The HDOH Has Juggled BC#’s for at Least 4 1961 BC’s

BC Number Manipulation Analysis

If Okubo’s numbering method was in effect, Obama’s BC# almost certainly originally belonged to Virginia Sunahara.

If Verna K L Lee’s numbering method was in effect, Obama was almost certainly given the BC# that originally belonged to Stig Waidelich, and the HDOH has juggled BC#’s down the line in order to hide that fact – including Virginia’s.

There will be more on this.

About these ads


  1. The Magic M
    Posted September 20, 2012 at 8:18 am | Permalink | Reply

    You keep assuming that the numbers were assigned chronologically.

    WND just published a quote from Verna K L Lee that the numbering was done at the end of the month.
    If the numbering was done chronologically, it wouldn’t have been necessary to wait until the end of the month.

    If you instead assume that “end of month” numbering was done alphabetically, the numbers all fall into place (with Ah’Nee having the lowest and Waidelich having the highest).

    Care to comment? (Or will you chicken out and not publish this question?)

    • Posted September 20, 2012 at 12:04 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Verna Lee said the BC’s were numbered at the end of the month IN THE ORDER OF OCCURRENCE (date and time). There’s no way they could have been numbered by both the time of occurrence and alphabetically. The 1961 registrar said it was done by order of occurrence; why would she say that if they were actually numbered alphabetically (but only by last name, because Susan Nordyke, who was born first, was numbered before Gretchen Nordyke – in birth order rather than alphabetical order)?

      See, no matter how you slice it there are problems. If the BC’s were numbered alphabetically then we’ve got the HDOH folks lying to us about the numbering system. We’ve already got 2 different claims about the numbering system so we know that SOMEBODY is lying to us already. And the only way we’re ever going to know the truth is by looking at MULTIPLE YEARS’ worth of microfilm rolls that show the pattern for numbering.

      Deputy AG Jill Nagamine argued that Duncan Sunahara shouldn’t be able to get his sister’s original long-form because Sunahara just wanted to get information that would shed light on Obama’s BC. Apparently she thinks that in order to hide the government’s lying about information that until 1986 was LEGALLY REQUIRED TO BE DISCLOSED TO EVERYONE (each person’s BC#), government has a right to keep not only their rules but also their policies and procedures hidden – in violaton of UIPA, whose chief purpose is to keep the GOVERNMENT accountable.

      This isn’t about Obama. This is about government that commits crimes and then lies to us to cover up those crimes. I’m sick of it. I’m sick of paying these people to screw us all, against our will. To rape us all. It reveals the heart of the people over us – the same heart of tyranny and lawlessness that Saddam Hussein had when he executed innocent men in front of their families and then charged their wives for the bullet. If that’s what you want America to be, then just come out and say that, because that’s what America under Obama has become.

      I don’t publish ad hominems or sheer “nyeah”. If somebody has something of substance to say I will publish it unless I suspect it was intended to be to me personally and they wouldn’t want me to publish it, in which case I usually email them to clarify whether they truly wanted it published.

  2. David Newton
    Posted September 20, 2012 at 7:40 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Don’t you think it stretches credibility that all (and ONLY) the BC numbers that have been released publicly so far for births in Hawaii in 1961 are involved in this grand conspiracy?

    Especially so given that Waidelich’s number only came to light as the result of a CNN investigation 3 years after we learned of obama’s BC number.

    • Posted September 21, 2012 at 3:32 am | Permalink | Reply

      Don’t you think it odd that none of those BC#’s showed up until AFTER the HDOH had changed their policy to violate the statutes by refusing anybody the opportunity to see any long-form birth certificates?

      The only numbers we’ve seen for these people have been easily-manipulable computer entries (except Ah Nee’s, which has 2 digits overlapping and was thus easily recognized as a forgery early on). And did you see that Mike Zullo has an affidavit from a person who checked the 1960-64 birth index and Obama’s name was not in it, and then a week later Obama’s name was in it? That’s how easily those numbers can be fabricated, when they don’t have to try to make any documents pass forensic examination. The BC# on the Sunahara death certificate was handwritten in, on a line that has alignment errors, indicating that the area with the BC# written in was C&P’ed badly, with the alignment out of whack. IOW, that line that has the handwritten BC# in it was altered and the alignment of the C&P was badly done. So of the 4 BC’s other than the Nordyke twins’, 2 are obvious forgeries of a long-form BC and a long-form death certificate, and the other two are easily-manipulable computer entries – one of which suddenly showed up in the birth index even though it supposedly should have been there all along.

      Of course, all that manipulation will be exposed when the complete transaction logs are audited, which at this point is REQUIRED before there can be any legally-established birth facts for Obama.

