Hawaii Open Records Law Thrown Overboard

Hawaii Open Records Law Thrown Overboard

Summary: The “vexatious requestor law” is being interpreted to mean that ANY request can be ignored, because ANY request can be called “duplicative” even when it is clearly not. The law gives total discretion to lawless bureaucrats who can ignore the clear wording of the law. Anybody surprised? One more example of lawlessness to cover for Obama. One more reason the Hawaii government comes out of this smelling like a sewer.

 Mark Niesse said in an AP report that anybody can see the public 1960-64 birth index. Sorry, Mark. The HDOH won’t let me see specific pages from it, and the OIP is saying they don’t have to hold the HDOH accountable for showing it to me. I guess some people are more “equal” than others, huh, Mark?

 The OIP and HDOH pulled a “vexatious requestor” determination on me. I sent a snail-mail with self-addressed stamped envelope,  requesting copies of pages from the 1960-64 birth index book where several specific names  are or would be – names I have never asked for before and which SHOULD BE unrelated to Obama  (such as Mae Obado). I have done this before on different names and the HDOH has disclosed the pages as required by law. Every page of those birth index books is a public government record and is required to be disclosed upon request. The only reason for them to refuse this request is if the request is so unclear that they don’t know what page is being requested. And then they have to request clarification.

 The HDOH used my SASE to respond by asking me whether I was talking about where the names would be alphabetically. I replied via a fax to Okubo to say yes, that was what I meant, and that I had asked for the full page specifically because I was unsure of the exact spelling.  I didn’t hear back from them so I contacted the OIP, who said I had to give them 10 business days from the time they got the clarification from me (IOW they can buy another 10 days into infinity just by asking stupid questions claiming that the request wasn’t clear.)

 The HDOH responded on April 8th :

 Ms. Nellie,

The Department of Health is unable to provide a page of index data where
a name would be.  We cannot provide index data for an individual without
the correct spelling of the name associated with that data. Index data
is stored electronically.

Janice Okubo

I e-mailed Okubo back to say that I didn’t request index DATA but a PAGE from a book, and unless she could give me a citation in UIPA where it says that birth index PAGES are not public government records, she needed to send me the copies of pages, to which I am legally entitled. No response.

 I e-mailed the following to the OIP last night:

 —– Original Message —–

From: Nellie

To: oip@hawaii.gov

Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2011 5:34 PM

Subject: Re: Request for Assistance – Birth Index Pages UIPA

 I have not heard anything from the HDOH on this request. It’s been over 2 months now since my original snail-mail was received by their office and 6 weeks since I clarified that I was asking for PAGES (as I made clear in my original request) and not specifically for NAMES.

 Their claim that they need to have a specific name to search for is certified baloney, as I have gotten from them in the past all the birth and marriage index pages that had entries with the last name of Asing. No problem then. Why is it a problem now?

 Two months is a long time to copy 4 pages from a single book. Will you help me in getting the records to which I am legally entitled? I have jumped through all the hoops I was told to jump through and have waited WELL beyond the required deadlines without hearing anything back from them even though I have given my e-mail contact information.

 Nellie/Freckles

 Today the OIP responded with this:

 —– Original Message —–

From: oip@hawaii.gov

To: Nellie

Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 12:54 PM

Subject: Re: Request for Assistance – Birth Index Pages UIPA

 Ms. Nellie,

The DOH has responded to your request asking for clarification.  This is OIP’s final response with respect to this matter.  Act 100, SLH 2010.    

 Act 100 of the 2010 State Legislature of Hawaii is the “vexatious requester” bill – which allows them to ignore DUPLICATIVE REQUESTS.

 The OIP is claiming that because I have asked for their help on this (and they told me I had to wait longer) they don’t have to finish out this issue. They can ignore the fact that the HDOH is totally disobeying the law by falsely saying they CANNOT disclose copies of specific birth index pages. They are claiming that as long as the HDOH responded AT ALL, that’s good enough for UIPA. The HDOH could respond to my request for a required disclosure with a big fat raspberry and the “vexatious requestor law” would say that’s all I can get.

 IOW, the “vexatious requestor bill” is being interpreted to mean that state agencies can ignore clear violations of the disclosure law. They have in effect gutted their Open Records Law in Hawaii. Nothing about this request for records OR the request for assistance was “duplicative”. The only words of the “vexatious requester law” that matter are the ones that allow them to ignore requests; doesn’t matter whether the requests are duplicative or not since they can call ANYTHING “duplicate” at their own discretion.

 So I am asking everybody who reads this to send an e-mail to Janice Okubo at janice.okubo@doh.hawaii.gov , to the OIP at oip@hawaii.gov, to Lt Gov Schatz  at brian.schatz@hawaii.gov and to the Ombudsman’s Office at  ombudsman@hawaii.gov  and  politely tell them that you don’t appreciate Okubo’s clear violation of UIPA, which says that public government records – such as PAGES from the 1960-64 birth index book in their office – must be disclosed upon request. Tell her there is nothing in UIPA that exempts birth index book pages from disclosure.

 BTW, there is a reason why she is so afraid to disclose those records. There is more about those birth index books than Mark Niesse never wanted to know. lol

Advertisements

61 Comments

  1. kj
    Posted April 26, 2011 at 2:03 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butterdezillion:

    I assume that you are aware of
    http://myveryownpointofview.wordpress.com/2011/03/06/its-a-date/

    The postemail also mentioned the differences between all of the other indices and the birth index for 1960-1964.
    http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/04/23/are-the-officials-in-hawaii-nervous-yet/

    Could DOH consider anything already published on the internet as a duplicate request?

    • Posted April 26, 2011 at 2:38 am | Permalink | Reply

      At this point they can apparently call anything they want a “duplicative request”. The only way to challenge the HDOH and/or OIP decisions is in Hawaii court and if the Hawaii courts weren’t in bed with all the corruption, the HDOH would never even try this stuff.

      It’s all just a big raspberry in our faces. We the people have no way to MAKE any of these government people follow the laws or rules.

      • gorefan
        Posted April 26, 2011 at 11:17 am | Permalink

        I assume you saw the CNN piece with Stig Waidelich. He was born on 8/5/1961. His birth announcement is in the same papers as President Obama. His COLB says “date filed” and was filed on 8/8/1961. But his Certificate Number is 151 1961 010920.

