*Ahem*
Danae and I live in the same town. She was kind enough to meet me on neutral ground and show me the documentation in question.
I can wholeheartedly vouch for it being an actual document, printed on very real paper. I stake my reputation as an Obot on this!
OK, jesting aside. It's pretty obvious to me that she got it from Hawaii. On the back side of the copy of her long form there is a readable transfer of ink from the receipt forming a mirror image of where they had been in contact.
It seem reasonable and clear to me that the two documents had been folded together soon after printing and had some time to get to know each other.
Would it have been nice if she had asked for a certified copy? Yes, it would have. But that's not the case.
I have no reason to question her statement in regards to the pedigree of the document, regardless of any other issue or concerns.
Danae and I had a nice opportunity to chat. We differ on certain matters and details in the meaning of NBC and other issues I imagine, but anyone who wants to call her a liar will now need to deal with me.
-Whaps one fist into his palm-
Jamese777 didn’t get your post. You forgot an ‘e.’ But since you’re gonna be payin’ ‘im a FRiendly visit to discuss our “offer,” you can just tell ‘im in person. :)
Really? You saw it, El Sordo? Too cool of you to do that, Danae.
THANK YOU!!! Wow. I totally did not expect this!! Wow.
I would not have asked you to post anything! Some people dont want to put themselves on the line like that. I will never ask anyone to do it.
Wow... I don’t know what to say other than a heartfelt thank you!
THANK YOU!!!!
THANK YOU!!! Wow. I totally did not expect this!! Wow.
I would not have asked you to post anything! Some people dont want to put themselves on the line like that. I will never ask anyone to do it.
Wow... I don’t know what to say other than a heartfelt thank you!
THANK YOU!!!!
As a staunch critic on the "birther" threads your intellectual honesty is to be applauded.
STE=Q
Wow a face-to-face meeting.
Rascal, she’s a babe too.
Well .....ok..... I guess I believe ya
You’re a stand-up guy, El Sordo. Thank you.
Just got to ping again to this post. :)
(Disclaimer: The following may not make me popular—oh well—here goes anyway!)
El Sordo said:
“On the back side of the copy of her long form there is a readable transfer of ink from the receipt forming a mirror image of where they had been in contact.”
Danae, if you could just please snap a photo of this within a reasonable time frame (like less than an hour), I would be so grateful! Obviously, it would be impossible for the HDOH to mail the photocopy of your BC and receipt with the mailing address behind the photocopy of the birth certificate. After all, they did arrive in an envelope with a window and the mailing address is printed directly on the receipt according to your photos.
Folks, please look at this photo and put that receipt behind the BC and put it in the envelope with your mind. Where is the mailing address?http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g172/Danae_photos/IMG_0591.jpg
Why, it’s right here, on the receipt behind the Photocopy of the BC? http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g172/Danae_photos/IMG_0592.jpg
Come on. This story is pure invention, El Sordo.
In fact, a quick eyeballing of the photos shows it would be impossible for that receipt to have ever been folded up BEHIND the photocopy of that birth certificate. The folds on the receipt are just too far apart. As a graphic designer, I am aware that when ink transfers during mailing, it’s a result of the sorter machines.
It’s been three days since this was posted and there has been no correction from Danae or El Sordo if he was mistaken. But if for some reason the ‘ink transfer’ came from the TONER on the photocopy of the birth certificate and was transferred to the back of the receipt—please post a photo of that, too! I want to “read” it.
I mean, Danae’s COLB is basically the only COLB propping up the ‘Date Filed By...’ language also found on Obama’s COLB and this story doesn’t hold water. It’s important to verify these claims. Or not. Why are you lending credibility to Danae’s BC story with an outright lie, El Sordo? Hmm?
This is not about some silly bet that Danae could obtain an uncertified copy of her long form—this is about verifying there’s nothing unusual about her long form that would cause her ‘certification’ to read ‘Date Filed By Registrar.’
And don’t get me started on the State Registrar acceptance ‘date stamp’ on that long form. A comparison with 26 other ‘date stamps’ from 1927-1981 shows that only Danae’s are inconsistent. I can provide a visual aid to help you understand this: http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/9213/danaescertstampfinal2.jpg
Why are yours so very different, Danae? Contrary to what you claim, something is unique about your birth certificate: the date stamps. Why?
I am sorry, but what the heck is going on here? Maybe I don’t really want to know.
I really struggled to just keep my mouth shut on this, but I can’t watch Danae and El Sordo and other unsuspecting people fall all over themselves about their humility and the truthfulness behind this stupid, stupid situation. There’s lies all right. Lots of them.
Of course I expect people to think and believe as they please—but personally, I don’t give this Birth Certificate and the ‘Certification of Live Birth’ any credibility—too many weird variables....I know that some of you who I included on this list KNOW what I am talking about.
Anyway, I just had to speak up on it. Sorry, Danae. Something stinks here.
[end rant]
