What does "the original Certificate of Live" birth mean in your world? Don't see the word "Original" used in the message to which I was responding. Mr. Noise Machine is now introducing it, and asking how I can't understand what it means.
I tracked the message thread all the way back to message 187, and the word "original" doesn't appear in that message. The word "original" isn't used in message 193 either. It wasn't used in message 240, which is the message to which you are replying, but when we get to your latest response, (message 245) suddenly the word appears in your comment five times, with you acting like it is the central point of dispute.
Again, you are a childish f*cking noise machine, who just pumps out sh*t, and expects people to take you seriously.
Let's just make my response simple. Since your latest pack of mouthing is contingent upon the usage of the word "original", and that does not seem to be a fact in evidence that I can see anywhere in the recent exchange, I simply reject your premise as false, and therefore I need put forth no further effort into responding to your sewage stream.
(Cpn Hook's methodology depicted below.)
I may be mistaken, but I don't recall them EVER claiming that the "original" document had been put forth, and that is THE EXACT NATURE of my bitchfest regarding the worthlessness of Hawaii's pronouncements. Indeed, they always have a dodge to allow them to say it isn't the "original."
Don't see the word "Original" used in the message to which I was responding. . . . I tracked the message thread all the way back to message 187, and the word "original" doesn't appear in that message. The word "original" isn't used in message 193 either. It wasn't used in message 240, which is the message to which you are replying, but when we get to your latest response, (message 245) suddenly the word appears in your comment five times, with you acting like it is the central point of dispute. Try #235. No doubt later on it's harder to find it when you skipped past it originally when in you're frequent "I'm not bothering" mode. In that post, there it is, separated into it's own paragraph and put into quotation marks, thus making it pretty easy to see:
"Not when further below Onaka says this is based on 'the original Certificate of Live Birth.'"
Since your latest pack of mouthing is contingent upon the usage of the word "original", and that does not seem to be a fact in evidence that I can see anywhere in the recent exchange, I simply reject your premise as false, and therefore I need put forth no further effort
This excuse coming from someone else might warrant little more than a shoulder-shrug. But you pull the "I'm not replying" routine even when you know what I've written and I'm repeatedly rubbing your nose in it. So no matter whether you've donned your "selective reading" glasses or whether your doing your ostrich pose and burying your head completely -- the result is the same.