High ranking army officer from Greeley refuses to obey orders until President produces birth certificate

by Jack Minor,
for the Greeley Gazette

photo by WND

A former Greeley resident who is a highly decorated officer in the Army has become part of an ongoing national debate. Lt. Colonel Terrence Lakin, has refused to obey any and all orders until President Obama produces proof he is eligible to be the Commander in chief.  Lakin,  a flight surgeon charged with caring for Army Chief of Staff General George Casey’s pilots and air crew, said in a statement “For the first time in all my years of service to our great nation, and at great peril to my career and future, I am choosing to disobey what I believe are illegal orders, including an order to deploy to Afghanistan for my second tour of duty there.” Lakin was selected as the Army Medical Department’s Flight Surgeon of the Year for 2004.

The issue of eligibility arrives from the qualification listed for president in the United States Constitution. Article II, Section 1, Clause5 states “no person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of 35 years and been 14 years a resident within the United States.” According to a  Military Times survey, 6 out of 10 U.S. Soldiers are “pessimistic” or “uncertain” that Barack Obama is eligible to serve as Commander In Chief of America’s armed forces. Another recent survey found that nearly one in three Americans said they believed that President Obama was not born in this country. The most vocal of those who question the President’s eligibility under this clause have been derisively labeled “birthers” by many in the mainstream media. However, this group of critics actually encompasses several different theories. Some critics believe the president is a British subject, while others believe he was born in Kenya. The third group states they do not know, they merely want to see proof of the President’s US citizenship.

In response to questions regarding eligibility, President Obama’s campaign and administration have posted online images of a document that is purported to be the president’s Certificate Of Live Birth (COLB) from the State of Hawaii. Critics have stated at the time of the President’s birth, Hawaii was issuing COLB for children not born in the state. They say the true “long-form” birth certificate, which includes information such as the name of the birth hospital in attending physician, is the only document that can prove Obama was born in Hawaii. To this day, President Obama has not permitted the release of this long-form birth certificate for public or press scrutiny. The birth certificate is part of a longer list of documents, the President has not released to the public.  This list includes his Columbia University records and thesis papers, his kindergarten records, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, passport, medical records and files from his years as an Illinois state senator.

In reporting the issue, military.com states the issue is that Lt. Col. Lakin has simply refused to deploy to Afghanistan. Margaret Hemenway, who is acting as spokesman for the case said that is not true. “It is not just an issue of deployment,” she said.  “He is refusing to obey all orders, that’s what makes this case different. There have been other members of the armed forces who have refused deployment orders on this basis and the Pentagon simply changed their orders to cancel the deployment.” She went on to say Lakin reached out to official channels, requesting the documentation showing Obama was qualified to be the Commander-in-Chief, but was rebuffed at every turn.  Because of this he feels he has no choice but to disobey what he considers to be illegitimate orders. Hemenway says the issue is important because “the constitution still matters in this country.”

The eligibility issue has also been the subject of numerous lawsuits, however to date none of them has reached the discovery phase which would require the President to produce documentation. Currently the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is scheduled to hear one such case on June 29.

In spite of a concerted effort to silence the eligibility critics, several factors continue to keep this issue alive. First is simply the President’s refusal to make public all the documents that could silence the critics.  Instead, the administration has spent at least $1.7 million in legal costs to defend against all requests for the documentation. In addition, many foreign news sources have reported that Obama was born overseas. The Kenyan Observer in 2008 made reference to “the Kenyan born senator.” African Travel Magazine declared “as Kenyan born, US Senator Barrack Obama gets into Kenya today…”  The issue has also been kept alive by WorldNetDaily (WND), the number one news site on the internet. Joseph Farah, the founder of WND has over 25 years of newspaper experience including editor in chief of several major market dailies. Farah said in response to the issue “never have I stated that Obama was not born in the United States. I have been outspoken in calling for Obama to release his original birth certificate. Calling for public officials to release personal documents, especially when they are critical to establishing constitutional eligibility to serve, is not akin to fostering conspiracy theories. It is called good citizenship.”

State Rep. Jim Riesberg said he had no reason to doubt Obama’s eligibility to be president and that releasing the long form birth certificate would probably still not satisfy the critics.In an attempt to put the controversy to rest several states have proposed laws requiring election officials to verify eligibility going forward. Currently there is no legal requirement to verify the eligibility of a candidate for President.