        How does that fit into your Birth Certificate numbering theory?

      • Posted April 26, 2011 at 12:11 pm | Permalink

        I did not see the piece, and reading the article about it I’m glad. What a shallow piece of drivel disguised as an “investigation”. The only “investigation” they did was to get somebody to order their BC supposedly to see if a COLB is what anybody would get. Any dumbkopf knows that’s what a person would get – especially since the HDOH decided to break their laws by refusing to issue certified copies of long-forms on request as HRS 338-13 mandates – an issue that CNN didn’t bother to check (see https://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/hawaii-desperately-chasing-escaped-horse/ ). That “experiment” makes no sense whatsoever – except that it provides a good way for the HDOH to be able to give a COLB with a recently-modified number to try to refute the numbering problems, which Fukino’s interview with Isikoff was also trying to refute. This is a very transparent cooperation between the HDOH and CNN to try to deal with the only real issue either one was interested in: planting false data in order to try to cover the damage already done with the BC#’s.

        The COLB is a print-out. They can manipulate those records temporarily in whatever way they want. They’ve manipulated their index book. A little girl whose name is in their birth index now doesn’t show up when they query her name for a birth record. They have absolutely no qualms about manipulating the data, or about breaking the law.

        Show me the transaction logs so I can see what number this guy had when his BC was issued and whether that number has been changed, what hospital he was born in, what date his BC was signed by the doctor and received by the HDOH. Then I’ll tell you what it does to my numbering theory. One of the unintended consequences of being caught repeatedly lying and breaking the law is that people justifiably don’t believe a word that comes out of your mouth, and that’s where the HDOH is at right now. They’ve accidentally shown that they are willing to not only break laws but also manipulate records for Obama’s sake, so how are we supposed to know which records they’ve manipulated and which they haven’t? The only way we can know that now is by seeing the transaction logs.

        I suspect that somebody at the HDOH is just digging their grave deeper, and I suspect that CNN will be buried with them in that grave. Just a reminder that CNN agreed to air Saddam Hussein’s propaganda in return for being allowed access in Iraq; Hussein’s plan to acquire WMD mentioned CNN specifically as the way to get his propaganda accepted as if it was legitimate because CNN had world credibility. Nobody would have thought that CNN would simply repeat the lies fed to them, since they were supposedly a credible NEWS organization.

        And CNN has never given up their treasonous ways. A friend of mine was there when a CNN report lured coalition helicopters to a place outside Baghdad to rescue a supply caravan that CNN had reported as stalled. The caravan was not there but terrorists were, and they shot down the helicopters, killing US soldiers. CNN’s hands are very, very bloody with the blood of patriots. Their treachery knows no bounds.

        Sorry, CNN. Just like the HDOH officials, you should know by now that when you repeatedly get caught lying and breaking laws, people stop believing you.

      • gorefan
        Posted April 26, 2011 at 4:50 pm | Permalink

        You have to agree the trip to the DOH was for theatrics. But so was Mr. Trumps saying “somebody told me” and then refusing to say who told him. It all about putting on a show.

        Have you seen the new Hawaiian Administrative Rules? The website says Chapter 117 is being redone by Dr. Onaka. But it has said that for awhile.

        The reason I ask is when I read 338-13, it says it is subject to 338-18, and 338-18 says that everything is subject to the Administrative Rules.

      • ksdb
        Posted April 27, 2011 at 4:24 am | Permalink

        To Gorefan: Where do you get the certificate number for the Waidelich certificate? I watched the video online and couldn’t make it out. If it’s 10620, that would pretty much prove Obama’s is fraudulent … and I did see other evidence that would also clearly prove Obama’s alleged COLB is fake.

      • gorefan
        Posted April 27, 2011 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

        To KSDB
        I watched it live on CNN – on HD 55″ TV. But over at freerepublic there was at least one person who post the number as 151 1961 3010920.

        Find someone who dvr’ed it and it and watch on HD TV..

  2. gorefan
    Posted April 26, 2011 at 7:49 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Hi Butter,
    Here is a portion of the CNN piece,

    The reporter holds up Stig’s COLB. To be honest you need to see it on a large screen high definition TV to make out the detail. But the reporter says that the date filed is August 8, 1961.

    They might replay that portion tonight during the second part of the report on AC360.

    • ksdb
      Posted April 27, 2011 at 6:16 am | Permalink | Reply

      The date filed is the part that proves Obama’s COLB is a forgery. What I’m curious about is what the Waidelich certificate number is. 10620 makes sense … and would just drive another nail in the coffin, so to speak.

      • Posted April 27, 2011 at 6:34 am | Permalink

        Gorefan is claiming the number is 10920. A number 279 higher than the Factcheck BC# though filed on the same day. And then 3 days later the HDOH assigns the Nordykes numbers even lower than the Factcheck number. The HDOH is trying to make it seem like they bounce all over the place with their numbers.

        Unless Waidelich specifically asked for a long-form this “experiment” doesn’t even do anything. Nobody doubts that the default document that gets sent out is a COLB. To find out whether the HDOH CAN issue a certified long-form the place to look is in the statutes and rules. The “experiment” was totally pointless – unless the point was to try to show that the BC numbers are not given sequentially. But they were given sequentially in the order in which the BC’s were filed at the HDOH office, and this way-out number was obviously orchestrated – with CNN getting a specific person to request his BC and the HDOH happening to have a manipulated record ready for him at the proper time.

      • gorefan
        Posted April 27, 2011 at 4:57 pm | Permalink

        Hi Butter,

        Is it possible they didn’t assign the numbers on the date filed? Supposed they just collected all the birth certificates and put them in alphabetic order and then assigned numbers at the end of the week. The Nordykes would have come ahead of Obama and waidelich would be even further behind.

  3. ksdb
    Posted April 27, 2011 at 5:55 am | Permalink | Reply

    Wanted to add something else here. CNN has just proved that Hawaii has lied about being able to release Obama’s original birth certificate. They claimed Fukino was able to inspect the original birth certificate because she met the “direct and tangible interest” requirement. This same law gives permission to disclose records, not just inspect them. It’s the same reason Obama can get a copy of his own record and make it public if he wants. If Fukino meets that same requirement, then SHE can make the original birth certificate public, just like Obama can make his alleged COLB public.

