If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
INCLUDES ANALYSIS BY IMAGING EXPERT DECLARING IT A FORGERY
(Jun. 5, 2011) — Dear Editor:
The following letter was mailed with enclosures to FBI Director Robert Mueller as well as the Agent in Charge at the FBI office in Honolulu, HI. The author is urging everyone to send his or her own letter to the FBI to prompt an investigation into why Barack Hussein Obama would claim a forged image as his official birth certificate from Hawaii.
Mr. Douglas Vogt, the author of the 22-page report referenced and included in the letter below was interviewed by The Post & Email last week after he filed his own criminal complaint with the Washington, DC and Honolulu offices of the FBI.
935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20535-0001 June 2, 2011
Attn: Robert S. Mueller, III; Director
Re: Information sent to the FBI regarding possible criminal acts of Barack Hussein Obama.
Dear Director Mueller:
I am merely a common, everyday American citizen but it is with the greatest concern that I’d like to bring to your attention a packet of extensive information sent to the FBI by Mr. Douglas Vogt with whom I have no connection except that I have read much of his extensive technical analysis of the basis for his submission. I find it to be both chilling and technically accurate from my background in many aspects of computer software, hardware, and publishing over the last 50 years. He has made a very good analysis and I’d urge you to take the time to study it personally due to its implications and possible repercussions.
Even further I’d urge the FBI to take the requisite steps to investigate the matter Mr. Vogt outlines which can only be done definitively by not merely duplicating his technical analysis to verify it, but by having an agent team actually verify the contents of the purported White House birth certificate he mentions (which is, in fact, not a genuine original document that it is purported to be) by comparing it in depth against the ACTUAL original medically-attested (by the delivering MD) and witnessed document which is required by law (both Federal and State) to be on file at Kapiolani Hospital in HI as has just recently been disclosed. The form of this original document is as described by the definitive Vital Statistics report on page 228 here http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsus/vsus_1961_1.pdf
The team should be made acutely aware of the “unique” natality laws in HI which are completely different from those in all other 49 states. I have enclosed a separate two page description of how this affects the situation and why the team should not be fooled by such shenanigans as have many of the American public.
The computer image on the White House website is, in fact, an administratively-originated and constructed document built up from some (but not all) of the information on file in the Department of Health office in Honolulu. Local HI agents may not understand this. It is most likely a compilation of selected data from several documents but it is NOT the medically-attested original birth-witnessed document from the hospital site and must not be taken to be such (as the fraud identified is attempting to accomplish).
The investigative team should be as politically unbiased as possible, but the determination is NOT political as they need not (and indeed should not) comment upon the eligibility of the individual for office under the Constitution – that would likely properly be the province of the U. S. Supreme Court. The team’s job would be to determine if the original hospital-filed medically-witnessed birth certificate is in all respects identical to that presented on the White House site as of April 27, 2011 and if not, where the fraud originated.
If there IS no matching Kapiolani Hospital birth certificate, that should be made known to the American public at once; millions question its existence. Should it not match exactly, the team should then thoroughly investigate ALL the related records on file in the HI DOH from which the WHBC (let’s call it) was constructed and take careful note of all information therein since obviously some of it has been purposely withheld from citizens. The team can then proceed to determine the breadth and depth of the fraud and those involved including any on the US mainland.
Note that in the enclosure the names used are as those originally specified in HI laws … these names have recently been dramatically (and misleadingly) changed for political purposes, confusing everyone. When former Director of the DOH Fukino specified that Obama was a “natural born citizen” she was speaking with reference to a HI determination of the term (which she herself could solely and legally determine) and NOT with respect to any US Constitutional meaning – but this was never stated. That would be good for a HI driver’s license no doubt but not for a license to the Oval Office. 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.
excerpt from The Mombosan Son, Chapter 5
Hawaii is the only state in U.S. history to offer an alternative form of an ‘Original (Vault) Birth Certificate’ which does not require an eyewitness to the birth, or natal history attributable to any location other than the State of issuance.
