Obama Citizenship

Eligibility Update: Fox News Poses Certificate Question, Dr. Polarik Speaks Out on Fox?s Coverage, Mario Apuzzo on COLB

By Phil

As WorldNetDaily reports, the Fox News Nation site has introduced the discussion question, “Should Obama Release Birth Certificate? Or Is This Old News?” in response to White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs’ recent response to a question on the President’s birth certificate. As of the end of the day today (5/29), the posting has garnered nearly 1,700 comments, making it one of the top issues being discussed:

One contributor to the page had this to say: “Not old news, just a burning question that needs an answer, and while your at it, get some of that other hidden, sealed information uncovered like, his passport to Indonesia, his college records, etc. There are so many unanswered questions, and frankly you all dropped the ball before the election.”

The visibility of the Obama birth certificate issue has also been raised by a new national billboard campaign initiated by Joseph Farah, editor and chief executive officer of WND. Launched just over a week ago, the campaign has raised about $55,000 and begun erecting billboards that ask the question, “Where’s the birth certificate?”

The site OfByFor.US.com and their “Flush the COLB” toilet paper initiative is also contributing to the WND billboard campaign as well as helping sponsor The Right Side of Life by allowing people to send a roll to a federal representative or as a novelty item signifying what the certification is really worth in determining eligibility.

In response to Fox News’ coverage of Mr. Gibbs’ response concerning the online certification of live birth, Dr. Ron Polarik, one of two individuals who have gone on record via affidavit in the case Keyes v. Lingle attesting to the lack of authenticity of the certification, wrote the following email to Fox anchor Bret Baier (h/t TheObamaFile)…

Dear Bret:

Congratulations to you and FOXNEWS for being the first news agency to bring Obama’s birth certificate controversy into the mainstream.

This controversy, however, goes far beyond the question of Obama’s citizenship status — it also raises the specter of President Obama’s involvement in document fraud.

What the Obama campaign actually posted on its website on June 12, 2008, is a forged document image and not a real copy of Obama’s birth certificate.  I spent five months conducting intensive research on the document images alleged to have been made from Obama’s “original birth certificate.”  My research proves that the document image posted on Obama’s website and on other pro-Obama websites, was fabricated using Photoshop, and that no such document actually exists.

My final research report and executive summary can be found here: http://polarik.blogtownhall.com

Obama’s campaign manufactured this bogus birth certificate to deceive the American public into believing that Obama was born in Hawaii, and was therefore eligible to be President.  This forgery was also used to derail attempts to see his actual original birth certificate which undoubtedly contains birth information that differs from what his fabricated birth certificate image shows.  The reason why Obama still refuses to release his original birth certificate is because it would confirm that he is not eligible to be President, that he lied about his history and citizenship status, and that he engaged in document fraud to hide these facts from the American public. 

To help cover up this scam, Obama’s campaign called upon patently partisan, pro-Obama “fact checking sites” like Factcheck and Politifact to proffer, protect, and promote this fabricated image as being a real copy of Obama’s actual birth certificate, and to engage in slander and public ridicule of anyone having the audacity to question its validity.

In every news conference that he’s had up until now, Obama and his Press Secretary have side-stepped all of the questions raised about his birth certificate, including the use of intimidation of reporters to do so.  When Press Secretary Gibbs said that “The state of Hawaii provided a copy, with a seal, of the president’s birth,” it was a bald-faced lie.  Hawaii never produced a Certification of Live Birth document for Obama, with a date-stamp of June 12, 2007.

Furthermore, Hawaii denied that Obama, a family member, or someone Obama personally authorized, ever requested and received a copy of this alleged Certification of Live Birth (COLB) in June 2007 or in any other month of that year. 

Not one governmental official, in Hawaii or in any other place in the nation, has ever seen this COLB document in person, let alone validate it as genuine.

The reason is simple: this document does not exist and never did.  Hawaii announced that it has Obama’s original birth record, but has refused to reveal what’s on that record.  Hawaii never confirmed where Obama was born, and if he had been born in Honolulu as Obama claims, Hawaii would not have any reason to withhold that information.

What has unfolded is a genuine conspiracy to commit document fraud.  This bogus birth certificate constitutes a false identification document, and is a violation of federal forgery laws punishable by five years in prison (for each count) and up to a $250,000 fine.  Not only were federal forgery laws violated, but also Hawaiian forgery laws, as well.

That, Bret, is the untold story here.  Why would a President risk committing document fraud just to prevent his original birth certificate from ever being seen?

The answer must be that the information it contains would spell the end of his Presidency and his charade as well.  He would be exposed as a fraud and a usurper, and the political landscape would be forever changed, along with how the media shapes public policy.

Dr. Polarik holds a Ph.D. in Instructional Media and specializes in computer graphics with over 20 years experience with computers, printers and typewriters. [italics original; embolding mine]

Dr. Polarik goes on to mention the following on his web site:

People say that Obama released a genuine copy of his actual Certification of Live Birth.

• He never did, and they are mistaken, misinformed, or misleading others if they do.

People say that Hawaii confirmed this copy to be Obama’s actual Certification of Live Birth.

• Hawaii never confirmed a request for, nor the printing of, this Certification of Live Birth.

People say that Factcheck verified this image as Obama’s actual Certification of Live Birth.

• Factcheck was complicit in falsifying this image and passing it off as a genuine scan.

Obama also knows that this image is fake and doesn’t contain his actual birth information.

That’s why Obama and his staff refuse to answer any questions about his birth certificate.

Mario Apuzzo, attorney for Plaintiffs in Kerchner v. Obama, expressed a similar sentiment as that of Dr. Polarik’s in a recent posting (excerpted):

According to Obama and Gibbs, this digital document alone is supposed to allow Obama to qualify to be President of the United States and Commander in Chief of the Military. According to them, this electronic image alone is sufficient to prove that Obama is a U.S. citizen and therefore qualified to have the full power of the executive vested in him. It is unbelievable that Obama would expect the American people to grant him such license over their lives based simply upon an electronic image on a computer screen. It is even more unbelievable that the Electoral College, our Congress, political institutions, security forces, and media would allow him to get away with it. This document, which in its paper form is undoubtedly a legal document, has no probative value given that it was posted by some unknown person on the internet as a digital image without following any prescribed electronic media security protocols. We know that digital images can be easily manipulated through computer technology. See http://technology.findlaw.com/articles/01102/010555.html for an explanation of the need to follow defined federal and state standards when it comes to electronic/digital information transmittal of legal documents. If Obama expects this digital image of a COLB to have such unprecedented value which allows him to be President of the United States, then he should at least show that the electronic image he posted meets electronic/digital security standards.

While not officially confirmed, the authenticity of the COLB computer image has been questioned by at least two digital image experts who have concluded that the COLB image is a forgery.

Obama says he was born in a hospital. A birth certificate provides the name of the hospital where the birth occurred and the name of the doctor delivering the baby. The COLB does not have this vital corroborating information.

When Obama was born in 1961, Hawaii had in effect the Certificate of Hawaiian Birth Program which it established in 1911 and which it terminated in 1972. Someone could under Act 96 get a certificate claiming a Hawaiian birth even if he was physically born in Kenya by an adult or parent falsely claiming to the director of health that he was born in Hawaii when in fact he was born in Kenya. Hence, because of the contradictory evidence that exists regarding where he was born, plaintiffs are entitled to pierce the alleged COLB and examine the file that is in the possession of the Hawaiian Secretary of State which may contain a sworn application/petition in which some party set forth circumstantially all the facts upon which the application rested and supporting sworn affidavits of witnesses. The file could also contain the results of the Secretary or his designee examinations under oath of the applicant or other person who may have been cognizant of the alleged facts regarding the application/petition along with other documentary evidence that they may have obtained as a result of issuing subpoenas for books and other papers. …

Not eve the Hawaii Department of Home Lands accepts a certification of live birth (COLB) as conclusive evidence of being a native of Hawaii for its Homeland program. From its web site: “In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL.”

Despite the numerous and more-to-come law suits that have been and will be filed against Obama, he continues to refuse to release his original birth certificate and has opted rather to spend large sums of money using lawyers to defend himself and to cause the courts and litigants to expend large amounts of time and resources pursuing litigation against him and other third parties. He relies on procedural and other threshold arguments such as jurisdiction, justiciability, standing, political question, separation of powers, mootness, and ripeness rather than simply produce his original birth certificate and make a motion for summary judgment with prejudice as to the merits so that no other future cases can be brought against him and others which would then put an end not only to the ongoing drain of money, time, and other resources but also to the great public outrage that continues to be brew regarding his constitutional eligibility.

For some unknown reason and relying on state privacy laws, Obama has refused to publicly release his original Certificate of Live Birth (BC) even though in his book, Dreams from My Father, he stated that he has it.

Obama and his half-sister have each stated that he was born in different hospitals in Hawaii. In November 2004, in an interview with the Rainbow Newsletter, Maya told reporters her half-brother Sen. Barack Obama, was born on Aug. 4, 1961, at Queens Medical Center in Honolulu. But Obama has said he was born at Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women & Children. Changing her story, in February 2008 Maya then told reporters for the Honolulu Star-Bulletin that Obama was born at the Kapi?olani Medical Center for Women and Children.