    • Posted September 21, 2012 at 3:45 am | Permalink | Reply

      I guess what I mean to say, David, is that it’s pretty easy for the only BC’s released to be part of the HDOH’s manipulation because the HDOH won’t release any of the long-forms. As soon as Duncan Sunahara started asking about getting Virginia’s BC (and right around the time that Abercrombie and the HI AG forced Neal Palafox to resign and then had Janice Okubo lie about it being for “personal reasons” – shortly after Abercrombie told his friend Mike Evans that there wasn’t a BC for Obama in Hawaii…) the HDOH started violating their rules and UIPA so that all the original records would remain hidden. Doesn’t that seem a little bit fishy to you?

      UIPA requires that unless a person is specifically blocked by statute from receiving a record, they are to receive it in the form which they request. Until mid-March of 2011 certified copies of long-forms were still being issued. Then sha-zam! Just like that, without going through the required mechanisms for changing the Administrative Rules )which say specifically that certified copies of standard BC’s have to be reproduced by microfilm or photocopy), they CHANGED a policy already set by rules rather than allowable to be at the discretion and whim of the HDOH Director.

      And now Abercrombie has a page on the HI governor’s website claiming that they haven’t issued certified copies of long-forms since 2001. We’ve got a certified copy of a long-form from mid-March 2011 and videotape of a woman ordering her long-form at the HDOH office and being told she’d get it in 2 weeks. Do Abercrombie and the entire Hawaii government think we’re morons? Who we gonna believe – Abercrombie or our lying eyes?

      • David Newton
        Posted September 21, 2012 at 8:21 am | Permalink

        Yet some of these BC’s come from sources other than the HDOH and you’re arguing that, just coincidentally, ALL of them have been integral to a conspiracy? What are the odds?

      • Posted September 21, 2012 at 10:50 am | Permalink

        What BC’s come from sources other than the HDOH? The forged Ah Nee one? Having 2 overlapping numbers kinda proves my point on that one. And the fact that it had a convincing seal on it shows that either somebody has a convincing seal to use on this (and what other?) forgery, or else the HDOH itself created that forgery.

        What other BC are you talking about? I haven’t contested the Nordyke BC’s – which, incidentally, are NOT in alphabetical order so they disprove the alphabetization theory anyway. Alphabetized by last name only? What good would that do – especially in a culture where there may be a lot of people with the same last name or where the last name may not even be the defining one (if I’m understanding Asian names correctly)? The Nordyke BC’s are the only ones for 1961 (other than Obama’s) that came out before the HDOH began refusing to allow the originals to be seen, and incidentally happen to be the ones that are NOT alphabetical.

        Look at the list:

        Ah Nee – forged
        Susan Nordyke – not alphabetical
        Gretchen Nordyke – not alphabetical
        Obama – forged
        Sunahara – forged at the HDOH and not alphabetical
        Waidelich – HDOH computer-generated

        Those are the dots, and the pattern they make is actually quite clear.

        And there’s more too. Deputy AG Jill Nagamine said that Duncan Sunahara was trying to find out information about Obama’s birth certificate and the HODH had to deny him access in order to protect Obama’s record which Duncan is not authorized to learn anything about. Release of Virginia Sunahara’s original long-form would only reveal things about Sunahara and the HDOH – the 2 agents involved in that BC – UNLESS something from Sunahara’s BC is also on Obama’s BC. That’s the only way Sunahara’s record would reveal something about Obama’s BC specifically. So the argument by the Deputy AG is an admission that something on Sunahara’s BC is actually on Obama’s BC. Whether that is the BC# or something else will only be known by seeing the original microfilm rolls for multiple years. But the HDOH isn’t allowing that…

      • Posted September 21, 2012 at 11:14 am | Permalink

        I should clarify: the line containing the BC# on Sunahara’s DEATH certificate was forged at the HDOH; the BC was computer-generated after the HDOH was refusing to let anybody see originals.

  3. Posted September 26, 2012 at 12:11 am | Permalink | Reply

    Hi there would you mind stating which blog platform you’re using? I’m going to start my own blog in
    the near future but I’m having a hard time selecting between BlogEngine/Wordpress/B2evolution and Drupal. The reason I ask is because your design seems different then most blogs and I’m looking for something completely unique.
    P.S Apologies for being off-topic but I had to ask!

  4. Whitt Tarleton
    Posted October 15, 2012 at 2:45 am | Permalink | Reply

    Why is it the old adage that “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” only seems to apply to Republicans these days? Sounds like the officials in Hawaii are getting tripped up in their own pack of lies.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 82 other followers

%d bloggers like this: