Barack Obama's 'privacy rights'

To hear it told from the state of Hawaii and Barack Obama supporters, the reason we can't see his birth certificate, and judge for ourselves whether or not he is constitutionally eligible to serve as president, is a matter of state laws written to protect personal privacy rights.

This raises a number of serious questions the rest of the press and most elected officials in Washington seem to want to avoid:

• Has a Hawaiian birth certificate become a source of national controversy?
• Does that birth certificate belong to the most visible and well-known public figure in the nation?
• Does that birth certificate form the basis for any serious determination as to that public figure's constitutional eligibility to serve in the highest public office in the land?
• Has the state of Hawaii made official public representations about the nature of that birth certificate?

  On the edge of a constitutional crisis … learn the facts in WND's comprehensive "Obama Eligibility Primer"

• Has the well-known public figure made representations about that birth certificate?
• Has the well-know public figure already released publicly other documents purporting to be official Hawaii birth documents?
• Does Hawaii routinely release birth announcements publicly to the press and public?
• Did Hawaii release a birth announcement publicly regarding this particular birth in 1961?
• Was the Hawaii privacy law that prevents anyone without a direct or tangible interest in seeing a particular birth certificate created to prevent misuse or abuse of a person's personal information?
• Since Barack Obama has released his name, his alleged parents' names, his date of birth, his address and his ethnicity in a short form certificate to bolster his campaign for the presidency, did he not establish with said release a tangible public interest in the long-form certificate?
• Since a particular hospital in Hawaii has, at various times, claimed for the purposes of fundraising and public relations concerns that it was the birthplace of Barack Obama, how can the hospital continue to hide behind privacy laws the information to support that claim?
• What possible privacy matters could be breached with the release of the long-form certificate that have not already been breached by the hospital, state officials and the No. 1 public figure himself?

Hawaii's state constitution contains a section about personal privacy. It states that privacy of the individual shall not be infringed "without the showing of a compelling state interest."

Recently, Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie announced his intention to seek that document. He asked the attorney general of the state to research the matter. Yet, unnamed officials in Hawaii have determined that, for some reason, Barack Obama's birth certificate should remain top secret because of the Uniform Information Practices Act.

TRENDING: James Woods: 'It's outright cruelty' to leave Biden in front of a camera

Let's examine what that act actually covers and doesn't cover:

• medical history, condition, and treatment;
• criminal law investigation, except where disclosure is necessary to prosecute or continue the investigation;
• eligibility for social services or welfare benefits;
• public employment personnel file type information;
• non-governmental employment history except where information qualifies a government employee for his or her position;
• financial information;
• professional and vocational licensee qualifications except;
• personal recommendations or evaluations;
• Social security numbers.

The office administering these policies has also determined that the individual has a significant privacy interest in his or her home contact information, date of birth and ethnicity.

Yet, under these guidelines, Hawaii has an obligation to release the long-form birth certificate because all of the relevant privacy matters have already been disclosed with the public release of the short-form certificate.

What possible privacy breaches could occur by releasing the long-form birth certificate – unless, of course, that information is actually different from what has been provided by Obama himself, the hospital claiming his birth, state officials and the newspaper announcements revealing his birth date, parentage and address?

In other words, Hawaii officials either can't read their own laws, or they are actively involved in an extensive and elaborate cover-up of a matter of great public interest, national security and constitutional integrity – all the while claiming falsely their hands are tied by their own privacy laws.