SHIP. DOCK. SAILORS.
Posted on 08/28/2009 8:21:55 PM PDT by rxsid
New Law suit filed in the Western District of Texas. Flight Surgeon Cpt Connie Rhodes, MD refuses to be deployed to Iraq until Obama’s legitimacy for the position of the Commander in Chief is verified Orly Taitz, Esq
Attorney & Counselor at Law
26302 La Paz ste 211
[snip]
(Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice
U.S.D.C. Western District of Texas
Submitted August 28, 2009)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Western district of Texas
CPT Connie Rhodes MD,
Plaintiff,
v.
Dr ROBERT GATES, UNITED
STATES SECRETARY OF DEFENSE,
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, de facto
PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES,
Defendants.
APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
Plaintiff Captain Dr. Connie Rhodes has received what appear to be facially valid orders mobilizing her to active duty with the United States Army in Iraq on September 5th, 2009 (Exhibit A). Captain Rhodes is both a US army officer and a medical doctor, a flight surgeon. On May 15th of this year 501 brigade out of Fort Campbell, KY, currently stationed in Iraq, has requested a support of medical personal in Iraq. Two days ago, August the 23rd, an order was given through the chain of command via e-mail for Captain Rhodes to arrive in San Antonio TX, Fort Sam Houston for Tactical Combat Medical Care Course (TCMC) to be held from August 30th till September 4t and next day, on September the 5th to arrive in Fort Benning in Columbus GA for immediate deployment to Iraq for a period of one year and twelve days from September 5th, 2009 until September 17th 2010. Captain Dr. Connie Rhodes wants to serve her country and fulfill her tour of duty, however as a US army officer and a medical doctor she has severe reservations regarding legitimacy of Barack Obama as the Commander in Chief and repercussions of her service under his orders, particularly in light of mounting evidence of him having allegiance to other Nations and citizenship of Kenya, Indonesia and Great Britain.
...
Continued: "http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/?p=4038"
Even though many have stated the "no other allengiences" as no dual citizenship. However if the "Law of Nations" definition of natural born is what was intended, then just the fact that his father was not a citizen, is enough to disqualify him.
Normally I would say that is somewhat of an injustice, since his father played no part in raising him. However his stepfather did, and he too was an alien, and raised Barry Soetero, for 4 very influential years, in not a only a foreign country, but also in a foreign religion, many of whose adherents want nothing more than to kill Americans, regardless of race or national origin.
His story, as much of it as we know, is just the sort of thing that the founders were trying to avoid with the Natural Born citizen requirement.
Dr. McDonald was a congressman, not a senator.
My wife has the professional version, both at home, and on her office computers(desktop and laptop). I only have it on my work computer. She wants to spend money on her computer, she does. OTOH, she thinks I spend too much time on FR, and she's probably right, as usual.
Your right, British law doesn't determine US citizenship.
However, you omit the opposite question.
Does US law determine British citizenship? The answer is equally no. Therefore, his admitted British citizenship AT birth is most relavent.
No but non US citizenship by a parent at the time of a person's birth may determine their status as "natural born" or "native born", assuming they are born in the US.
I think he's concerned with being sure of the identity of the sender of the email. Plus I guess the possibility that the email might not get read. However one can set "read receipt requested" as well. But, the problem with that, from the senders perspective, is that the recipient can prevent the receipt from being sent.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2327809/posts
I would agree with him, it's all about Barry's born with dual citizenship.
AFAIK, there has only been one other instance were it could have come up, plus a few VPs, including Al Gore, who were not born in states, but were born in the United States. In DC for Gore, in a couple of territories before they became states for the others.
That other case also involved a VP, but one who succeeded to the Presidency upon the death of the President, that being Chester Arthur (President from September 19, 1881 until March 4, 1885), who succeeded James Garfield, who was assassinated by a nominal supporter of Arthur. Although no one knew it at the time, Chester's father was not naturalized until Chester was about 14. That fact was not even discovered during Arthur's lifetime, but rather quite recently. At the time it was alleged that Chester himself was not born in the US, with allegations of Canada and Ireland being tossed about. Sort of like allegations of Canada and Kenya being tossed about now. However it's well established that Chester was born in Vermont, although not far from Canada.
But Obama hasn't hidden the fact that his father was not a citizen at the time of his (junior's) birth. Chester Arthur did, and burned most of his papers after he was out of office. But he missed his father's naturalization certificate, or a copy thereof, which ended up on microfilm at the Library of Congress.