    • Posted April 27, 2011 at 6:08 am | Permalink | Reply

      Fukino doesn’t satisfy the requirements to have a “direct and tangible interest” according to HRS 338-18, which can be seen at http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0018.htm .

      So I’m not sure what law they’re talking about, unless they are referring to 338-18(a) which defers to the Administrative Rules – the same rules which say that a non-certified copy of a COLB can be disclosed to anybody who asks for it, which Fukino refuses to do even though UIPA requires disclosure if it is not forbidden by law.

      Do you have any idea how Fukino would qualify as having “direct and tangible interest”?

      • Posted April 27, 2011 at 6:12 am | Permalink

        Also, do you have a large high-definition TV?

        We don’t get cable and I hardly ever watch TV anyway. And I can’t even see it on my computer because I have to be in safe mode and that doesn’t allow the speaker. Hmm. Maybe I could at least see it. Maybe that would be the Lord’s provision so I can see but don’t have to listen to the drivel that would just disgust me anyway. lol. But a screenshot was shown on Free Republic and it was way too blurry to read anything on the Waidelich COLB.

      • ksdb
        Posted April 27, 2011 at 6:14 am | Permalink

        She doesn’t. She simply had statutory authority as the director of health to inspect the records as its caretaker. How would the department release any records if they can’t simulataneously view the records. The point is, that CNN has contradicted an obvious lie by claiming Fukino had access because of D&TI requirement. If this is true, then she or the current director of health can simply release Obama’s records.

      • Posted April 27, 2011 at 6:23 am | Permalink

        This “investigation” by CNN is a joke at best. They aren’t doing any digging into genuine evidence, but just taking a bunch of hearsay and ignoring everything else.

        For instance, why didn’t they ask Dan Nakaso, “How do you know there wasn’t any other way to get announcements in the paper? Why were some births only reported in one paper? Why were 21% of the August 1961 Oahu births never reported in the Star-Bulletin? Why don’t the lists match?”

        And the CNN article just blankly says that their investigation found that all the birth announcements came from the HOSPITALS, for crying out loud. That contradicts what Nakaso had just said about all the announcements coming from the HDOH office. Conflicting claims by Nakaso and the CNN reporter, and yet neither source gives any documentation or substantiation for their claims. And that’s supposedly an “investigation”?

        Geez. This wouldn’t pass my son’s 8th-grade writing class.

  4. gorefan
    Posted April 27, 2011 at 4:48 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Hi Butter,

    What do you think of the President’s long form, they released today.

    The format (security paper, with Dr. Onaka.s stamp and the date stamp on the bottom) resembles the one Miki Booth released on P&E. Her’s was date stamped March 15, 2011.

  5. patp12
    Posted April 27, 2011 at 5:46 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Main page of the hospital Obama says he was born in. Note date of name change 1978, look at birth certificate dated 8/8/61. Also note size of 8/8 compared to 1961. don’t look the same.

    A Century of Care for Hawaii’s Women and Children

    This is the story of two hospitals: Kauikeolani Children’s Hospital and Kapi‘olani Maternity Home.

    Concerned about the welfare of Hawaii’s mothers, Queen Kapi‘olani held luau and bazaars to raise the $8,000 needed to open Kapi‘olani Maternity Home in 1890. She endowed her legacy with “Kulia i ka nu‘u” or “Strive for the highest.”

    In 1908, Albert and Emma Kauikeolani Wilcox donated $50,000 to start a children’s hospital. The community, concerned that two of every seven infants in Hawai‘i did not live to see their first birthday, rallied to match the Wilcox’s gift. A year later, Kauikeolani Children’s Hospital opened.

    The two hospitals joined in 1978 to become Kapi‘olani Medical Center for Women & Children. Staying true to its mission, the non-profit hospital has played a vital role in the health of Hawaii’s women, children and adolescents. It is staffed with highly skilled, compassionate physicians and nurses, dedicated to providing the finest care for Hawaii’s families:

    * Specially-trained physicians, nurses, staff and equipment that uniquely care for children, from infants to young adults.
    * The state’s only pediatric emergency room and pediatric intensive care unit.
    * The highest level of neonatal intensive care, with specialists on-site 24/7 to care for babies at delivery, should the need arise.
    * A major training facility for the University of Hawai‘i, John A. Burns School of Medicine’s Pediatric and Ob/Gyn residency programs.
    * The state’s first Women’s Center, offering an array of screening and therapy services to improve the health and well-being of Hawaii’s women.
    * The state’s only Breast Center, offering screening, diagnostics and cancer treatment, all in a beautiful spa-like setting.
    * The state’s only Women’s Cancer Center, for the prevention and treatment of gynecological cancers (ovarian, endometrial, cervical, vulva and vaginal cancers).

  6. Bill Keller
    Posted April 29, 2011 at 12:54 am | Permalink | Reply

    Madam, have you no sense of common decency?

  7. what's wrong with this picture?
    Posted April 29, 2011 at 2:28 am | Permalink | Reply

    The part that struck me was Nordkye twin’s LFBC states it is a “true & certified copy of the ORIGINAL record on file” and Bama’s says his is a “true copy or ABSTRACT of the RECORD ON FILE”. Was this changed just for Bama or do all LFBC’s now lose the “original record” wording and replace with “abstact of the record on file”? The WH LFBC is obviously not from a scan of a certified doc, but is a created document. Did HDOH make this computer file or did the WH make the .pdf? Was HDOH just making a LFBC from abstract of his short form or forms that might be post adoption/amendments, and just making it sound like it was from the original record, but is actually just one of the “records” not the “original record”? I would assume the originals are sealed from adoption/Lingle/Obama. Didn’t HDOH said this was a computer generated abstract? It’s all confusing, but this layered .pdf file is really strange, so I want to know who made it – WH or HDOH?

    • Posted April 29, 2011 at 2:43 am | Permalink | Reply

      Somebody had mentioned that Fuddy said it was a computer-generated abstract. I wasn’t aware of that; do you know where or when that was stated?

      Here’s what I posted over on Free Republic regarding the change in the certifying statement, which appears to have been changed recently:

      The statement on the Nordyke long-form is, “This certifies that the above is a true and correct copy of the original record on file in the Research Planning and Statistics Office Hawaii State Department of Health.”

