Had anyone, including you, seen his birth certificate? The proof would be in him showing it just like McNuts and every other President has!
Newbies are fun!
I have this to offer and maybe this is what you might have seen:
Posted on 07/10/2009 3:22:39 PM PDT by rxsid
"MAJOR STEFAN FREDERICK COOK, Plaintiff,
v.
COLONEL WANDA L. GOOD, COLONEL THOMAS D. MACDONALD, DR. ROBERT M. GATES, UNITED § STATES SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, Rule 65(b) Application for BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, de facto Temporary Restraining Order PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES, Defendants.
APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
Plaintiff Major Stefan Frederick Cook has received from the Defendants in this cause what appear to be facially valid orders mobilizing him to active duty with the United States Army in Afghanistan on July 15, 2009 (Exhibit A).
AN OFFICER’S DUTY TO OBEY LAWFUL ORDERS: This Plaintiff, at the time of his original induction, took the United States military oath, which reads: "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" Title 10, Subtitle A, Part II of the United States Code contains the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). 10 U.S.C. §890 (ART.90), makes it an offence subject to court-martial if any military personnel “willfully disobeys a lawful command of his superior commissioned officer," 10 U.S.C. §891 (ART.91) "lawful order of a warrant officer", and most importantly, 10 U.S.C. §892 (ART.92) provides court-martial for any officer who (1) violates or fails to obey any lawful general order or regulation; (2) having knowledge of any other lawful order issued by a member of the armed forces, which it is his duty to obey, fails to obey the order; or (3) is derelict in the performance of his duties; In each case, 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. Unfortunately the Uniform Code of Military Justice does not provide a means for ascertaining the legality of orders, and accordingly, this Plaintiff is left with no choice but recourse to the ordinary civil courts of the United States to seek a determination of what he considers to be 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.
Plaintiff Major Stefan Frederick Cook is not a pacifist. He does not object to war or the use of military force in the implementation of national policy or the enforcement of international law. Above all, Plaintiff is not a coward, he is not engaged in mutiny, sedition, insubordination, contempt, disrespect, or any kind of resistance to any general or specific lawful order of which he knows or has received notice. Plaintiff Major Stefan Frederick Cook realizes and accepts as a matter of political reality (although it is very hard for him to bear personally) that many may criticize or even shun him, saying that he is not acting in the best interests of his country for trying to uphold the plain letter of the Constitution. Others may cynically ridicule this Plaintiff when, as an officer responsible not only to obey those above him but to protect those under his command, he comes to this Court asking for the right to establish the legality of orders received not only for his own protection, but for the protection of all enlisted men and women who depend on HIS judgment that the orders he follows are legal. Above all, when Plaintiff Major Stefan Frederick Cook submits and contends that he files and will prosecute this lawsuit and seeks an injunction or temporary restraining order against the enforcement of potentially illegal orders for the benefit of all servicemen and women and for the benefit all officers in all branches of the U.S. Military, he knows that those in power illegitimately may seek to injure his career. He knows that he risks all and he does so in the conscientious belief that he does so for not merely his own, but the general good. But Plaintiff cannot escape from the mandates of his conscience and his awareness, his educated consciousness, that all military personnel but especially commissioned officers have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ.
NEVER BEFORE IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES
Plaintiff presents the key question in this case as one of first impression, never before decided in the history of the United States: Is an officer entitled to refuse orders on grounds of conscientious objection to the legitimate constitutional authority of the current de facto Commander-in-Chief? In the alternative, is an officer entitled to a judicial stay of the enforcement of facially valid military orders where that officer can show evidence that the chain-of-command from the commander-in-chief is tainted by illegal activity? ..."
http://www.scribd.com/doc/17266905/05311066823
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/
Have you read the petition? He is not refusing to obey a lawful order. Given the massive evidence of Obama’s fraud, the officer is asking the court to rule on the legitimacy of his orders.
bttt
Had anyone, including you, seen his birth certificate? The proof would be in him showing it just like McNuts and every other President has!
Newbies are fun!
I have this to offer and maybe this is what you might have seen:
I think the Doctor’s signature is fake.
The Governor of a state does not ‘activate’ the National Guard or Reservists to deploy overseas.
Correct.
Don’t celebrate yet. If you’ve been around the military justice system, you know that by revoking his deployment orders they have change his status to make it much easier to bring him up for a general courts martial for refusing to obey orders.
and Unfortunately my legal analysis says they’ll win. The military worships the concept of Chain of Command and in their eyes Obama did not give him an order to deploy, the Pentagon or his superior officer did. Thus under the UCMJ the Fitness or Eligibility of the person at the top of the CoC to issue orders is “above his paygrade” so if the order from his superior was valid, the court martial will not entertain any evidence about Obama or his Birth certificate
thanks
What I still don’t get about the Obama birth certificate controversy is this: even if Obama was born in Kenya to an unmarried American woman, he would still have American citizenship right? American military, diplomats, even tourists’ children are citizens right? So unless he was born to foreign parents he is a US citizen and eligible right?
I agree that there HAS to be something weird about this due to the fact that he is spending so much to hide it.
Her one aim is to subpoena the original long form birth certificate to prove that Obama is not eligible as a natural born citizen. There are other issues that it could lead to such as felony forgery.
I along with many others are praying for Major Cook's safety and also for the truth to come to light.
Welcome to Free Republic!
What orders did he refuse to obey?
If it's proven Obama was indeed foreign born (Kenya), He would not have received U.S. citizenship based, only, on his mother's citizenship status. Per U.S. law at the time of his birth (December 24, 1952 to November 13, 1986). Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock: "For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child."
Following up on #375:
Obama’s mother didn’t give birth to him at 19 (14 + 5). Therefore, Obama could not obtain U.S. citizenship based only by virtue his mother’s citizenship (if he were born outside the U.S.). Keep in mind as well, that’s “Citizenship” and not “Natural Born Citizenship.”
(At this point, I believe Impeachment is the only legal remedy for his removal from office)
bo is too big to fail, & this will not happen. BO’s leaders and followers will not allow it. These are really creepy times & I pray for all that continue to fight for what is true & right, including Maj. Cook.
So, is the President of the United States above the law?
Your image did not come through
Now the image came through
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.