You have a knack for trying to baffle your way out of a question with volume rather than directly addressing the point. The subject is Obama’s ORIGINAL birth certificate, not what passes for a legal birth certificate. You said they would refer any questions about the ORIGINAL to an alleged June 2007 abstract. Either you think he has no other birth certificate prior to June 2007 or you know that it would be a deflection to refer anyone asking about the ORIGINAL to look at the jpg on the FTS site. Do you understand now??
In light of the fact that officials of the state of Hawaii from the Governor to the Attorney General to the Director ot Health to the Registrar of Vital Statistics to the Director of Communications for the state Health Department have gone out of their way to verify and authenticate that Obama’s birth in Hawaii occurred on August 4, 1961, do you believe that a long form birth certificate for Barack Hussein Obama II released by the state of Hawaii under Obama’s authority will be a valid and true representation of the facts of his birth?
Ummm, these people you listed have gone out of their way to avoid saying Obama’s alleged COLB is genuine, and to avoid specifying any official documents that support the claims that Obama was born in Hawaii. They have gone out of their way to change their law to avoid any responsibility in giving direct answers or complying with other disclosure laws. Because of their indirect approach to this issue, they don’t have a lot of credibility, but it still doesn’t deal with the question I posed originally about why the White House isn’t as responsive to questions about an original birth certificate as they appear to be with this diplomatic passport.