      Compared to now: “I CERTIFY THIS IS A TRUE COPY OR ABSTRACT OF THE RECORD ON FILE IN
      THE HAWAII STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH”

      They deleted “and correct”, “original”, and “in the Research Planning and Statistics Office”.

      They added “or abstract”.

      So they’re allowing that it could be an amended record, could be incorrect, could be based on other records, and those records could be in a part of the DOH that doesn’t handle vital records.

      Wow. Is there anything that this statement WOULDN’T allow? It’s like they’re saying “I swear that this is either the truth or not the truth, either the whole truth or not the whole truth, and either nothing or something but the truth.”

      I wonder exactly when this change was made and exactly what led up to it.

  8. what's wrong with this picture?
    Posted April 29, 2011 at 3:28 am | Permalink | Reply

    So far of all the LFBC’s that have been posted online, the only one that doesn’t certify it to be from the ORIGINAL record is Obama’s. I looked at all I could find, and all but Bama’s have the “original record” language and none except BO’s has the “or abstract” language. Obviously, this means they can abstract the amendments or other possible damaging details right out and are still covered with this language. I also wonder when this was changed, and why. One thing for sure, a computer generated abstract is not a certified photocopy of an original birth record, and they know full well it isn’t.

    • Posted April 29, 2011 at 4:09 am | Permalink | Reply

      I think the one that was on Post & Email that was sent out on March 15th had this new language. But I’m losing my mind tonight. lol. So you probably better check that to be sure.

  9. what's wrong with this picture?
    Posted April 29, 2011 at 4:05 am | Permalink | Reply

    Another thing strikes me as odd. BO supposedly contacted HDOH and asked them to release a copy of his original BC, knowing what Trump and the American People have asked for is the ORIGINAL record (what good is anything else? Duh!). But instead, HI puts together a “computer generated abstract” and sent that to him instead. They figured out this way to make it SEEM like they were releasing the original record, but actually it was just info taken from the later one made up after the amendments and adoption. They consider amended records to be a “record on file”, but it is not the “original record on file”. Amended records by HI law can state foreign-born children are born in HI. The certification language was changed so they weren’t saying it was the “original record” but now only a “record on file”. This was a concerted effort by both BO and HDOH to deceive.

    • Posted April 29, 2011 at 4:18 am | Permalink | Reply

      Well-said. Now if we can find a link where they admitted it was a “computer-generated abstract”, that should pretty much document that what is on this could be from an amended record.

      I wonder if that’s why they didn’t put an identifiable HDOH raised seal anywhere. By law amendments have to specifically be noted on any BC they print out, as does a notation of supplementary evidence to support a late filing. Or maybe they did put a raised seal on what they actually sent because it also had note of the amendment and the evidence offered for it and/or for the late filing. That’s why the White House had to manipulate it – for the same reason they had to manipulate the COLB: to get rid of the note of the amendment. They just had to delete that type in the bottom line, which is easy to do when it’s a white copy. And change the BC# maybe.

      If there was an adoption the HDOH couldn’t access the original birth certificate unless there was a court order to do so.

      • MissTickly
        Posted April 29, 2011 at 5:40 am | Permalink

        Fuddy says it’s a “computer generated certified copy.”

        The download to that correspondence is here.=)

        http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-correspondence.pdf

      • Posted April 29, 2011 at 2:10 pm | Permalink

        Thank you!

      • Posted April 29, 2011 at 10:27 pm | Permalink

        Actually, I guess she says she is making an EXCEPTION to the policy of making computer-generated certified copies. And then in the last paragraph she says that she personally witnessed the copying of the documents. So she is claiming she sent 2 certified photocopies.

        It is the certification statement that says it is either a copy or an abstract. Which is actually kind of stupid for them to have a stamp that says that, if their policy was going to be to only provide abstracts. Almost seems like their stamp was made up with the thought that it would provide for “exceptions” such as for Obama to have an actual “copy” though the (unlawful) policy is to only allow abstracts. Just off the top of my head I’m thinking that when they made up that stamp they had in mind that Obama was going to ask for an exception to the (unlawful) policy. That stamp was used on March 15, 2011 so if I’m correct they must have known sometime before then that they were going to be asked to produce this forgery.

        No wonder Obama was smirking. They’ve had this whole thing planned out for a while.

        The White House would have us believe that the white copy and the green copy are both from the HDOH – one printed on security paper and one not, and both certified. Unless those both came from the HDOH, the White House had to have manipulated the white one to get rid of the cross-hatches, or the green one to add the cross-hatches.

        Are certified copies required to be on security paper in Hawaii? I don’t think the Nordyke copies were, but then they were issued in 1967? so things might have changed.

      • Posted April 29, 2011 at 11:44 pm | Permalink

        I looked at the certification stamp from a COLB issued in 2007, and it has the same “I certify this is a true copy or abstract of the record on file in the Hawaii State Department of Health.”

        So they’ve had that for a while. Maybe they switched to that one when they started doing computer-generated abstracts.

  10. Tommy Thompson
    Posted April 29, 2011 at 4:08 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, this video from infowars brings up an important point. The newly released forgery is so bad it begs the question…why did they create such a poorly constructed forgery? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIewAP_lGA0&feature=player_embedded

    Also, “abstract of the record” actually reads “abstract of txe record”???

  11. what's wrong with this picture?
    Posted April 29, 2011 at 5:13 am | Permalink | Reply

    Not being able to get to the sealed file except by court order could be why they had to make a computer generated abstract and not just a photocopy of the original record.

    This whole thing is just so odd! Where is the security border? Why did they layer this on top of a wallpaper that looked like the security paper, but isn’t the security paper? Wasn’t the certificate that HDOH sent over to BO already on security paper? Why did they choose not to use the raised seal required by law (or used to be)? Why is the language changed as to what they are certifying this is a true copy of? It is clear they are not certifying this to be a copy of the original record on file, yet they lead the media and all to believe this IS a copy of the original record on file. Common sense says something is very odd about what should be an easy subject. My goodness, it is only a birth certificate! Why is Obama so up in arms and “testy” over the document that most Americans are proud to have, and many non-Americans envy? This layered computer doc is just so outside of my world. How can you certify a computer doc that can be so easily manipulated? The signatures & numbers can be moved around, added, deleted – within hours we saw how easy it was to manipulate. It seems so reasonable to wonder about this to me!

    • Posted April 29, 2011 at 2:09 pm | Permalink | Reply

      If they disclosed sealed information from an adoption , they are in contempt of court.

      Of course, they’ve already disclosed sealed information from adoptions, in their modified 1960-64 birth index. So they’re in contempt of court. Just another example of the lawlessness to cover for Obama. Because these people are lawless, anything is possible. And that is a very critical problem.

      For them to actually certify what they call a “birth certificate” that does not have note of amendments and supplementary evidence that has been provided for an amendment or late filing is a violation of the law. If this is an abstract, then some information from the record has been left out. Miss Tickly was denied access to requested records including supplementary evidence filed in support of the certificate. And Obama argued in court that he should not have to release his BC because it would “embarrass” him. Fukino referred to his birth record being “half typed, half handwritten”. There is more information than is on what Obama presented publicly. It is supplementary evidence on a different sheet of paper, which would not have had to be filed if Obama was born in a hospital and Ann and Sr were married. They had to use the different certifying statement because the original would not have had the hospital listed. But they could not have actually printed anything that they can legally call a “birth certificate” without the statement of what supplementary evidence is in the file to support a late and/or altered record, and if there is supplementary evidence, this IS a late or altered record, unless the evidence was added to the file within the first 37 days after birth – again, which would not be necessary if it was a hospital birth. But the HDOH has already indicated that the record was amended in 2006.

      If Fuddy sent Obama certified copies, it wasn’t what Obama posted publicly. There is no distinctive HDOH seal as required by law (the HDOH’s “Rules of Practice and Procedure” – the only part of Chapter 117 that actually exists right now, if I’m understanding correctly). I believe what Obama posted is an ALTERED version of what Fuddy sent. What Fuddy sent had a seal on it and note of the amendment as required. It was apparently not on security paper, or else there would have been no need to put the cross-hatches as a layer in the digital file.

      She conveniently made it a computer-generated abstract rather than an actual copy as was supposedly requested so she could put the amendments in as if they had always been on the form. Everything had to be scanned in order for the computer to assemble anything, as evidenced by the hand-written numbers next to some of the numbered entries so the only reason to not simply scan the whole thing is because they wanted/needed to edit it, which they acknowledged by calling it an “abstract”. The reason they didn’t print it on security paper was so individual data fields could be manipulated by Obama’s people and the cross-hatches added digitally after the fact to make the forgery/manipulation easier for Obama’s people. Because the file was already computer-generated it would give cover for the White House digital manipulations.

      And the HDOH had to hide the actual birth certificate so nobody in their office, who might have an agreement with Trump, could look and see that the HDOH was deliberately breaking the law to cover for Obama.

  12. what's wrong with this picture?
    Posted April 29, 2011 at 12:46 pm | Permalink | Reply

    One last thing… I’m reading some say all .pdf files have “layers”, though I’ve also been told if it was a single scanned image as we have been led to believe from the WH, any layers could not be manipulated, and this one can. Has anyone tried to scan the Nordkye LFBC’s as a .pdf and see if the same thing can be done to theirs as to Obama’s? Can you take their signatures and move them around and delete them?

    • Posted April 29, 2011 at 2:13 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Good question. I’m not technologically skilled enough to know how to do that, plus it’s a crazy busy day today, but that would be an excellent thing for somebody to try. If somebody does try it and would like to post their results here but need to upload a PDF in order to show what you found, let me know and I can post anything you’d like to put up.

      • MissTickly
        Posted April 29, 2011 at 3:30 pm | Permalink

        BDZ

        The blank ‘VOIDED’ COLB file that Okubo sent you also separates into layers when opened in Illustrator. Personally, I do believe it’s a result of optimizing the pdf rather than a sign of forgery.

        The signs of forgery can be found in the smirk on Obama’s face and the three years it took to release this nothing of a BC while a hero went to prison.

      • Posted April 29, 2011 at 3:43 pm | Permalink

        Can you tell what the layers are on that? Are they similar to the layers that appear on the long-form?

        Just the fact that Obama gave a “white copy” to the press shows us that the file was manipulated – either to make the “white copy” or to make the “green copy”. Why would the White House manipulate either one? And why does neither one have a distinct certifying HDOH seal? Why didn’t Obama just bring the actual document he received from the HDOH to the press conference and show it to everybody? They could have taken pictures of it in 3D.

        This is just the Factcheck mess all over again, except now we have a document where we can’t even see a seal, although we have a letter saying that a certified “computer-generated abstract” had been sent – which is totally stupid too, since Fuddy said she was granting Obama’s request, and his request was for a “certified copy” of the “original certificate”, not an abstract. She said she would make an exception for him but then didn’t even CLAIM to give him what he asked for. And what he posted wasn’t even what she CLAIMED she gave him (a CERTIFIED computer-generated abstract).

        So none of it matches up. And you are right, that Obama’s behavior is a dead giveaway. Both he and Fuddy need to be deposed, handcuffed, and locked up until the trial – he for the felony of forgery and she for misprision of the felony of forgery for not reporting that he had committed forgery using what she had sent him. She knows he did, which is why she ordered that the actual birth record be put in hiding. If what was done had been genuine she would have welcomed one of their workers being paid by Trump to look and verify that what was posted publicly is what is actually there. It would have vindicated them all – if they have told us the truth. But she knows they haven’t, which is why she hid it.

      • MissTickly
        Posted April 29, 2011 at 3:34 pm | Permalink

        I am emailing you some screenshots of that pdf and the layers opened in Illustrator….

      • MissTickly
        Posted April 29, 2011 at 3:58 pm | Permalink

        To answer you first questions–I sent you screenshots of those layers. Like the LFBC, the layers separate basically into groups of color..in this case, black and gray.

        And actually there are some visible signs of the seal. I will send you some jpgs of that, too. It is tough to see but you can see some of the circular outline.

        And yes, I agree with everything you said.

        At this point I have resolved to just take the man at his word, this is the real deal and you and I were all wrong. Hawaii was just f*cking with us and lying to us, left & right. In fact, I read an article (I think Politico) that talked about Hawaii’s role in this mess and the things they should have done differently.