Meanwhile, in a video posted on YouTube, Lakin asks the president to release the one document that would put this issue to rest once and for all. “President Obama, I ask you to respect and uphold the Constitution. Be transparent and show your honesty and integrity. Release your original, signed birth certificate, if you have one, thus proving your birth on American soil, and thus assure the American people that you are lawfully eligible to hold the office of the presidency and serve as commander in chief of the Armed Forces.”

Obama birth certificate – Army Dr. Terry Lakin, examines the partially amputated finger of an Afghan man who assists in collecting unexploded ordinance at Kandahar Airfield

– Army Dr. Terry Lakin, examines the amputated finger of an Afghan man in Kandaha


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Trackback  •  Posted by Jack Minor in General News category

 
  • HistorianDude says:

    Sorry Gomer… your cluelessness regarding the UCMJ is screaming.

    Orders do not low downhill like water through a pipe. Military authority is based on position and rank, not who the CIC is. A lawful order is a lawful order regardless of whether or not there is a CIC at all. When a Battalion Commander is killed in combat, orders of subordinate commanders do not suddenly evaporate.

    And the orders of subordinate commands are still lawful regardless of whether Obala is the president, a planarian, or a potted plant.

    Lakin has pissed away his careers, both military and medical. But, even in medical school, not everybody graduates at the top of the class.

  • Gomer Pyle says:

    HistorianDude
    April 20, 2010 • 10:45 am
    Sorry Gomer… your cluelessness regarding the UCMJ is screaming. Orders do not low downhill like water through a pipe. Military authority is based on position and rank, not who the CIC is.

    ________

    You sir are wrong,

    As with the other detractors here you need to go back and educate yourself on Military Law. Likewise as with all the other willfully ignorant trolls who have posted opinions here. Military Authority is not a matter of rank, it is a matter of Subordination. A Private can order a General to do something, if that Private has been vested with the authority over any area/place/thing/whatever he/she has been placed in charge of by his superiors.

    You don’t believe me? Then I suggest you go anyplace on any military installation or FOB and have a General Officer violate a secured area, by accident or by willful action. Then watch how quickly that General Officer gets Jacked Up by a lowly 1 stripper who happens to be responsible for, and is invested with the authority to keep said area secure.

    Like Relayman5C, and a few others here. You are typing out of complete ignorance. I find it amazing how such willfully ignorant individuals such as yourself think you have a leg to stand on when espousing this kind of ignorance. I can see I’m doing battles of wits here with unarmed opponents. You all are entitled to your opinions, even if they demonstrate what absolute fools you are when you post them.

    Unfortunately nobody can expect to educate the willfully ignorant, or those who simply argue for the sake of argument. I’ll not waste my time any longer.

  • Sam Sewell says:

    Danger! Danger! Will Robinson,

    Historian Dude is a notorious prolific Obot PSYOPS agent. He peppers the forums of all the AKA Obama questioners with Obot propaganda. He is very dangerous! He is intelligent. I suspect that he is ex military intelligence officer). He is persuasive. Much like AKA Obama he could sell furnaces in Key West. He is obsessed (or highly paid) about his mission of undermining whoever questions his God Obama.

    He has been banned by other forums.

  • Sam Sewell says:

    How to obtain a copy of Obama’s original long-form birth certificate, legally
    Does this give anyone any ideas?

    Lt. Col. Terry Lakin is the highest-ranking and first active-duty officer to refuse to obey orders based on President Obama’s eligibility.

    Remember Patriots, the case against Barack Hussein Obama will be over in Discovery, therefore, let us commence with Our Discovery of the Truth regarding the suspect commonly known to us Citizens as Barack Hussein Obama of unknown Citizenship, Allegiance and Alliances.

    Commander Fitzpatrick was hoping to be arrested so as to lead to ‘discovery’’ All we need is for just ONE honest and patriotic judge, anywhere in these 50 United States, to order DISCOVERY!

    below excerpt from : Obama “I have nothing to hide but I’m hiding it.”

    The Crux of the Legal Straw That Can Break AKA Obama’s Back

    Another piece of information that many fail to realize is that in the birth certificate cases, all that is needed is for the case to be heard. This case will be over in the “Discovery” phase. Before a trial starts, both sides are required by the court to put all their cards on the table to avoid “trial by ambush.” The judge orders all evidence to be presented by both sides. Since this case is about discovering documents that are hidden, the case will be decided by court-ordered presentation of all relevant records. Lawyers in birth certificate cases don’t need to win a trial; they only need to get a trial.For those of you who think ridicule and name calling are effective debate tactics, I refer your kool-aid drenched, tin foil protected brains (a dose of your own medicine) to this article from American Thinker: Why the Barack Obama Birth Certificate Issue Is Legitimate .
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Full Story Here:
    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=143213

    Approaching apocalypse: Will Obama docs surface?

    I’m not going to say what we are going to do other than we are going to do what you would want us to do,” Jensen said.

    He specifically avoided broadcasting any specific defense strategy for the case that is developing against Lakin – confirming that the officer was told in writing on Monday that he now has been “flagged” by the military and charges are expected to be filed soon.

    But he expressed confidence that there will be an aggressive discovery phase in preparation for a defense of any charges that could be filed.

    “Every criminal defendant has to be allowed the benefit of doubt to discover information relevant or which may even lead to the discovery of relevant information that could support his case,” he said.

    “It would shocking to me that a defendant … would not be permitted to discover information that would lend itself to proving his [case],” he said.

  • HistorianDude says:

    So… Sam. Where’s that OMG moment you’ve been premising for over a year?

    :D

  • HistorianDude says:

    Gomer:

    I suggest you reread my post… especially the part you quoted.

    “position and rank”

    Your little scenario with the PV1 guard is rather neatly covered by my comment. Please do not mistake your illiteracy for my ignorance.

  • Bon'Fire says:

    Historical Dude does not know that whoever speaks with the wise will become wise and whoever walks with fools will suffer harm. Historical dude is an unreliable messenger and and ignores criticism. Historical Dude would like to see his dreams come true, but he’s a fool and will not turn from evil to reach his goals. The Dude will continue to walk the rocky road just like Obama who acts like a fool and then even brags about it.

  • HistorianDude says:

    Bon’Fire writes that, “Historical Dude would like to see his dreams come true, but he’s a fool and will not turn from evil to reach his goals.”

    To Bon’Fire I recommend Matthew 5:22

    “Whosoever shall say, “Thou fool,” shall be in danger of hell fire.”

  • HistorianDude says:

    LTC Lakin was formally charged today with on specification (“count”) of “Missing movement,” and four specifications (“counts”) of “Disobeying orders.” Unfortunately for his intended defense, none of the orders he is accused of disobeying were issued by President Obama.

  • Brazontruth says:

    HistorianDude

    Thank you,

    For the rest,

    If we in the military were free to disregard the orders of the authority appointed over us, I don’t believe 70% of us wouldn’t have gone to Iraq. By taken the oath we must honor the orders of the elected individuals that govern this country and most of all the military.

  • Brazentruth says:

    HistorianDude

    Thank you,

    For the rest,

    If we in the military were free to disregard the orders of the authority appointed over us, I don’t believe 70% of us wouldn’t have gone to Iraq. By taken the oath we must honor the orders of the elected individuals that govern this country and most of all the military.

  • Sam Sewell says:

    June 17, 1972: Five men, one of whom says he used to work for the CIA, are arrested at 2:30 a.m. trying to bug the offices of the Democratic National Committee at the Watergate hotel and office complex.

    August 8, 1974: Richard Nixon becomes the first U.S. president to resign. Vice President Gerald R. Ford assumes the country’s highest office. He will later pardon Nixon of all charges related to the Watergate case.
    * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
    Tuesday, June 16, 2008
    Obama committed felony document fraud and posted a false identification document on the Internet.
    Monday, March 30, 2009

    Somethings coming – Something big! Obama’s going down!
    The Federal Grand Jury is the 4th Branch of Government -by Leo C. Donofrio, J.D.

    Tuesday, April 21, 2009
    AKA Obama Fans: All together now – say OMG!! published by Aristotle the Hun
    http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2009/04/aka-obama-fans-all-together-now-say-omg.html
    *******************

    It took 22 months to get Nixon. AKA Obamas crimes are far more serious than Nixons.

  • Fox_1 says:

    For the rest,

    If we in the military were free to disregard the orders of the authority appointed over us, I don’t believe 70% of us wouldn’t have gone to Iraq. By taken the oath we must honor the orders of the elected individuals that govern this country and most of all the military.
    ________

    The Oath of Office is a solemn oath taken by officers of the United States Uniformed Services upon commissioning. It differs slightly from that of the oath of enlistment that enlisted members recite when they enter the service. It is statutory (i.e. required by law) and is prescribed by Section 3331, Title 5, United States Code. It is traditional for officers to recite the oath upon promotion but as long as the officer’s service is continuous this is not actually required. One notable difference between the officer and enlisted oaths is that the oath taken by officers does not include any provision to obey orders; while enlisted personnel are bound by the Uniform Code of Military Justice to obey lawful orders, Officers in the service of the United States Military are bound by this oath to disobey any order that violates the Constitution of the United States.

    Enlisted Oath:

    I, (NAME), 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 regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

    Officer Oath:

    I, [name], 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; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

    As clearly stated above, Commissioned Officers in the service of the United States are bound by this oath to disobey any order that violates the Constitution of the United States. Gomer Pyle is by far the most correct with his/her analysis of the situation. Contrary to what you think, your opinions to the contrary are irrelevant.

  • HistorianDude says:

    Fox_1

    I have taken that oath. Have you? Because I have to tell you, neither you nor Gomer appear able to make heads or tails of it.

    The oath requires commissioned officers to “support and defend the Constitution.” It does not set them up (as in many banana republics) to be the arbiters and enforcers of it. The Constitution firmly and completely places the military under the command and direction of the civilian leadership (I.e. the President and the Congress). What you are suggesting is frankly in direct violation of the oath itself. This is why Lakin is getting so little sympathy from his fellow officers.

    Since none of the orders disobeyed by LTC Lakin violate the Constitution, your post is beyond pointless. What is most tragic is that more and more, Larkin appears to be the victim (unwitting or otherwise) of an orchestrated stunt by deeply incompetent lawyers who have given him some very, very bad legal advice. The only real question is whether or not the genuine purpose of the stunt is fund raising. Nothing else substantive appears to be likely to result.

    Lakin will never get to raise the issue of Obama’s eligibility in either his Article 32 hearing or his general Court Martial, as it is completely irrelevant to the charges made against him. This is not speculation. It is a sober accounting of the facts.

    LTC Lakin is going to prison. For no purpose whatsoever.

  • Atticus Finch says:

    LTC Lakin’s attempts to challenge Obama’s orders will fail under the political question doctrine.

    The judge in LTC Lakin’s court martial will not allow the defendant to go on a fishing expedition through discovery to find out if Obama is constitutionally eligible to be president. The judge will denied his request as being immaterial and irrelevant to his violation of Article 92 (FAILURE TO OBEY ORDER OR REGULATION) and furthermore, the judge will ruled as a matter of law that the deployment order was lawful. See Manual of Court Martial (2008 Edition) Paragraph 14 (2)(a) page IV-19

    Upon his conviction for violating Article 92 and after exhausting his administrative remedies in the military court system, LTC Lakin will file a petition
    for Habeas Corpus in the federal district court arguing that court martial judge violated his Fifth Amendment rights in refusing to permit him to discover whether or not Obama is constitutionally eligible to be president .

    The federal district court will affirm LTC Lakin’s conviction and following established Supreme Court precedent in Baker v. Carr (Political Question doctrine) it will also hold that LTC Lakin’s discovery of Obama’s eligibility is barred by the Political Question doctrine.

    The federal district court will rely on the language in the United States v. New, 448 F.3d 403 (D.C. Cir. 2006) decision in which the New court observed:

    “[N]othing gives a soldier “authority for a self-help remedy of disobedience.” 55 M.J. at 108 (quoting United States v. Johnson, 45 M.J. 88, 92 (C.A.A.F.1996)). Two of the canonical factors from Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 217, 82 S.Ct. 691, 7 L.Ed.2d 663 (1962), “an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to a political decision already made,” 369 U.S. at 217, 82 S.Ct. 691, and “the potentiality of embarrassment from multifarious pronouncements by various departments on one question,” id., are uniquely powerful when the context is a soldier’s use of the “self-help remedy of disobedience.” Also supporting a broader sweep to the political question doctrine in military trials is the point made by Judge Effron in his concurring opinion — that the doctrine “ensur[es] that courts-martial do not become a vehicle for altering the traditional relationship between the armed forces and the civilian policymaking branches of government” by adjudicating the legality of political decisions. Id. at 110”

    As such, the judge of LTC Lakin’s court martial will ruled as a matter of law that the deployment orders were lawful and under the Political Question doctrine LTC Lakin’s attempts to disprove Obama’s eligibility is immaterial and irrelevant.