There is a chronological overlap between 1959 and 1972 in the official time of the Certificate of Hawaiian Birth Program during which the State of Hawaii issued both a ‘Certificate of Hawaiian Birth’ and a ‘Certificate of Live Birth’, both under the umbrella title of ‘Original (Vault) Birth Certificate’, but under completely different circumstances. The documentation used to validate one’s birth decided which certificate was issued. The distinction between the two documents was determined by whether a person’s birth was attended firsthand in the State of Hawaii by a witness defined in Hawaii Revised Statute 338-5 and 338-6, or whether it was determined by an official of the state of Hawaii through secondary sources showing that a person was born in the state of Hawaii sometime in the past. Therefore, the difference between the two documents is that one is issued as a result of an eyewitness to the birth, the other is issued by the decision of an administrator or judge.
“The Certificate of Hawaiian Birth program was established in 1911, during the territorial era, to register a person born in Hawaii who was one year old or older and whose birth had not been previously registered in Hawaii. The Certificate of Hawaiian Birth Program was terminated in 1972, during the statehood era.”
In the description above, the Department of Health doesn’t include that judges and administrators can and do make decisions to grant ‘Certificates of Hawaiian Birth’ based on information provided through secondary identification documents, personal testimony and support records from later in the applicant’s life, long after the birth took place. When the courts make the final decision, they declare the decision irrefutable and correct.
excerpt from The Mombosan Son, Chapter 8 –
Thus, the state of Hawaii gives itself permission to recognize Obama as a natural-born citizen by its own autonomous definition despite the fact that its administrative declaration is in complete contradiction to federal Constitutional law which draws discernment as follows:
“The difference between the synthetic endowment of natural-born status provided by the state of Hawaii as opposed to the federal Constitutional requirement is that the federal mandate requires the candidate to actually be born under medical verification and federal legal jurisdictions. The birth of a natural born civilian must be documented with a standard NVSD “Certificate of Live Birth” and it must be signed by a licensed professional qualified to witness and attest to the legal and medical characteristics of a “live birth” at the moment of the birth, within the geographic region affording U.S. Constitutional protection for the witnesses and the child.”
Notes for Agent Team:
1. Obama has released in writing and by speech his “original birth certificate”. Since most of us are only born once, that would most certainly mean the Kapiolani Hospital where the birth on U. S. Soil occurred as a delivery-MD-witnessed live birth of the person plus witness signatures and various metrics such as height, weight, etc. The terms used would be as on page 231 (race and color) and the form of the BC would be as specified by page 228 of http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsus/vsus_1961_1.pdf
2. Also at Kapiolani the hospital should be able to present the admission, treatment medical records, and discharge records for the mother as well as treatment and discharge records for the child.
3. The Investigating team should take with them two sets of court orders; one set for Kapiolani and one for the HI DOH. Each set should specify all documents to the person/persons involved be provided no matter by what name or from what country of document origin.
4. Kapiolani should be investigated first since there is a very high likelihood of getting meaningful results quickly – e.g., no records for the person(s) and therefore no US birth. The DOH will still need to be investigated but doing it second would help focus the investigation on the criminal fraud perpetrated.
5. The Agent Team when at DOH should be made aware that if the WHBC has been constructed by piecing together portions of different documents that ALL documents should be obtained even if not used in the fraud directly. It is even possible under HI laws that a foreign BC might be on file at the DOH or that one or more documents may be sealed (and should also be included). Lists showing access to the documents should also be obtained for possible interviews of certain individuals.
6. Also, the Agent Team must be made aware that in HI law is is possible to have an already born infant examined in a hospital (even if not born there) by a medical doctor who is required by HI law to sign the document as though he witnessed the birth (when he did not) and thereby under HI law making the hospital used for this examination the birth location even if the birth took place elsewhere (including in a different country).
7. For any DOH investigation, the Agent Team needs to be aware that there are several possible types of HI “birth certificates” which may even all be on file at the same time. These have never been identified by the public DOH statements, but should be. Included might be a birth certificate from a different country, a Hawaiian Certificate of Live Birth, a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth, a Delayed Birth Certificate, an Amended Birth Certificate, a Vault Copy Birth Certificate, a Certification of Live Birth, and even others. Having the word “Live” in the title is misleading since it is not the same in HI parlance as a medically-certified live birth but may really be an administratively-certified birth (or not even a real birth at all).