        For me, taking this stance looks worse for Obam than if his BC said ‘born in Kenya’ and FMD was the father. I could understand hiding that, but hiding this innocuous birth certificate for three years out of childish spite makes Obama a mental-case.

        What a f*cking whacko.

        Still, I encourage and support everyone who rejects this LFBC and believes it’s fraudulent because Obama is a very sick and unstable person. Nothing can be put past him.

        In my opinion, he probably killed Toots, his own mother, his father and does very bad things to his own children and his dog. He is a very dangerous, and very mentally ill man.

        Only a serious nutjob would play this kind of game for three years when he could retrieve a pristine LFBC within one business day and have spared Lakin and his family such pain.

        Obama enjoys watching others hurt. That’s what serial nutcases do…they are “bemused” by it.

      • Posted April 29, 2011 at 4:55 pm | Permalink

        That’s the same bent I’m taking with the HDOH. They could be lying their skulls off, and in some instances we can prove that they are. But my point is that if we take them at face value, what they’ve revealed is some very serious foul play going on.

        Obama argued for 3 years and sent Lakin to prison for 6 months because his BC would be so “embarrassing”. I believe when it all comes out we’ll find that the 2006 amendment was the addition of an INS “memo” by an educational advisor giving a hearsay claim that Sr was a womanizer, married somebody from Washington, and had a son named Barack Hussein Obama II who was born Aug 4, 1961 in Hawaii. That was disclosed by an AZ reporter as having been disclosed in a FOIA response, on the very same day as Obama disclosed the supposed long-form. Obama disclosed the “half typed” part and this reporter disclosed the “half handwritten” part of Obama’s birth record, as Fukino described it.

        The trouble is that if Obama was born at Kapiolani Hospital as claimed on his “long-form”, there woudl have been no need of supplementary documentation. And for this documentation to be included it had to be added when it was available to the public, which would have been well after the first year of Obama’s life – meaning that the BC is both late and amended/altered and HAS NEVER BEEN LEGALLY VALID. And whatever BC Obama was using until the HI one was completed, it wasn’t from Hawaii, and Washington State says they don’t have a BC for him. I’m inclined to believe Obama’s own words to Race Bannon in the summer of 1981 – that he was born in Mombassa, was raised in Indonesia, and was going to be President someday. He knew he was born in Mombassa then – most likely because the BC he’s been using his entire life said so.

        And that’s why EVERY offical US document Obama supposedly has is associated with foul play. Forged draft registration. fraudulently-gained SSN. Passport breached 3 times. Birth certificate forged. Every one.

      • MissTickly
        Posted April 29, 2011 at 5:09 pm | Permalink

        By the way, I spoke with a friend who is a child psychologist at length the other day. He was disturbed at the idea that Obama was lucid enough to be aware of the BC controversy, yet he did not present this LFBC at the request of any person he perceived as ‘powerless,’ he released it at Trump’s request or due to some other perceived threat. This friend is liberal as are most of my friends, he even voted for Obama.

        If the LFBC is genuine (and I am going to accept that it is), he believes Obama’s bizarre and cruel behavior is very likely a sign he was abused or perhaps molested by a ‘powerful’ figure in his own world as a child. We talked about his smirk and the bemusement…the perceived sleight at having even been asked to show it.

        Obviously he reveled in showing it, he didn’t appear to be offended or reluctant one bit, it was clear that he was ‘turned on’ and not the least bit remorseful for any trouble he caused Hawaii and the people.

        If what Obama has presented is truth, he shouldn’t be given any ‘power.’ The worst thing we could do is give him more–he’s dangerous. He uses power to hurt people he believes are powerless and he ‘gets off’ on it. I really do fear for his children. I hope that they see a counselor anyway to deal with the stress of being in the White House and limelight, but also because a professional will pick up on it if Obama is hurting them. Obama will always walk on those who he perceives are powerless…until he gets help anyway.

        Anyone bemused by contributing to a man senselessly going to prison when he had the power to stop it is probably not above hurting children and animals.

        Violent criminals are released too soon due to overcrowding yet Obama felt Terry Lakin should be locked away? How much of a victim did Obama think he was for being asked to show this nothing of a LFBC? How sleighted did he feel by that?

        I have been ‘carded’ when buying alcohol and even if I have to run back out to my car to get my ID and am certain I look old enough to purchase it, I have never felt strong feelings of hurt at having been asked. I don’t lash out at the cashier just because I am the customer and am “always right.”

        Have you?

        How deep does his mental illness go? His perception of reality is grossly distorted.

        I would love to hear others’ psychological analysis of Obama considering everything that has transpired. I can honestly say I don’t know a person with it in them to watch a man go to prison for disagreeing with them when they could have prevented it by just simply proving themselves right all along. Obama needs a mental evaluation before the next election and the People should be made aware of the diagnosis.

        I would love to read other analysis of the mental disease(s) he suffers from. I can see now that he has succeeded in life through petulance and manipulation – it certainly wasn’t through strength of character.

        (P.S. The minute Obama chose to put out that pristine LFBC after three years on Wednesday, he asked for this kind of scrutiny. He begged for it.)

  13. Mrs. P
    Posted April 29, 2011 at 2:14 pm | Permalink | Reply

    OUT OF ORDER: Obama’s Non-sequential Certificate Number Based On Registration Office Location, Not Birth Date

    http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2011/04/out-of-order-obamas-non-sequential.html

    This is a great article!!!

    Contrary to recent implications, new evidence reveals that Barack Obama was not born in Kapi’olani hospital, as records suggest, but, rather, he was merely examined there by a private practitioner, David Sinclair, in the days following his birth, which triggered the validation of an administratively issued “Certificate of Live Birth” registration, not a hospital generated birth certificate representing an actual delivery.

    • Posted April 29, 2011 at 2:26 pm | Permalink | Reply

      I haven’t read that article and may not have time to get to it today because it’s a nutso day, but the only difference that the location of registration makes in determining the BC# is when the local registrar gets the record to the state HDOH office for numbering. Okubo says that the “date filed” is the date that Oahu births were received in the state HDOH office and given a number.

