• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Natural Born case will go forward

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Opponents of Barack Obama's presidency claim small court victory
9:26 PM | July 13, 2009

Supporters of a case that disputes the legitimacy of Barack Obama's presidency claimed a small victory today when U.S. District Judge David O. Carter told them to fix their paperwork and that he would listen to "the merits" of their case. But others present for the hearing Monday at the federal courthouse in Santa Ana stressed that the case remains a long way from ever getting a full airing in court and may never get to that point.

The case, Alan Keyes, et al. v Barack H. Obama, et al. was filed on Inauguration Day and is one of a raft of suits alleging Obama is ineligible to be president because he is not a "natural born citizen.” Such claims have fared badly in court to date. In December, for example, the Supreme Court dismissed without comment a case challenging Obama’s right to take the oath of office.

Perhaps because of that history, Orly Taitz, the lawyer who filed the current suit, was greatly cheered by Monday’s hearing. "He's very determined to hear the case on the merits," Taitz said, referring to the judge. "He stated, the country needs to know if Mr. Obama is legitimate, if he can legitimately stay in the White House."

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/opponents-of-barack-obamas-presidency-claim-small-court-victory.html
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Here's another one for Thursday:

Defendants in this case are the supervising officers Col Wanda Good (hence the name of the case Cook v Good), Col Macdonald, in their capacity as commanding officers, Dr. Gates in his capacity of the Secretary of Defence and Barack Hussein Obama-de facto president of the United states.

Officer Cook is not only a highly decorated officer, being on staff of the Southern Command, he is also a family man, a father of a 16 y.o. and a highly educated professonal with the degrees in Economics, Business and Management.

His grave concern is about soldiers under his command, all US officers and enlisted and about our children- what future will they have, when the person sitting in the White House as the commander in chief, is consealing all his vital records, spends over a million dollars to seal an otiginal birth certificate, that costs $12 to produce, who has multiple social security numbers in National databases and statements of experts, showing multiple signs of forgery in his Certification of live birth and selective service sertificate.




Hearing in Major Cook case is set for July 16th, 9:30 in the morning, Federal District Judge Clay D. Land
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Looks like the Government didn't want to answer to the charge. Major Cook's orders to deployed have been revoked.

What does this mean? Now is any military personnel wants to get out of going to Iraq/Afghanistan, all they will need to do is bring a lawsuit against Obama's comander in chief status, I guess.

It means that for the sake of covering up for Obama and fraud perpetrated, top brass of the US military are willing to undermine integrity of the military. Dangerous precedent, don't you think.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

U.S. ARMY HUMAN RESOURCES COMMAND

1 RESERVE WAY

ST. LOUIS, MO 63132-5200

AHRC-PLM-S 14 JUL 2009

ORDERS A-06-916551R

COOK STEFAN FREDERICK EAD8 MAJ EN 155 54 7803

4207 HARBOR LAKE DRIVE W096AA

LUTZ FL 33558

THE FOLLOWING ORDER IS REVOKED OR RESCINDED AS SHOWN.

ACTION: REVOKE
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Soldier who says Obama isn't president doesn't have to deploy, Army says
BY LILY GORDON

U.S. Army Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook, the reserve soldier who says he shouldn't have to go to Afghanistan because he believes Barack Obama was never eligible to be president, has had his deployment orders revoked, Army officials said.
Lt. Col. Maria Quon, U.S. Army Public Affairs Officer, U.S. Army Human Resources Command-St. Louis, said Tuesday evening, Cook was no longer expected to report Wednesday to MacDill Air Force Base in Florida for mobilization to active duty.

Cook is an Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA), meaning he is a reserve soldier assigned to an active component unit for duty. He is assigned to the U.S. Army Element of U.S. Southern Command. Last week he filed a request in federal court seeking a temporary restraining order and status as a conscientious objector through his California-based attorney, Orly Taitz.

Taitz, who has also challenged the legitimacy of Obama’s presidency in other courts, filed the 20-page document on July 8 with the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. In it Taitz asks the court to consider granting her client’s request based upon Cook’s belief that Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States and is therefore ineligible to serve as commander-in-chief of the U.S. Armed Forces.

Cook further states he “would be acting in violation of international law by engaging in military actions outside the United States under this President’s command. ... simultaneously subjecting himself to possible prosecution as a war criminal by the faithful execution of these duties.”

Documents show Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961, two years after it became a state.

Earlier today, Quon said Cook submitted a formal written request to Human Resources Command-St. Louis on May 8, 2009 volunteering to serve one year in Afghanistan with Special Operations Command, U.S. Army Central Command, beginning July 15, 2009. The soldier's orders were issued on June 9, Quon said.

"A reserve soldier who volunteers for an active duty tour may ask for a revocation of orders up until the day he is scheduled to report for active duty," Quon said.

She added that there is an administrative process to request revocation of orders. As of this afternoon, Cook had not asked for his orders to be revoked, Quon said. She could not say why the soldier's orders were pulled today by 3 p.m. CDT.

"Because of the Privacy Act I couldn't go into it," Quon said.

A call to Cook's attorney this evening was not immediately returned.

There are approximately 3,800 Individual Mobilization Augmentees in the U.S. Army Reserves. In addition to IMAs, the U.S. Army Reserves has three additional reserve levels, Quon said.

Approximately 63,000 soldiers serve with the Individual Ready Reserves, meaning they have no routine training or attendance requirements and no pay; 188,000 serve as reservists, attached to reserve units; and about 16,000 soldiers serve with the Active Guard Reserve, Quon said. The latter group consists of soldiers who have volunteered to be on full-time active duty, she continued.

