Replies

Joe - oops!! I meant the fools on Zero’s support team!!! They’re all over the place with terminology and not on the same page at all. Sorry! It’s really wild and wooly the last several days (weeks, months...) but ramping up considerably. I am neglecting duties and spending too much time on FR (But not enough to read everything I want to read, stiil).

I agree with everything you’ve said. Because Zero is a liar and helped by a huge team of liars, and therefore so many have committed felonies, his entire “life” is a myth with some small droppings of truth to make it look real - as far as I’m concerned, EVERYTHING is on the table to be dissected. Everything. Not one thing isn’t relevant, because nothing can be trusted or taken at face value.

I don’t know if you’ve seen the thread linked below, freaking incredible research. Incredible. I’ve been reading it since it started and there is absolutely new research (or newly put into the public view) that is mind boggling. I know am convinced that not only his is birth place not necessarily what is claimed, but also the date and parentage are not ironclad. Read the thread if you can, at least the last bunch of pages.

And regarding the abstract/COLB/long form (all those terms are used for this “document” the WH has proffered), hoosiermama had this to say, and it makes it really clear what exactly this document purports to be.

When we had the FR cruises I contacted the clerk where I was born to get my BC. She asked which one I wanted. I replied give me one of each. After I got home realized that my mom’s name, dad’s name, date of birth and my own name were all wrong.

So I went to the office with all three in hand thinking I’d have a problem. Clerk proceeded to get the big book out with original in it. I looked at it showed her where the typist had misread the original script writing and the one typo. (Dad was with me to confirm my date of birth. She proceeded to enter the correct information in her computer and reprinted the short form, long form and a credit card size copy on official paper, then stamped and signed it.

What I had in my pocket was just what the typist put into her computer.

What we are looking at is what the clerk chose to put into the computer and print out. It is NOT A PHOTO COPY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT. It is what BO or his minion choose to make public. It’s been stamped with the “abstract” stamp to indicate that material has been left out. He could print it on toilet paper if stamped and signed it’s a form of a BC....BUT the ABSTRACT stamp indicates that material has been condensed, is not complete.

AGAIN I ask: If he has made this public, by law is the source material that this document was created from available to the public?

(Courtesy ping to hoosiermama).

Now here is the link to the absolutely amazing ongoing research thread:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2702976/posts?page=1647

I think it would be well worth your time to start back a bit.