On February 5, 2008, Madelyn Dunham was still alive, but the Obama campaign did not make her available for interviews with the media. Obama’s maternal grandmother surely would have known where her grandson was born but Obama refused the media access to her. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004164387_brodeur05m.html.

Neither of the two or any other hospital in Hawaii or anywhere in the world has been willing to come forward and claim its place in history as being the hospital where the first African-American President was born. There is no Hawaiian hospital that has confirmed that Obama and/or his mother were present in any such hospital at the time of Obama’s alleged birth in Honolulu. Not a single person has come forward, not a doctor, nurse, hospital administrator, nor any one else to confirm Obama’s birth in Hawaii.

Nor has the American public heard from any other person who could confirm Obama’s birth in Hawaii. …

Other than the COLB and the two newspaper announcements whose basis for information is the same single source, there does not exist one known corroborating medical or other document of any kind which shows that Obama was born in Hawaii. Obama?s birth notices appeared in both Honolulu Sunday newspapers on August 13, 1961. The information for those birth notices comes straight from the state Health Department?s Vital Records Division. Hence, the birth announcements, not having their source of information in some other place, do not add any corroboration to the COLB. Other secondary evidence may include baptismal or circumcision certificates, hospital birth records, or affidavits of persons having personal knowledge about the facts of birth. Other documentary evidence can be early census, school, or family bible records, newspaper files, or insurance papers. No such documents have been produced for the American public.

No public official in Hawaii has publicly confirmed that Obama was born in Hawaii. Director of Hawaiian Department of Heath, Fukino, said she has ?personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama?s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures,” but she failed to say that the certificate shows that Obama was born in Hawaii.

We have not heard from one international, federal, state, or local police or security agency that Obama’s birth place has been officially confirmed. …

Obama has refused all effort to have him release the following documents, relying on sealing of records and/or privacy laws: Punahou High School records, Occidental College records, Columbia College records, Columbia Thesis paper, Harvard College records, Selective Service Registration, medical records, Illinois State Senate records, Illinois State Senate schedule, Law practice client list, Certified Copy of original Birth Certificate, Harvard Law Review articles that were published, University of Chicago scholarly articles, exit and entry immigration records covering all of Obama’s travels out of the United States; passports; and record of baptism, if any.

Fightthesmears.com and factcheck.org have since maintained silence on the birth place issue after the questionable COLB was posted on the internet.

Obama has remained silent and has not declared publicly after his COLB and place of birth were questioned that he was born in Hawaii.

No member of the media, political party, the Executive Branch of Government, Congress, other political institution, Judiciary, or law enforcement entity, nor has Speaker Nancy Pelosi stated that she, has publicly stated that he or she has independently confirmed that Obama was born in Hawaii.

This Himalayan Mountain of contradictory evidence is sufficient to cause the prima facie presumption of the COLB to fall. Obama therefore now has the burden to come forward with competent evidence to conclusively prove that he was born in Hawaii. To date, he has failed to come forward with such evidence. Hence, under these circumstances, how can the American people in good faith conclude that Obama was born in Hawaii? How did Obama in good conscious twice take the oath to be President on January 20th when so many Americans have put forward all this contradictory evidence regarding where he was born and he refuses to come forward with any other convincing evidence (like a certified copy of his original birth certificate) showing that he was born in Hawaii?

We cannot place any trust in what Mr. Gibbbs said. He and Mr. Obama have to do a much better job than Mr. Gibbs? feeble and floundering effort at answering Mr. Kinsolving?s simple question. Obama should just do the right and simple thing for everyone’s sake and produce the real evidence of where he was born rather than have his political cronies dodge the question for him.

The above is only a portion of Mr. Apuzzo’s posting; he has much more available to peruse on his site.

For those who oppose questioning this President’s eligibility or, worse, think the time is past to do such questioning (as if there’s a statute of limitations of some sort to the eligibility question), it has been repeated many times the “mountain of evidence” that is available to substantiate this President’s background. The issue is whether or not it is to be released. And while it is proper for their to be privacy laws in place to protect the illegitimate dissemination of such documentation, I would argue that the People’s right to know about the background qualifications of their President is more than established in Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution.

If the President is a public figure, then we, the People, have a right to know about his background. After all, we need to be able to know who, exactly, it is that’s in charge of protecting the nation.

A current listing of citizen grand jury updates and eligibility lawsuits can be found here.

-Phil

Full post as published by The Right Side of Life on May 30, 2009 (boomark / email).