A hearing to discuss Cook’s requests is scheduled to take place in federal court here Thursday at 9:30 a.m.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Yep- his military career is now done....

Last week he filed a request in federal court seeking a temporary restraining order and status as a conscientious objector through his California-based attorney, Orly Taitz.


Comical now how the rightwingernuts are promoting and backslapping the "conscientious objectors"- when only a few years ago they were wanting them brought back from Canada and hung...Guess now that sexual gender preference is being downplayed in the military- this will be the new way to get out of overseas deployment when you get that yellow streak.... :wink:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
They didn't kick him out of the army, they just said he didn't have to go to Afghanistan.

Looks like they gave him the case, they didn't want to show up for court.

Actions of an innocent man for sure. Why not just show the documents that would prove he is eligible.

The Major has stated he wanted to continue to serve his country, but not under illegal orders from an usurper.

There was no chance of Obama winning this in court.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
They didn't kick him out of the army, they just said he didn't have to go to Afghanistan.

That doesn't matter- his career is over...Period...I forsee his new position is that of inspector general of latrines- with a job description of personally inspecting the qualities of every military john in the world.... :wink:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Great, so one less volunteer to stand on the wall. All because Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen.

Be proud of your hero OT, very proud.

I hope for everyone's sake this does not become a trend.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
Great, so one less volunteer to stand on the wall. All because Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen.

Be proud of your hero OT, very proud.

I hope for everyone's sake this does not become a trend.

Not because of Obama- its how the military has operated for 200 years...

You don't challenge the authority of superiors or fight the system...
Remember Billy Mitchell.... :???:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
hypocritexposer said:
Great, so one less volunteer to stand on the wall. All because Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen.

Be proud of your hero OT, very proud.

I hope for everyone's sake this does not become a trend.

Not because of Obama- its how the military has operated for 200 years...

You don't challenge the authority of superiors or fight the system...
Remember Billy Mitchell.... :???:

What if they are illegal orders? Do you question the authority or not?

How bout in the case of Torture?
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
hypocritexposer said:
Great, so one less volunteer to stand on the wall. All because Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen.

Be proud of your hero OT, very proud.

I hope for everyone's sake this does not become a trend.

Not because of Obama- its how the military has operated for 200 years...

You don't challenge the authority of superiors or fight the system...
Remember Billy Mitchell.... :???:

If the orders come from Obama, then they're NOT coming from a superior. In fact, the very opposite.
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
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.'"
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Thanks Lonecowboy, hadn't seen that yet.

the very premise of the case is based on Obama's authority to give orders as Comander in Chief.

If it came from Obama to revoke the orders of deployment, then it could be argued, that he does not have the authority of revocation either.

This one needs to go to court, it looks like.
 

alice

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
Thanks Lonecowboy, hadn't seen that yet.

the very premise of the case is based on Obama's authority to give orders as Comander in Chief.

If it came from Obama to revoke the orders of deployment, then it could be argued, that he does not have the authority of revocation either.

This one needs to go to court, it looks like.

This one needs to go to court, it looks like.

Who the hell are you to say? Who are you to say what needs to go to court...especialy in the United States.

You are quite the Pretender, hypocrite.

Alice
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
hypocritexposer said:
They didn't kick him out of the army, they just said he didn't have to go to Afghanistan.

That doesn't matter- his career is over...Period...I forsee his new position is that of inspector general of latrines- with a job description of personally inspecting the qualities of every military john in the world.... :wink:


Excellent point OT--

Why would Major Cook, a decorated officer, highly educated (engineer)
set himself up for this kind of treatment without good reason??
He wants to go to Afganistan, he wants to serve his country, he just wants to make sure it's a lawful order and keep his oath to defend the Constitution of the United States of America from enemies both foreign and domestic.
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
Thanks Lonecowboy, hadn't seen that yet.

the very premise of the case is based on Obama's authority to give orders as Comander in Chief.

If it came from Obama to revoke the orders of deployment, then it could be argued, that he does not have the authority of revocation either.This one needs to go to court, it looks like.

Interesting twist Hypo-
there are lots of military men watching this one, it is just a matter of time till something will have to be done.
This just doesn't seem to be going away, it's picking up momentum.
Yesterday and today have upped the ante-
this sets quite a precedence for others to follow.

Just a side note , Judge Carter in California is a Marine, he took the same oath as Major Cook, he wants answers too!!
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
alice said:
hypocritexposer said:
Thanks Lonecowboy, hadn't seen that yet.

the very premise of the case is based on Obama's authority to give orders as Comander in Chief.

If it came from Obama to revoke the orders of deployment, then it could be argued, that he does not have the authority of revocation either.

This one needs to go to court, it looks like.

This one needs to go to court, it looks like.

Who the hell are you to say? Who are you to say what needs to go to court...especialy in the United States.

You are quite the Pretender, hypocrite.

Alice

Who are you to comment, Alice, when you pretend that Gibbs isn't lying about the cert? This is your country, why do you put up with that?
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
alice said:
hypocritexposer said:
Thanks Lonecowboy, hadn't seen that yet.

the very premise of the case is based on Obama's authority to give orders as Comander in Chief.

If it came from Obama to revoke the orders of deployment, then it could be argued, that he does not have the authority of revocation either.

This one needs to go to court, it looks like.

This one needs to go to court, it looks like.

Who the hell are you to say? Who are you to say what needs to go to court...especialy in the United States.

You are quite the Pretender, hypocrite.

Alice

Don't you want the military following legitimate orders from a legitimate president.

Pretty scary to think some in the military are not willing to follow orders because of doubt in the President's loyalities, isn't it.

That's the exact reason the Natural Born Citizen clause is there in the first place.
 
Top