But since no one knew of this, or had enough evidence showing Arthur himself was not born in the US (since he had been there was no such evidence to be found), the matter was never even submitted to a court.
Letters of Marque and Reprisal have been done away with, by treaty. Congress still theoretically has the Constitutional power to issue them.
Of course I don't see this as a Political issue, a political one to be sure, but not a partisan political one. If it were, there would be dozens or hundreds of Republican politicians demanding to see the birth certificate. Rush, Shawn and Mark would be in full throat over the issue. At most Rush as made a few jokes about it. (How is Obama like God? God doesn't have a birth certificate either. :) )
I see, same increment or "wave", but not on the same aircraft due to his destination being so far west, that they probably went east instead. Although there are some mighty long hops going that way. Still, it can be done, and could be done in '59. The great circle route from Nairobi to Honolulu does go east, but it goes over the former Soviet Union. However going through Hong Kong only increases the distance by a couple of hundred miles, and it makes a good refueling stop. (Nairobi-Honolulu is 10736 mi, Nairobi to Hong Kong (conveniently British at the time) is 5427 mi and Hong Kong to Honolulu is 5568 mi. Range of the Britannia aircraft, 9268 km or about 5759 mi, at least according to one source, another says 4,270 mi. Even the longer range is kind of tight for the over water leg, but one could make stops in Bombai India and Tokyo Japan to make the legs shorter, the longest would be Tokyo to Honolulu, although the overall trip even longer, but they'd probably attract more passengers. (Distances calculated by the Great Circle Mapper. A very cool tool. It's more accurate than a simple spherical earth model. (It uses the same WGS-84 model that GPS uses.)
That's Orly's "Headline" but that is not what the filing says, and in any event she can say anything she wants, until she reports for active duty, as long as she does report, she's OK. She's got a big decision to make, hopefully she has either already made it, or positioned herself in or near San Antonio, to keep her options open until the last minute, which would be about now, or when she wakes up in the morning in a hotel in San Antonio, or nearby somewhere.
Yep, even those Navy pukes and the Jarheads.
I haven’t heard. He was on active duty in Iraq, so I doubt “refusing” to go is much of an option to him. His commander probably gave him a choice of staying on the line and fighting for his country or getting courtmarialed and sitting in jail.
If that is indeed the state of the law, then as someone once said, "the law is an ass" and it should be changed, sooner rather than later.
Isn't the standard in a civil case, "preponderance of the evidence" rather than "beyond a reasonable shadow of doubt"?
I would think that would mean that the standard for TRO's and just getting into court to allow discovery, would be a bit lower as well. There is of course a competing privacy interest, but public figures, generally have a higher hurdle in that regard.
Isn't it also true that even though the TRO was denied, the basic case goes forward?
Rats. I thought I'd corrected that. I know I meant to, since I looked it up before copying the quote, but then I guess I forgot to edit it. Good catch.
My prediction is that a courtmartial will convene and it will have some of the sharpest lawyers on the guvmint side and the good doctor will NOT be allowed discovery, by virtue of some technicality these hotshot lawyers come up with. That’s the pure zer0bama play, if they can get away with it. The court will go along with it because they are afraid for their own careers. Like Capone before him, no one wants to cross the dark thuggish soul from Chicago.
While it's almost the same thing, I think it's all about Barry's baby-daddy being a non citizen. The difference being it does not matter if Britain or Kenya considered BHO Jr a subject/citizen or not, just that his father was not a US citizen.
Only sailors for sure. Doesn't look like a dock to me, no ships in sight. Could just as well be the tarmac at the airport. Also I don't ID BHO Sr in that picture. Certainly none of the apparently African dudes is wearing his signature eye-glasses. Might be the 1960 or later arrivals.
Should have added that I'd have been one of those Navy pukes, but their ROTC program would not allow married cadets, and I was at the time I entered the two year AF-ROTC program. Always wanted to be an engineering officer on a nuclear sub. Failing that, on a surface ship. I like airplanes, but my eyes were not up to even navigator standards at the time, now they are worse.
Obama Sr is the black man standing next to Stanley Armour Dunham. The image is undated.
Obama Sr arrived in Hawaii in 1959.
There are sailors in the group.
You cannot see a ship. I cannot see an aircraft.
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.