      What is problematic is the “date filed” of Aug 8th. Doesn’t matter where the BC came from or how, the “date filed” is the date the BC got to the state HDOH office and was given a number. Obama’s was supposedly given a number on Aug 8th but was given a later number than the Nordykes’ who were given a number on Aug 11th.

      There are very, very good reasons to believe that what Obama released is not genuine – beyond any of the image analysis that’s been done, which I am not skilled enough to do or even (at this point) understand. I’ve mentioned some of those non-computer reasons in comments here. When I have time (probably next week, after my son’s confirmation is done) I’ll organize, document, and post that analysis.

      • MissTickly
        Posted April 29, 2011 at 3:43 pm | Permalink

        “There are very, very good reasons to believe that what Obama released is not genuine – beyond any of the image analysis that’s been done, which I am not skilled enough to do or even (at this point) understand.”

        Exactly.

  14. what's wrong with this picture?
    Posted April 29, 2011 at 2:56 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I was told by someone who knows graphics very well that if the B/C had been scanned directly onto security paper like they are leading us to believe, that when you look at it you would see a difference in color from the various shades of the security marks behind the type – since is is supposedly one document that was scanned – maybe even see the security marks through the type themselves. But here it is white behind the type, which shows the “security paper” is really just computer graphic wallpaper with the type laid over it (so, not very secure, huh?). It is not a doc that was scanned or copied onto security paper, but the “security paper” was actually from a computer graphic rather than a paper pad. He can see this directly from the WH copy at their website without even looking into the layering in this document.

  15. Tommy Thompson
    Posted April 29, 2011 at 3:54 pm | Permalink | Reply

    we had a question from one of our posters about the different registrar. I don’t know how Hawaii operated in 1961. Would they have multiple registrars?

    • Posted April 29, 2011 at 4:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

      They were able to deputize registrars. Somebody pointed out the scribbling next to the “local registrar” heading on the Nordyke BC and said it said “deputy”. I haven’t looked at it closely to be sure but that sounds plausible because I’ve seen other BC’s where the word “deputy” was written in next to the word “local registrar”.

      • ksdb
        Posted April 29, 2011 at 9:19 pm | Permalink

        It looks like they use a stamp that says “deputy” on it. This just adds to the mystery about how Obama’s alleged COLB was processed and why it has an out-of-sequence number on it.The stuff at the Daily Pen blog is pretty sloppy. I wouldn’t rely on their reasoning.

  16. Tommy Thompson
    Posted April 29, 2011 at 4:44 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, I know with all that’s going on you are probably being overwhelmed with info input. I found the answer, I think, to the question above at this site. http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2011/04/out-of-order-obamas-non-sequential.html

  17. Tommy Thompson
    Posted April 29, 2011 at 5:53 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I’m sorry Mrs. P, I now see that you posted the same article…I saw it at our other site…extremely good article.

  18. patp12
    Posted April 30, 2011 at 6:57 pm | Permalink | Reply

    There is something else that has bothered me about this BC. When I ordered mine to get a passport, when it was sent back, the background was black with white letters. It also had a raised seal. My husband from a different state had the same thing. The twins BC that has been mentioned above was also with the black/white configuration. So why was Obama’s different? It really appears that they cut a square out of security paper and placed it over the one they produced because the sides are crisp while the part with the information on Obama is fuzzy and you can see where it looks like the paper was lightly folded (curved) with it black at top and more gray at the bottom. I hope this makes sense. Anybody with answers on this?

    • gorefan
      Posted May 1, 2011 at 5:35 am | Permalink | Reply

      patp12
      When did you get your BC? The black with white lettering could be either a copy from a microfiche file or if it is older, like the Nordykes (issued in 1966) it is a photostatic copy. If you look at the Nordyke’s their has a curved edge also. This because the BCs are in abound book. To make the copy they put the book on a glass plate of either the phototstatic or xerox machine. Have you ever copied a book at the library? With the Nordyke’s you can see that they used a quartersheet of paper at the bottom. This had the signatures on it. It was placed on the glass plate and then the book was placed over it. You can see that light leaked into the image and shows up as a think band of over exposed area between the quarter sheet of paper and the birth information poartion.
      The President’s BC was copied or scanned from the book of BC’s and then printed onto the green security paper. It is a different technique from the Nordyke’s and from the way you and your husband’s states do things.

      Here is Rep. Bob Goodlatte’s Massachusetts’ BC

      http://www.politico.com/static/PPM116_certificate5.html

      He is a Republican Congressman from Virginia. Obviously, it is in a bound book.

  19. Shez ZK
    Posted May 1, 2011 at 1:26 am | Permalink | Reply

    Do read the Daily Pen article. Yes, he gets a few things wrong here and there, but it still reveals some very interesting research. It mentions there being at least 4 offices of registrars on Oahu.

    We know the local registrar named on this fresh new hell appears to be the same one on the Costa ’62 cert. If you read the Costa cert to check the area of birth (perhaps for that registrar’s area office?) it says Wahiawa General Hospital, in Wahiawa.

    By the time I saw this commment link, http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2702976/posts?page=1566#1566

    with the graphic of the baby Sunahara obit for Aug 5, its address at Wahiawa jumps right out. And its birth cert is strangely missing from records. Odd coinky dinks that seem to tie in, if they stole its original basic file doc and # as some suspect.

    I don’t trust a thing out of BO’s mouth, his dirty dealing minions, or anyone in Hawaii involved in it. The punishment for treason, and bribes about “national security issues (trans: riots of pissed off millions in general) if we reveal another of my boneheaded mistakes”, is plenty to make them all lie by hook and crook not to get caught.

  20. PRNDL
    Posted May 1, 2011 at 1:36 am | Permalink | Reply

    I’ll throw a little wrinkle into this saga.As Mooshell has stated she’s so pround of O’s home country being Kenya,I wonder where her daughter Malia’s daddy’s birthplace is listed on Malia’s birth certificate? On July 4 1998 the issue was of no consequence,unless he knew he was going to run for President…..????????????????

    • PRNDL
      Posted May 1, 2011 at 1:55 am | Permalink | Reply

      Ah,nevermind,just noticed his first book was published in 1995 which stated Hawaii as birthplace.Surely not that dumb.

  21. Shez ZK
    Posted May 1, 2011 at 4:27 am | Permalink | Reply

    Sorry, meant the Edith Coats ’62 cert.

