ok, here you are. Now please go copy & print this with the same black print and light blue background as the other one, and post it on this thread.
Posted on 04/29/2011 5:52:16 PM PDT by Nachum
Both 0bama and Mrs. Fuddy Duddy also said that there was an exception made for him, but we know of at least two people who have received long form BCs from Hawaii in the past few months!
Yes, something stinks in Hawaii!
That’s 1961. I’m talking about the data printed on COLBs (as opposed to LFBs.) I spoke with the HDoH (and so did Polarik, actually) way back in 2008. They print their own seals, borders, etc.
YE-E-E-E-E-EEEEEESSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!! This is what I have practically been screaming at anyone who will listen! Hawaii told us exactly what they did, right down to the certifying statement! And if you look at each layer independent of the others, you can almost figure out what is on the original document, and further, if you take what is available from the layers and add it in with research by Butter and H. Mike (?) The complete picture is there!!!! I wish, wish, wish I was smart enough to do all this, because I know the answers are there.
“X” truly DOES mark the spot!!!!!
Thank you for holding your ground and refusing to be bullied into going with the flow. That is what true American’s do. They think for themselves and they don’t care whether it makes sense to the GLOBAL world, they care if it makes sense for their families and the values stated in the Declaration of Independence. Please keep digging!!!! All of us who care about this country have to stand our ground!
Well it’s not exactly a lie. Yes, it doesn’t pass the smell test.
The only reason they can say that without perjuring themselves is because recently the HDoH changed the forms so one could request only the short form.
The Post & Email ran a story recently (well after Danae received her LFBC) about someone who went in person to request his/her LFBC and was told that the HDoH no longer produces copies of them in accordance with policy. All the request forms have been changed to remove the checkbox for LFBCs.
Yep! They’ve been doing a lot of that type of talk all along with every statement they’ve releaed.
I’m merely hobbling along trying to follow the footsteps of my betters.
My tagline means a lot to me.
but there was also another one dated March 15.
There are four types of people in this BC issue:
1) Americans, 2) Wanna-be Globalists, 3) wishy-washy fence sitters, 4) Elites.
Here’s how this thing’s goin’ down. The fence sitters are going to be collateral damage. The Americans are gonna see this thing to the end, and we are just now gettin’ fired up, and the Wanna-Be Globalist are gonna get picked off, one at a time by both the Americans, and the Elites with whom the Americans are battling.
There are those on this and every BC thread who are “Parse-ing” along...eventually they will fall on a side, whether they like it or not.
Versions? How so?
It appears to be a black and white copy of the physical sheet of paper that has the green, thatched security background. You can see the thatched portion on the edge of the document. You can’t see it elswhere because the green is not dark enough that a photocopier (which uses a flash) could capture a significant difference between the green and white.
I’ve copied lots of documents that have faint, colored backgrounds that show up as white on a black and white copy. I don’t see the issue.
Keep letting that tag show!! :)
There are four types of people in this BC issue:So let me get this straight. You're saying that it's essentially "game on." If other FReepers simply disagree with you and don't support your theories, a) we're un-American and b) we'll be collateral damage in your war.1) Americans, 2) Wanna-be Globalists, 3) wishy-washy fence sitters, 4) Elites.
Here’s how this thing’s goin’ down. The fence sitters are going to be collateral damage. The Americans are gonna see this thing to the end, and we are just now gettin’ fired up, and the Wanna-Be Globalist are gonna get picked off, one at a time by both the Americans, and the Elites with whom the Americans are battling. There are those on this and every BC thread who are “Parse-ing” along...eventually they will fall on a side, whether they like it or not.
We're either for you or against you, is that it? We're your enemy if we happen to disagree with your chosen cause? ("You" and "you're" being birthers, collectively.) Is that really what you want?
Because to me, that sounds like you want JimRob to purge those FReepers who disagree with birtherism. And to me that suggests that birtherism is your highest priority. So nothing else matters? What about the rest of our conservative values, responsibilities, and duties? Will they too become "collateral damage" in your war? Should FReepers focus solely on birtherism and forget the other conservative causes where we can make a real dfference?
Please tell me that I misunderstood you. Please tell me that you think reasonable people (FReepers) can disagree about birtherism and still partner together on other conservative issues. Please tell me that you don't really think of fellow FReepers as "collateral damage" or enemies simply because they don't support birtherism?
It was also called a “true copy”. Read the rubber stamp.
it says, “OR ABSTRACT” - go read it yourself!
I was making an observation, and I called no names. Are FReepers allowed to make observations? Are you taking offense? It seems as if you have...I’m not sure why an observation of an independent thinker would cause offense to another independent thinker.
This reaction kind of reminds me of the “gun-scope” about Sarah Palin. Of course you do realize the term collateral damage was not meant in the actual bodily term?
Either we have free-speech or we don’t. Would you agree?
So you want to pick & choose? So how about those gays that believe in the Constitution and every other conservative value except for homosexuality? or how about those abortionists who believe in the Constitution and every other conservative value except for abortion? or how about those atheists that believe in the Constitution and every other conservative value except for God?
I've been asking that same question for two years. Yet on this thread alone, I've been attacked for making observations that offend birthers.
Of course you do realize the term collateral damage was not meant in the actual bodily term?
Yes, of course. What I don't understand is whether or not your intent to make us "collateral damage" is equivalent to having us banned. Is that what you want?
Either we have free-speech or we don’t. Would you agree?
Yes, we have free speech. But I think you misinterpret the intention of the 1st Amendment. It's there to protect us from the government. It's not there to protect us from all consequences resulting from our free speech.
You specifically avoided my request for you to clear up an misunderstanding I may have about your intent. Why? Was I correct? Did I properly understand your intent?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.