Anti-Obama GI's Afghan Orders Revoked

[hp_fa]

Interesting Link

 

[UAL_TECH]

Interesting Link

Yes it is interesting that they would say that.
Most cities and states have 'digitized' their documents and destroyed the original.
My birth certificate was 'digitized' (scanned to microfilm) and I have a copy of the original.
Same with my marriage license and my Mothers Birth Certificate.
We recently needed a copy of my brothers birth certificate and it even had his little baby footprint on it.
Recently (the past 10 years or so) microfilm copies have been transferred to pdf.

I would think a printed copy of the microfilm or pdf would be acceptable.
Where is it?

B) xUT

 

[tech2101]

Yes it is interesting that they would say that.
Most cities and states have 'digitized' their documents and destroyed the original.
My birth certificate was 'digitized' (scanned to microfilm) and I have a copy of the original.
Same with my marriage license and my Mothers Birth Certificate.
We recently needed a copy of my brothers birth certificate and it even had his little baby footprint on it.
Recently (the past 10 years or so) microfilm copies have been transferred to pdf.

I would think a printed copy of the microfilm or pdf would be acceptable.
Where is it?

B) xUT

View attachment 8517

 

[UAL_TECH]

View attachment 8515

Like I said...
Isn't quite the same is it?
Post it a few more times and maybe I'll believe it.
If I can get a microfilm copy of my Mothers original birth certificate from Ohio 1929, how hard would it be to produce the same for NoBama?

I am guessing 'impossible'? h34r:

 

[hp_fa]

Like I said...
Isn't quite the same is it?
Post it a few more times and maybe I'll believe it.
If I can get a microfilm copy of my Mothers original birth certificate from Ohio 1929, how hard would it be to produce the same for NoBama?

I am guessing 'impossible'? h34r:

I suspect that many governmental entities are no longer using microfilm and you couldn't get records that way. That said I am not sure if Hawaii ever went to microfilm at all and perhaps skipped that technology entirely and went from paper to e-records.

Like I said, I don't know the specifics as to whether or not what I say is correct, but it would make sense (at least to me).

 

[UAL_TECH]

I suspect that many governmental entities are no longer using microfilm and you couldn't get records that way. That said I am not sure if Hawaii ever went to microfilm at all and perhaps skipped that technology entirely and went from paper to e-records.

Like I said, I don't know the specifics as to whether or not what I say is correct, but it would make sense (at least to me).

Hawaii Vital Records
Hawaii has birth and death records beginning in 1853. Prior to 1896, however, the records are incomplete. Early vital records were kept by local government authorities and clergymen. There are a few missionary reports that date back as early as 1826. They are on file at the Hawaii State Archives, the Department of Health, and the Daughters of the American Revolution Library in Honolulu, and many are at the FHL in Salt Lake City. Since 1911, delayed birth certificates can be applied for in Hawaii. They often contain valuable genealogical information. The FHL has seventy microfilm rolls of delayed birth records for Hawaii. This collection contains 50,000 delayed birth records and covers the period from 1859 to 1903, with indexes from 1859 to 1938. Most records are now deposited with the State Department of Health.
For birth, marriage, and death records, write:
Hawaii Department of Health
Vital Records Section
P.O. Box 3378
Honolulu, HI 96801-9984

So they microfilm everything up to 1903 then just 'give up'?
B) xUT

Edited by Me!
---------------------------
Here is an edited version of the 'LAW' requiring keeping records.
The original or a fascimile must be kept at all times.
A 'statement of live birth' is neither an original or a fascimile.
As POTUS I not only want to see his original birth certificate but his college transcripts including his professors notes as well.

Act 177, Session Laws of Hawaii, Regular Session of 2005 (HB 515), expressly allows the use of government records in electronic format. The Act took effect on July 1, 2005.

 

[tech2101]

As POTUS I not only want to see his original birth certificate but his college transcripts including his professors notes as well.

And that will change what?

The people who are beating this dead horse would never have voted for him, nor ever will. They also will not change any of the minds of those who did.

People in the talk radio circuit and noise machine shows are the only ones who have any motive to drag this out...(money).

 

[UAL_TECH]

And that will change what?

The people who are beating this dead horse would never have voted for him, nor ever will. They also will not change any of the minds of those who did.

People in the talk radio circuit and noise machine shows are the only ones who have any motive to drag this out...(money).

To be fair, I was not a big Bush supporter and thought the invasion of Iraq senseless as we needed to concentrate on Afghanistan. The Cheney/Halliburton mess was also pretty disgusting and I think a few of my posts have verified my discontent with the past administration.

But that is neither here nor there. I don’t trust our gooberment to do the right thing, and I believe that my distrust has been verified numerous times. I do not trust the current administration either as, unless I am missing something, they are pretty much handling things similar to the past administration. I do not perceive myself as a ‘left wing nut’ nor a ‘right wing nut’ but somewhere in the ‘common sense’ category.

As noted before regarding the ‘birther’ ideology, I don’t see the big deal in providing a digitized copy of the original birth certificate. I can provide mine and most everyone else in this country can (including my deceased Mother born in 1929). Who knows, technology at that time was intermittent so it may be that Hawaii could not do a digital scan that day and decided to ‘fat finger it in’. It would be pretty easy to verify by taking sample data of people born that week and see how many scanned copies –vs- manual entry.
This #### isn’t rocket science as it once was.

B) xUT

 

[777 fixer]

Looks like the attorney in this case is up to some new tricks.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105764

Of course it did not take long for that document to be exposed as a huge lie.

http://images.salon.com/politics/war_room/...torylarge01.jpg

Which begs the question, is Ms. Taitz a dishonest lawyer, or just an incredibly stupid one. Either one is a bad trait for a lawyer to have, especially if they are representing you. They could cost a whole lot of money or casue you to end up in jail, or both.

 

[Garfield1966]

A dishonest lawyer? Say it ain't so.