Duncan Denied – Sunahara V. HI Dept. of Health Dismissed
The link and article, from Dean Haskins, over at the Birther Summit are below my “update”. It is as I suspected it would be.
I will have some tid-bits of my own to add later today.
ADDED :
The information that I am now adding I have hinted at a few times in past blog posts. It never panned out for me, so I was never able to do a full post on it before.
Almost exactly one year ago I contacted a professional genealogist firm and asked them to do several things for me.
I asked if they could contact the Honolulu Dept of Health in a professional capacity and request official answers to a few “quirky” questions that I had.
One was the following:
In the Birth Index books that are available to the general public, spanning five years each, we found multiple entries that were “duplicates”. Not a “duplicate” entry preceded or followed by the original entry (?), but just last name, the word “duplicate”, and the first name.
Actually, some “duplicate” entries also had a last name, but no first name.
I will attach a copy of one image here. In this image you can see a “duplicate” with a first name, and also several entries of just last names followed by nothing but an asterisk. I have marked them with pink.
I surmise that the last names followed by an asterisk are deceased infants who were not given first names, and are cross referenced in the Birth Index. I can not figure out what the *surname, “duplicate”, given name*, entries are.
I became very curious when I noticed these, and attempted to ask the staff at the Dept. Of Health the seemingly simple question of why those entries are there. I admit freely that it is just curiosity, but my first request to them by phone received a curt answer that instructed me to place my question in writing. I did so, but have been utterly ignored. Which has served to make me much more curious!
Well, after the genealogists discussed this amongst themselves, they had several theories – none of which really seemed to fit. So I requested that they go ahead and get the OFFICIAL answer from the HDoH. In addition to that I asked if they could get some simple birth/death records for Virginia.
I did not expect or really hope to get the Sunahara records, I was pretty certain that the HDoH would not allow those to be released to a genealogist or even to Virginia’s family, but I thought, what the hell! Give it a shot.
So, I fired off my next request, along with a copy of the HDoH’s guidelines specifically for genealogists, and the corresponding links to the HDoH’s website. The geneoligist thought there should be no problem getting the “duplicate” mystery cleared up, and according to the HDoH rules AT THAT TIME, there should be no problem in obtaining the records that I had requested.
Oh those silly genealogists!
I requested a brief summary from them today, and will publish that as soon as it is provided. I have maintained the full email exchange record that I had with them, so if for some reason I do NOT receive the summary, I will post the most relevant emails shortly.
Needless to say – the HDoH never answered a single question, nor provided a single record – not even a simple copy of the entry in the Birth Index available for the public at large to view – nothin’. End of update.
This is the link to the full article pictured in the screenshot below:
click to enlarge:
An election for President and Commander in Chief of the Military must strive to be above reproach. Our public institutions must give the public confidence that a presidential candidate has complied with the election process that is prescribed by our Constitution and laws. It is only after a presidential candidate satisfies the rules of such a process that he/she can expect members of the public, regardless of their party affiliations, to give him/her the respect that the Office of President so much deserves.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.