  22. Tommy Thompson
    Posted May 4, 2011 at 4:05 am | Permalink | Reply

    Butter, we’ve been doing some research on the new long form bc at Obama-soetoro-exposed. We can see numerous identical letters down to the exact same pixel structure. If this was an image of a page out of a bound book that would virtually be impossible. The only way this can happen is if the letters were copied and pasted into place (or cloned). I can post a really good example of this from one of our posters if you like. In other words…the long form BC was created…it’s a fake…and an extremely bad one at that. Now what?

  23. BobTWilson
    Posted May 24, 2011 at 5:21 am | Permalink | Reply

    How sad.
    I saved for page for historical reasons- to show the future generations how a small group of paranoid, angry & hateful people finally tipped over the edge and down the rabbit hole, all due to their irrational hatred of a man who did nothing to them except have the nerve to be elected President of “their” country.
    I can only assume that all the dark things you see in Obama posted here (Murder, abuse, deceit, molestation) are reflections of yourselves and your actions and lives.

    Obama released his legal birth certificate three years ago. That wasn’t enough- the black man had to show more papers for your sick satisfaction. Now that he has, you still don’t believe, preferring to believe in the biggest and most vast conspiracy of all history, involving thousands of people across the world over fifty years.

    You believe that the entire country is corrupt, including:
    The President and the Executive branch (including the Bush Admin for allowing Obama to be certified the winner)
    The Judicial branch (for not violating the Constitution by voiding an election)
    ALL of Congress and the Senate (after all, they confirmed the 2008 vote and haven’t launched ANY birther-related investigations),
    The Supreme Court (For swearing him in and not taking on any birther cases),
    The entire State of Hawaii and their DOH, going back many years and including the Republican Governor who worked for McCain’s campaign,
    John McCain,
    Hillary Clinton,
    Kenya, For “hiding” his records
    The FBI,
    The CIA,
    The Joint Chiefs
    The Pentagon
    The Entire Militaryfor following orders from their CiC and not giving you your desired military coup,
    The Republican Party,
    The Democratic Party,
    The State Dept.,
    The Entire media, including Fox News for not taking birthers claims seriously.

    Look at that list- Could you ever consider, for one moment, that it is your heart and vision that is corrupt instead of all the people above? When you have decided the whole world is wrong and only you are right, perhaps you should reexamine your beliefs.

    You have created your own hell on Earth, tormenting yourselves, and you drive away friends and family.

    All for nothing. You should let the hate go. Obama is not the monster that you have created out of your own fear and hate, and you will never drive him from office, because the facts are not on your side.

    For the Love of God, find Peace.

    • Posted May 24, 2011 at 1:32 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Facts are facts, and your post included none. Both “birth certificates” that Obama released have been proven as forgeries. All the psychoanalysis in the world doesn’t change those facts.

    • AustinGuy
      Posted July 25, 2011 at 5:42 pm | Permalink | Reply

      Bob,

      Thanks for the nice comment wishing that we’ll find peace. However it’s not “All for nothing” as you said because Obama is running this country into the ground.

      You included the CIA in your list, and actually Major General Vallely said that he had CIA agents look into this matter. Afterwards Vallely said this: “His actual birth certificate has never been found in Hawaii” and “even the long-form [birth certificate] was a forged document,” So that kind of blows a hole in your arguments. And you also left off the name of another government agency involved in the conspiracy. Several private investigators have certified that Barack Obama has been using as many as 25 different social security numbers but the one most often used, 042-68-4425, was originally issued in Connecticut to a man born in 1890. The federal Social Security Administration is refusing to release information about the original person who was assigned this number, and there is no privacy consideration for deceased individuals. But Bill O’Reilly says it’s OK because Obama Sr lived in Connecticut for several years while he attended Harvard.

      Obama said, “The only people who don’t want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide.” Why are there a number of African newspaper articles and publications going back to 2004 (or earlier) that state that Senator Obama was born in Kenya? Why did James Orengo, a former presidential candidate in Kenya state, “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?” Why did Obama spend over $2 million to prevent anyone from seeing his birth and college records? Senator McCain willingly provided all of his records and the Senate passed S. 511 stating that because McCain was born to 2 citizen parents, as required by Article 2 of the Constitution, he was eligible. Actually the whole birth certificate issue is pretty much a red herring because Article 2 requires the president to be a “natural born citizen” which has been defined as a person born in the US to 2 citizen parents. But the Senate covered up the fact that Obama was not eligible under the S 511 definition because Obama Sr was never a US citizen. See the Minor v. Happersett US Supreme Court decision.

      Constitutional law expert Edwin Vieira states that Obama is obligated under law to prove that he is eligible.
      http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin84.htm

      This is supposed to be a country where no man is above the law. We just want our day in court so that it can be verified that Obama is constitutionally eligible. Instead, all we’ve gotten from the courts is that Obama’s eligibility was twittered and we have no standing to see and verify Obama’s papers. And Justice Clarence Thomas has told us that the Supreme Court is avoiding the issue. In other words the justices on the court are violating their oaths to uphold the constitution, just like all of Congress.

      We don’t hate Barack Obama or Barry Soetoro or whatever his name is. We just want him to have what he deserves. If he can prove that he was born in the US to two citizen parents as the Constitution requires, then we’ll smoke the peace pipe and think about voting for him in 2012.

      .

      • Posted July 25, 2011 at 8:59 pm | Permalink

        Very well-stated, Austin Guy. This is about the rule of law. We the people will not roll over and let our Constitution and the rule of law be totally ignored, even if all our government agencies, courts, and Congress do so. The bigger question in all of this, which every elected official better be giving serious thought to, is this: Whose country is this, anyway? If there is no rule of law, the country belongs to whichever crooks fight the dirtiest. Looking into the eyeballs of Al Qaeda and the Zetas seeking to devour this land, we better fully comprehend exactly what our elected officials, courts, and government agencies are signing us over to as if we were slaves.

  24. Tommy Thompson
    Posted May 25, 2011 at 4:36 am | Permalink | Reply

    Bob, you may want to keep some of this for historical reasons. You can tell your grandkids….Yeah I was one of those who really thought that was rain being sprayed on my leg…some of us aren’t that gullible…sorry.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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

%d bloggers like this: