Thursday, May 26, 2011


HDOH Has Two Different Versions of 1960-64 Birth Index

The HDOH sent me the exact same page from the 1960-64 Birth Index Book, 2 months apart. One had the 1960-64 date range in the heading; the other didn’t. Either the HDOH has 2 different versions of their 1960-64 Birth Index or they are altering the pages at will.
This supports Tsunamigeno’s contention that what he saw in the 1960-64 Birth Index in early March 2010 is different than what is in the 1960-64 Birth Index that is shown to the public in the HDOH office today.
This immediately raises 2 questions:
1. Why is the HDOH messing with the 1960-64 birth index book?
2. If they are changing it to add or delete the heading, what else are they adding, deleting, or changing? Stay tuned for something very critical that we know they changed…

HDOH Funny Business Regarding Virginia Sunahara

Summary: The HDOH has Virginia Sunahara in their 1960-64 birth index but claims they don’t have a birth record for her.
 They want me to believe nobody has asked for her record rather than telling me they didn’t even search to find out.
 The base record for Obama’s forged long-form appears to be from somebody who matches Virginia Sunahara – a girl born at Wahiawa Hospital who has an R as the third letter of her first name.
 Virginia also meets the criteria for Bill Ayers’ preferred method of identity theft, since she died as an infant.
 Two months ago the HDOH director changed the policy to ensure that the original copy of Sunahara’s birth certificate will never see the light of day without a court battle, which would give her time to forge a BC for Virginia (like the HDOH forged Obama’s long-form). All she would have to change is the BC#. Like she apparently temporarily changed the database’s BC# for Stig Waidelich, whose BC# on the COLB (which he requested for a CNN report) is so far out of sequence with other known BC#’s that it cannot be genuine (more on that in another post hopefully).
 There will be more on the illegal activity of the HDOH.

If the COLB Seal is nickel-sized… 

… the long-form seal, proportionally,  is  the size of a quarter. These are not the same seal.
Measuring by Crosshatches

I did an experiment simulating the Factcheck photo, which was taken from the right side of the COLB and has specific fold angles. Any photo taken from the right side should result in the seal leaning to the right. The Factcheck seal does not lean to the right but is almost a perfect circle. I see no way that the seal was on the COLB when it was photographed. Factcheck has some explaining to do.
Factcheck Seal Not Properly Distorted

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.