An authentic Hawaiian birth certificate for another
Hawaiian individual has since surfaced which, using the same official form as
the presumptive Obama certificate, includes an embossed official seal and an
authoritative signature, coming through from the back. Obama's alleged
certificate lacks those features, and the certificate number referencing the
birth year has been blacked out, making it untraceable.

Janice Okubo, Director of Communications of the State
of Hawaii Department of Health, told Israel
Insider: "At this time there are no circumstances in which the State
of Hawaii Department of Health would issue a birth
certification or certification of live birth only electronically." And, she
added, "In the State of Hawaii all certified copies of certificates of live
birth have the embossed seal and registrar signature on the back of the
document."

Compare the top image presented by his campaign as
evidence of Obama's 1961 birth and the other certifying the birth of one
Patricia Decosta.

-- notably in very low
resolution -- on its "Fight the Smears" website, with campaign officials vowing
that it's authentic, sending the image around as "proof" to reporters, and
inviting supporters to refer to it as they battle against supposed distortions
and calumnies against their candidate. However, the campaign refuses to produce
an authentic original birth certificate from the year of Obama's birth, or even
a paper version with seal and signature of the "Certification of Live Birth."
Nor has it even published an electronic copy with the requisite embossed seal
and signature.

The failure of the Obama campaign to do so, and its
willingness instead to put up an invalid, uncertified image -- what now appears
to be a crude forgery -- raises the dramatic question of why the presumptive
Democratic presidential candidate might have to hide.

Until now, it has
been thought that there might be some embarrassing information on the real
certificate: was the candidate's name something other than Barack Hussein Obama
II, as it is claimed? Was no father listed because of the uncertainty over
Obama's paternity? Was his father's race listed as Arab, or Muslim, rather than
African? These revelations might be embarrassing, and further undermine his
credibility, but he could disavow and downplay their significance. Would
revealing such embarrassment outweigh the far greater risks involved in
perpetuating a palpable forgery, or passing off an uncertified official document
as being certified?

There is one possibility, however, which alone might
justify the risk that Obama and his campaign seems to be taking in putting
forward the uncertified document image: Obama was not in fact born in Hawaii and
may not be an American citizen at all, or at least not a "natural born citizen"
as the Constitution defines the requirement for the nation's chief executive.
Real original birth certificates, circa 1961, have all kinds of verifiable
information that would confirm Obama's origins, or throw them into doubt should
they be lacking.

Research has since uncovered the law, in force at the
time of Obama's birth, that were he to have been born in another country, his
young American mother's youth extended time abroad would not suffice to make him
a "natural born citizen." Even if he were naturalized later -- and there is no
evidence that he was -- he would not be eligible to run for the office of
president and -- if forgery or misrepresentation were involved -- he and his
staffers might find themselves facing stiff federal and state charges.


But if, at this late date, Obama has no proof of being a US citizen by
law, natural born or otherwise, then he or his advisers may be tempted to try to
"tough out" the allegations about his "birth certificate" or the lack thereof.
He and his campaign have gotten through other embarrassments: maybe this one
will go away, too.

Because the consequences were he to admit, or should
it come out, that he was not born in Hawaii would be so grave as to make it
tempting to take the gamble and hope that no one dares call his most audacious
bluff by demanding proof. Talk about the audacity of hope.

But now the
State of Hawaii has dashed those hopes by clarifying that a certified birth
certificate must have an embossed seal and signature, features his claimed birth
certificate image lack.

The longer Obama waits, the graver grow the
consequences of waiting.

There is one simple way for the candidate to
clear up the issue once and for all: produce for public inspection and objective
analysis the paper copy of his original Hawaiian birth certificate -- if one
exists. If he's lost the original, he can request a certified copy. Ordinary
citizens are required to produce one to get a passport or a driver's license.
Surely it's not too much to ask from a man who aspires to hold the highest
office in the land.

The issue is not whether Obama is black or white,
Christian or Muslim. It is whether he was born in the USA and thus a citizen
eligible according to the Constitution to run for President.

If proof of
citizenship does not exist, then surely it would be wiser to admit it now.


Because if Barack Hussein Obama II does not produce definitive proof of
his "natural born" American citizenship with original, verifiable documents, he
will be setting the stage for a very public battle over his personal
credibility, the basic legitimacy of his candidacy, and its possible
criminality.