-
Website
http://washingtonindependent.com/ -
Original page
http://washingtonindependent.com/50771/does-the-obama-birther-soldier-have-a-case -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
In Iraq and Afghanistan, volunteer soldiers were ordered by then-President Bush to fight in a war that Congress specifically authorized. Issues of President Obama's birth have been raised and rejected, as he is a US citizen born in Hawaii. That one major in the Army doesn't believe it is hardly equivalent to the moral outrage that Vietnam turned out to be.
This guy doesn't like it? Shouldn't have volunteered. But if you're in, you obey the Commander-in-Chief, or face courtmartial.
He's been in the public spotlight for years, and there's not a single credible soul who believes there's the slightest evidence that he's not eligible to be POTUS.
Sorry, you've had plenty of time to come up with evidence. "If" doesn't do it any more.
So even interpreting the officer's claims in their best light -- Obama is still President and the orders he makes as Commander in Chief are valid.
Can't wait to see her next press release!
And still Black.
And you're neither!
Boo-hoo!
Associated Press Nov 1, 2008:
The Associated Press quoted Chiyome Fukino as saying that both she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama's original birth certificate.
Fukino also was quoted by several other news organizations. The Honolulu Advertiser quoted Fukino as saying the agency had been bombarded by requests, and that the registrar of statistics had even been called in at home in the middle of the night.
[...]
Fukino said she has “personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."
So, how's my "homework"? /Sarcasm.
Why can't they get their stories straight?
Ever hear about edit wars?
It was a farce. And, WND got what it wanted. A bunch of morons over to his site.
Did you read the story in Gawk where the writer for WND got caught changing wikipedia entries just to make a story for WND? A few months back. Old trick for WND. And, apparently sucessful for fools to believe such crap.
Also, both hospitals are in hawaii.
I can't speak for Snopes, but any asshole can edit Wikipedia to make it say whatever they want it to say. I suspect that's what World Net Daily did - make an edit with a lie, then grab a screenshot before it got changed back so they could publish the falsehood. WND readers aren't the sharpest crayons in the box so they're easy to fool.
Maybe I don't exist?
Didn't you know that?
So far as any of us know....
But they sure are fun! Otherwise we'd be shooting fish in a barrel. But the fish are smarter than WND readers.
Ever hear about edit wars?
It was a farce. And, WND got what it wanted. A bunch of morons over to his site.
Did you read the story in Gawk where the writer for WND got caught changing wikipedia entries just to make a story for WND? A few months back. Old trick for WND. And, apparently sucessful for fools to believe such crap.
Also, both hospitals are in hawaii.
You're citing Wikipedia as though it were factual????
You betcha.
Further, it does not appear that Orly has yet found local counsel (at least, none is listed on the Motion as filed) which she MUST have in order to be admitted pro-hac vice in GA, as she is not licensed to practice law in that state (she must be sponsored by a member of the GA Bar).
Finally, there are claims being made on various blogs that Charles Lincoln actually drafted this pleading and Orly simply filed it. Mr. Lincoln appears to have been disbarred in multiple states, and it is unclear if the CA Bar is aware that he is now assisting Orly (if indeed these claims are correct). There are specific provisions regarding "employment" of disbarred attorneys under the Rules of Professional Conduct in both CA and GA that need be followed if indeed he is assisting her...employment seems to include both paid and unpaid assistance on a case.
I can only hope that the Republican party will make Obama's birth certificate an even larger issue in 2012 than it was in 2008. Please try to convince them to do so, after all, its a real problem for Obama, right?
I could tell her where to look it up, but as a dentist, she should know how to use the law library....
She is a joke! And so are her repeated lawsuits.
Hope she has malpractice insurance! Actually, I hope she doesn't. If not, then both she and the dopes who hired her can file for bankruptcy. Friendly judges waiting to greet them there!
To anyone stupid enough to believe this lunacy at this point there is NOTHING that will change their mind. That would require them admitting that they are, AT BEST, legally incompetent buffoons.
And she still hasn't let you in on the little secret that jurisdiction in the federal courts has not attached to her lawsuit, until she figures out how to get service of process on Obama.
There are books that tell her how. First she has to read!
Where did she get her law degree? Mail-order?
Yep.
Uhh actually, they prefer the term "remote learning institution".
OBAMA, STOP HIDING. SHOW US THE LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE!!!!!
Mr Weigel. . .GET SOME INTEGRITY!
You mean the ones who were born there can. Or are you claiming that the Hawaiian Govt is handing them out to people who were not born in the state? If so you would be blatantly lying, but reality and facts have never been a requirement for any people believing the birther delusion.
The courts HAVE NOT ruled on the merits of the case.
Obama has NEVER EVER released his “birth certificate.” He only showed a (very sketchy) “Certification of Live Birth.” There's a very big difference. Go do some research.
And forget McCain, I didn't vote for him. Plus, he lost.
OBAMA, STOP HIDING. SHOW US THE LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE!!!!!
http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2009/04/aka-o...
Bombshell: Orders revoked for soldier challenging prez
Major victory for Army warrior questioning Obama's birthplace
Posted: July 14, 2009 9:53 pm Eastern
By Chelsea Schilling and Joe Kovacs
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Dr. Orly Taitz
A U.S. Army Reserve major from Florida scheduled to report for deployment to Afghanistan within days has had his military orders revoked after arguing he should not be required to serve under a president who has not proven his eligibility for office.
His attorney, Orly Taitz, confirmed to WND the military has rescinded his impending deployment orders.
"We won! We won before we even arrived," she said with excitement. "It means that the military has nothing to show for Obama. It means that the military has directly responded by saying Obama is illegitimate – and they cannot fight it. Therefore, they are revoking the order!"
She continued, "They just said, 'Order revoked.' No explanation. No reasons – just revoked."
A hearing on the questions raised by Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook, an engineer who told WND he wants to serve his country in Afghanistan, was scheduled for July 16 at 9:30 a.m.
Join the petition campaign to make President Obama reveal his long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate!
"As an officer in the armed forces of the United States, it is [my] duty to gain clarification on any order we may believe illegal. With that said, if President Obama is found not to be a 'natural-born citizen,' he is not eligible to be commander-in-chief," he told WND only hours after the case was filed.
"[Then] any order coming out of the presidency or his chain of command is illegal. Should I deploy, I would essentially be following an illegal [order]. If I happened to be captured by the enemy in a foreign land, I would not be privy to the Geneva Convention protections," he said.
The order for the hearing in the federal court for the Middle District of Georgia from U.S. District Judge Clay D. Land said the hearing on the request for a temporary restraining order would be held Thursday.
Want to turn up the pressure to learn the facts? Get your signs and postcards asking for the president's birth certificate documentation here.
Cook said without a legitimate president as commander-in-chief, members of the U.S. military in overseas actions could be determined to be "war criminals and subject to prosecution."
He said the vast array of information about Obama that is not available to the public confirms to him "something is amiss."
"That and the fact the individual who is occupying the White House has not been entirely truthful with anybody," he said. "Every time anyone has made an inquiry, it has been either cast aside, it has been maligned, it has been laughed at or just dismissed summarily without further investigation.
"You know what. It would be so simple to solve. Just produce the long-form document, certificate of live birth," he said.
Cook said he was scheduled to report for duty tomorrow, on July 15, to deploy to Afghanistan as part of President Obama's plan to increase pressure of insurgent forces there.
He told WND he would be prepared for a backlash against him as a military officer, since members of the military swear to uphold and follow their orders. However, he noted that following an illegal order would be just as bad as failing to follow a legal order.
Before news of the orders being revoked were reported, MSNBC anchor Keith Olbermann tonight called Cook a "jackass" and Taitz a "conwoman," as he labeled both of them the "worst persons in the world." He flayed the soldier as "an embarrassment to all those who have served without cowardice."
Named as defendants in the case are Col. Wanda Good, Col. Thomas Macdonald, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Obama, described as "de facto president of the United States."
According to the court filing, Cook affirmed when he joined the military, he took the following oath: "I, Stefan Frederick Cook, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the president of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
According to the claim, "Plaintiff submits that it is implicit though not expressly stated that an officer is and should be subject to court-martial, because he will be derelict in the performance of his duties, if he does not inquire as to the lawfulness, the legality, the legitimacy of the orders which he has received, whether those orders are specific or general."
The military courts offer no option for raising the question, so he turned to civilian courts to consider "a question of paramount constitutional and legal importance: the validity of the chain of command under a president whose election, eligibility, and constitutional status appear open to serious question."
"Barack Hussein Obama, in order to prove his constitutional eligibility to serve as president, basically needs only produce a single unique historical document for the Plaintiff’s inspection and authentication: namely, the 'long-form' birth certificate which will confirm whether Barack Hussein Obama was in fact born to parents who were both citizens of the United States in Honolulu, Hawaii, in or about 1961," explains the complaint.
Taitz said she will attend the hearing to amend the temporary restraining order to an injunction because more members of the military have joined the cause.
"We are going to be asking for release of Obama's records because now this completely undermines the military. It revoked this order, but it can come up with another order tomorrow. It can come up with orders for other people," she said. "Am I going to be flying around the country 1,000 times and paying the fees every time they issue an order?"
Taitz said the issue "must be resolved immediately," and she will continue working to ensure Obama proves he is eligible for office.
"We're going to be asking the judge to issue an order for Obama to provide his vital records to show he is legitimately president," she said. "We're going to say, we have orders every day, and we'll have revocations every day. This issue has to be decided."
She said there cannot be any harm to the president if he is legitimately holding office.
"If he is legitimate, then his vital records will prove it," Taitz said. "If he is illegitimate, then he should not have been there in the first place."
Asked what this decision means for every other serviceman who objects to deployment under a president who has not proven he is eligible for office, Taitz responded:
"Now, we can have each and every member of the military – each and every enlistee and officer – file something similar saying 'I will not take orders until Obama is legitimately vetted.'"
Multiple questions have been raised about what that would mean to the 2008 election, to the orders and laws Obama has signed and other issues, including whether he then is a valid commander-in-chief of the military. . . .
-------------------------
See the original TRO for Major Cook
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/?p=3064
And since he was a reservist, he had a regular job... emphasis on the word "had". Because he was working for a military contractor, that is, until this frivolous lawsuit of Taitz. It should come to no surprise, then, that the Army decided to yank Mr. Cook's clearances and therefore he lost his job. Now his job is unemployed.
Mission Accomplished, "Dr." Taitz.
There have been 24 attempts in the United States to regulate speech that has been deemed seditious. In 1798, President John Adams signed into law the Alien and Sedition Acts, the fourth of which, the Sedition Act or "An Act for the Punishment of Certain Crimes against the United States" set out punishments of up to two years' imprisonment for "opposing or resisting any law of the United States" or writing or publishing "false, scandalous, and malicious writing" about the President or Congress (but specifically not the Vice-President). The act was allowed to expire in 1801 after the election of Thomas Jefferson to the presidency. He was Vice President at the time of the Act's passage.
Under the Espionage Act of 1917, section 3 made it a crime, punishable by 20 years' imprisonment and a fine of up to $10,000, to wilfully spread false news of the US military with an intent to disrupt their operations, to foment mutiny in the ranks, or obstruct recruiting. The act was amended in 1918 by the Sedition Act, which expanded the purview of the Espionage Act to any statement criticizing the government. The act was upheld in 1919 in Schenck v. United States, but was largely repealed in 1921, leaving laws forbidding espionage and allowing military censorship of sensitive material.
In 1940, the Alien Registration Act or Smith Act was passed, which made it a crime to advocate or teach the desirability of overthrowing the United States Government, or to be a member of any organization which does the same. It was often used against Communist organizations. The act was invoked in three major trials, one of the Socialist Worker's Party in Minneapolis in 1941, resulting in 23 convictions, and again in 1944 in what became known as "The Great Sedition Trial", of pro-Nazi figures which ended in a mistrial. A series of trials of 140 leaders of the Communist Party USA was also predicated upon the Smith Act beginning in 1949, and lasting until 1957. Although the Supreme Court upheld the convictions of 11 CPUSA leaders in 1951, the court reversed itself in 1957 in Yates v. United States by ruling that teaching an ideal, no matter how harmful it may seem, does not equal advocating or planning its implementation. Although unused since at least 1961[citation needed], the Smith Act remains US law.