THE ALLEGED OBAMA BIRTH ANNOUNCEMENT MICROFILMS
"Regarding the microfilms, it has to be established that even if the Obama birth announcements were actually in the newspapers, it does not prove a Hawaii birth. Hawaii parents are/were able to file birth documents in Hawaii as long as they were residents, regardless of the actual birth place of the child. Additionally, no proof was required of the birth; only a written statement had to be made. Section 57-40 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961, and other subsequent Hawaii birth laws that allow registration with no proof, or allow Foreign Birth registration, leaves an opening to claim Hawaii “birth” without it being true. In 1961, once a birth document was filed with the Hawaii Department of Health (including those situations mentioned above as well as from the hospitals), the HDOH automatically issued birth announcements to the Hononlulu Advertiser and Star Bulletin.
People that believe Obama was born in Hawaii typically rely on the microfilm printouts of the “alleged” Obama birth announcements from The Honolulu Star Advertiser and Star Bulletin. Talking heads like Bill O’Reilly pose foolish, illogical questions like “Are we supposed to believe that Obama’s mother planted the birth certificate in 1961 in Hawaii because she wanted Obama to be President?” Maybe a better question would be “How many people from other countries come here illegally to specifically have their children born here so they can obtain U.S. citizenship?
However, none of the alleged more prominent journalists/talking heads, like O’Reilly and Chris Matthews (being the most prominent and most arrogant on the subject), have ever tried to find the original newspapers to confirm whether the microfilms are authentic. They just accepted what was fed to them by the Obama administration."
from westernjournalism.com
Only people ignorantly attempting to perpetuate a fraud consider newspaper announcements as legal documents.