  • Buzzedhaircut says:

    Highend words and legal comments do not get the job done. Lets keep it simple, SHOW US THE DAMN BIRTH CERTIFICATE! or step down. Barrack Obama/Barry Soetoro or whatever his name is needs to prove it, unless he has something to hide, but then again most hodgie phucs do.

  • Buzzedhaircut says:

    I have been and will be fighting for this country for some time. I hate the fact that my so-called CIC refuses to put this to rest, he must be hiding. His criminal friends and liberal robots give him a free pass 100% of the time, so don’t be supprised to see this get swept under the rug. For now I obey the orders of the military, not Obama/Soetoro or whatever his name is.

  • HistorianDude says:

    Barack Obama publicly released his birth certificate in June of 2008. With this single act (in case you were not paying attention) Obama had provided more proof of his eligibility for the presidency than any other President in American History.

    You’re not happy with it? Then don’t vote for him in 2012.

  • Sam Sewell says:

    Retired Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely, “Lt. Col. Lakin has ‘valid point’
    ‘He has right to discovery. Producing birth certificate is very important”

    This guy outranks anyone who has posted on this forum so far.

    http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2010/04/lt-col-terry-lakin-has-valid-point.html

  • old hat says:

    Even if he (Obama) was born in Africa, the evidence would be long gone. Of further interest is information regarding his school attendance in Indonesia. These schools repordedly do not accept citizens from other countries. This includes dual-citizenship. If we assume for a minute that he is in fact a real US citizen, then he would have had to revoke his citizenship and become a citizen of another country; before becoming president of this country.

    Why don’t we also discuss his school record? Why does our dear leader not release his collage transcripts? Did you know that not one of his supposed class mates remember him from his days at Columbia University? This includes the infamous liberal hack George Stephanopoulos. Fox news also interviewed hundreds of students that attended the university at the same time (supposedly) as Obama, and none of them remembered him.

  • Greg27 says:

    I’m no Obama supporter and quite the opposite, but all this hubbub is about nothing. First off, what chance in a trillion does this officer think he has of winning this battle? What strategic minded Army man would ever think to take this sort of action? He threw away his career and his retirement. He’ll go to prison too. Somethings in life are worth fighting for, but this was not one of them. Why would an intelligent person just throw all this away and give Obama another trophy to hang on the wall of the Oval Orifice of military officers he has successfully taken down? Ludicrous!

  • Sarah says:

    For those who think its shocking that someone could get into medical school with these views, he is NOT an MD, he is a DO, or doctor of osteopathic medicine, and went to University of Health Sciences-College of Osteopathic Medicine. These schools are a little easier to get into.

  • Former Marine says:

    The elgibility questioning a commander in chief has never been bought up by anyone in the military in history that I have heard of until the sitting president happens to be black. Go figure! I wonder what is going to be the next factor to doubt this black president elgibility to govern.

  • The Magic M says:

    > This guy outranks anyone who has posted on this forum so far.

    Still he is no expert in military law, just like a member of Congress is not an expert on Constitutional Law.
    Argument by authority is a logical fallacy. Just because a General supports a certain view does not make this view any more credible, especially with the additional fallacy that his opinion does not concern an area where he has any expertise.

    Gen. Vallely is in fact one of the guys who talked Lakin into this foolish errand. And he is out of his mind (and rightfully out of the military) if he thinks any soldier can just stop taking orders until his superior’s credentials are verified. If anyone of his men had questioned Gen. Vallely’s credentials while he was still in office, he would have schlepped them to court-martial himself.

    > These schools repordedly do not accept citizens from other countries.

    “Reportedly”? Has anyone ever actually verified this or do you birthers just keep making stuff up and calling it “fact”?

    > Did you know that not one of his supposed class mates remember him from his days at Columbia University?

    That is an open lie.

    > Fox news also interviewed hundreds of students that attended the university at the same time (supposedly) as Obama, and none of them remembered him.

    And what does that prove? There *are* people who remember him.

    If I can’t find no-one from your school days who remember you, does that mean you don’t exist or went to school somewhere else?

    Another logical fallacy.

    > The elgibility questioning a commander in chief has never been bought up by anyone in the military in history that I have heard of until the sitting president happens to be black.

    Not just that. I bet with no other president would anyone, including Lakin, have gone so far as to accuse Congress, the entire military, all the media, all the courts, both Dems and Reps, the Hawaiian authorities and a zillion other people of “being part in a huuuuuuge conspiracy spanning 50 years”.
    Because that is the only way the birthers can “explain away” all the evidence refuting their allegations, plus the fact that they have not a shred of real, let alone court-proof, evidence themselves.

    If anyone had ever gone so far as to question GW Bush’s or Clinton’s eligibility, after publishing a COLB it would all have been over.

    I mean, no-one on the left (who the birthers accuse of being “the original birthers” because of McCain’s NBC issue) started these wild theories about Panama and Congress and world+dog being part of a conspiracy to declare McCain eligible.

  • Truth says:

    @ Former Marine

    First of all: Thank you for your prior sevice!!!

    As far as your point goes think about it form a different perspective. The liberal machine would like you to stay put enjoy the show, and ignore the people that are screaming fire inside a movie theatre, because they are nuts, racist or delusional. The fact that Obama happens to be half black is not the issue here. His birth eligibility issues which were questioned by his own Democratic supporters who demanded answers to, is!!! Instead of providing us with his self proclamed transparency he reared his arrogance and reffused to deal with the issue from the get-go, unadversely adding fuel to the suspicion. So yes after the people started screaming fire some started smelling smoke!!!
    What other past presidents have had discrepancies with their birth eligibility that Obama’s had? Is Obama privileged or should we make him immune and give him a pass because he’s half black and use that as an excuse not to pursue the truth? There are racists on both sides of the fence. So should we look the other way just because a minute portion of the people questioning Obama’s eligibility issues are motivated by racism? Even if a minute portion of the people are motivated by racism, so what? The two Black Panthers who were allowed to stand guard outside the Philadelphia election office intimidating the voters during the 2008 Presidential election, are they not racists? Is Attorney General Eric Holder a racist for not prosecuting them? Just some food for thought.

  • The Magic M says:

    > What other past presidents have had discrepancies with their birth eligibility that Obama’s had?

    You’d have to ask the birthers. After all, they’re the ones claiming *every* President must *prove* his eligibility. No wiggle room for “only if doubts are rising”.

    So why do birthers take Clinton’s or the Bushes’ eligibility for granted if they’re allegedly so “sceptical”? Aren’t they the ones claiming that every law they signed would be “null and void” if it turns out they were not eligible? And aren’t the birthers the ones who say “you’re ineligible until proven otherwise”? Has any birther ever seen Clinton’s or the Bushes’ birth certificates? By their own logic, every former president except Reagan was ineligible. Somehow they don’t seem to care, though the consequences would be much graver than with Obama, given the plethora of laws and treaties that would be “void” if they were right.

  • Truth says:

    @ The Magic M

    Every person attempting to become the president of the US should be transparent and produce proof of elegibility!!! No one sholud be immune from it!!! And no one should have to ask for it, regardless of what’s driving their motivation!!!
    Your points however are futile since they are based in prejudice and lack of substance, due to the persistent liberal based assumptions and innuendoes claiming that every person questioning Obama’s eligibility is either a birther, racist, lunatic, or a right wing fanatic. All the aforementioned adjectives are frequently and freely hurled around by the laim stream media at any one who questions or speaks unfavorably of Obama. The horse died a long time ago, but you guys keep beatting it over and over. It’s time to quit because no one cares or listens when you pull out the race card. It’s worn out, illegible and it really makes you guys look stupid and ignorant. It is very clear once again in your response that what youre filling your comments with prejudicial smoke screens and distractions in order to take the heat form the main issue!!! So either give us something new or take your comments to CNN!!!

