter. Perhaps such information will initiate a healthy consideration of the proper course to take … which is not the course so far taken. I’d hope to see you all take the course of action your parents might have insisted that you do – be honest … DO THE RIGHT THING!! RELEASE THE INFORMATION!!!