  • The Magic M says:

    > Every person attempting to become the president of the US should be transparent and produce proof of elegibility!

    So please tell me, did you care whether GWB or Clinton did that? Did they do it? Have you seen their proof of eligibility? Are you 100% certain they were properly vetted?

    And if not, why don’t you seem to care about that and only seem to care about Obama? What’s different with him? Different from GWB (a white male Republican) and Clinton (a white male Democrat)? Can’t be the party, can’t be the gender. So what remains?

    > claiming that every person questioning Obama’s eligibility is either a birther, racist, lunatic, or a right wing fanatic

    His eligibility is settled. Claiming that his credentials are forgeries, that the Hawaiian authorities and Congress and the military and the courts and the media and the Reps and Dems and just about everyone is “in on it” and “part of a cover-up” is the raving of a lunatic. Period.
    Claiming that 200+ years of case law and Constitutional scholars are wrong and part of another conspiracy to distort the Founders’ intent as to “natural born citizen” is also the raving of a lunatic. Period again.

    > hurled around by the laim stream media at any one who questions or speaks unfavorably of Obama

    You are free to question, attack or speak unfavourably of Obama – either because you don’t like his politics or don’t like him as a person. But if you keep your lunatic conspiracy theories alive in the face of truth and evidence to the contrary, you are rightfully called out for what you are.
    If you don’t like him, fine. No need to invent conspiracy theories or make up redefinitions of the law to justify your irrational feelings. No need to paint him as the “Communist Muslim Nazi Marxist usurper” that the birthers love to call him.

    If the birthers were just as feverishly interested in the consequences of all former presidents (except Reagan) not having shown their birth certificates and not having proved their eligibility to their standards, no-one would call you bigots or racists.

  • Truth says:

    @ The Magic M, aka The Magic Wand

    Once again a perfect exampe of prejudicial smoke screens, twists, and spins being hurled around by your liberal magic wand. I don’t mention any lunatic conspiracy theories in my prior comments (nowhere did I personally claim that Obama’s proof is a forgery), which are very simple and easy to follow? If you didn’t pay attention to their entierty read them again or have someone with some common sense, or higher intelligence explain them to you. But just in case you can’t find anybody to help you drink, since I’ve already lead you to the water, let be be so kind and try again one last time for the sake of your liberal warped mind.
    EVERYONE INCLUDING PAST OR FUTURE PRESIDENTS, INCLUDING CLINTON, BUSH AND WHOEVER ELSE YOU WANT TO TOSS IN THE MIX, SHOULD BE TRANSPARENT AND PROVIDE PROOF OF ELEGIBILITY!!! NO ONE SHOULD BE IMMUNE!!! IF DISCREPANCIES EXIST WE SHOULD ALL BE ALLOWED TO QUESTION AND DEMAND THE TRUTH!!! I AM CERTAIN BEYOND ANY DOUBT IF ANY PAST REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES OR PRESIDENTS WOULD HAVE HAD A FRACTION OF OBAMA’S ELEGIBILITY DISCREPANCIES, YOU AND THE REST OF YOUR LIBERAL CLOWNS WOULD BE HAVING A BLOODY ORGY!!!
    As far as referring to Obama as a “Communist Muslim Nazi Marxist usurper”, show me where and when I did it!!! And you want to paint me as a bigot and a racist because it is my right not my ” irrational feelings” to get to get to the bottom of the truth? Just who is he bigot or racist? Have you looked in the mirror lately???

  • There are actually a variety of particulars like that to take into consideration. That could be a nice point to bring up.

  • muhammad saleem says:

    i understand that its very important to verify whether Obama is really eligible to be president & if hes really a US citizen etc
    but, i think its MORE IMPORTANT for soldiers to refuse orders because all the wars are illegal & immoral
    basically, the soldiers are saying that they would obey orders only if the president was eligible to be elected
    thats very stupid- cos irrespective of who is giving the orders- they are ALL illegal & immoral & these stupid soldiers are just pawns being used to do other peoples dirty work-WHICH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH FIGHTING TERRORISM.
    the vast majority of US soldiers are NOT “brave men & women” they are gullible pawns who are allowing themselves to be lied to just to feed their families back home- THERES NOTHING BRAVE OR HONOURABLE ABOUT THAT.

Please leave a reply...



You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>