Are you military or former military? Sign up as a plaintiff!

[bojo68]

Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Are you military or former military? Sign up as a plaintiff!
ATTENTION ALL MILITARY PERSONNEL (active or reserve, former or retired, any age). THIS IS A REQUEST TO SAVE YOUR CONSTITUTION, by participating as a Plaintiff in an urgent action lawsuit.



Mail or Email to Orly Taitz dr_taitz@yahoo.com



CONSENT FORM



DATE:____________

Attn. Orly Taitz, Esq.
26302 La Paz, Ste. 211
Mission Viejo, CA 92691

I agree to be a plaintiff in the legal action to be filed by Orly Taitz, Esq. in a PETITION FOR A DECLARATORY JUDGEMENT THAT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IS NOT QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT of the U.S., nor TO BE COMMANDER IN CHIEF of the U.S. ARMED FORCES, in that I am or was a sworn member of the U.S. military (subject to recall), and therefore when serving as an active member of the military, I would be unable to follow any orders given by a Constitutionally unqualified Commander In Chief, since by doing so I would be subject to charges of aiding and abetting fraud and committing acts of treason.





TYPED NAME or Signature: ______________________

FULL NAME:

ADDRESS:

TEL. #: FAX. #:

EMAIL:

POSITION IN THE MILITARY/RANK/DATES SERVED/STATUS:

OCCUPATION:

ACHIEVEMENTS:



Attorney Taitz would like to file in California soon in December, so that this lawsuit can eventually reach the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) before the joint session of Congress (on 8 January, 2009) can officially count and certify the Electoral College votes of December 15th 2008.



As Attorney Orly Taitz is performing this service for her country Pro Bono, any amount that you can contribute will be most helpful. (Orly has already done two RT ‘redeye’s’ to Washington DC this week alone: National Press Club on December 8th (WTP Obama Citizenship Challenge – National Press Club, DC Dec 8 2008, and to file another ‘BHO is Unqualified’ case before the SCOTUS).



All contributions should be made payable to Orly Taitz, and mailed to:

Orly Taitz, Esq.
26302 La Paz, Ste. 211
Mission Viejo, CA 92691

Check out her blogsite for further actions: www.drorly.blogspot.com

Neil B. Turner, Capt. US Army Aviation (1957-1964)

(Plaintiff in the case now before the US Supreme Court: Lightfoot v. Bowen, docket number 08A524)

Carlsbad, CA

760-431-8899

Email: NBTurner@sbcglobal.net

[RSLudlum]

This needs to be distributed on military forums!

This is just a short part of her speaking at the WTP Obama Citizenship Challenge Press Conference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKTquyTO2yg#t=38s

[libertarian4321]

Are you military or former military?

Yes.


Sign up as a plaintiff!

No.


I agree to be a plaintiff in the legal action to be filed by Orly Taitz, Esq. in a PETITION FOR A DECLARATORY JUDGEMENT THAT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IS NOT QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT of the U.S., nor TO BE COMMANDER IN CHIEF of the U.S. ARMED FORCES,

Okay, I'll bite, why is he allegedly not qualified to be CINC?



Attorney Taitz would like to file in California soon in December, so that this lawsuit can eventually reach the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) before the joint session of Congress (on 8 January, 2009) can officially count and certify the Electoral College votes of December 15th 2008.

Old Orly better get on the stick. He's about 11 days past the deadline...


All contributions should be made payable to Orly Taitz, and mailed to:

Why contribute when the deadline has passed?

[bojo68]

Yes.



No.



Okay, I'll bite, why is he allegedly not qualified to be CINC?




Old Orly better get on the stick. He's about 11 days past the deadline...



Why contribute when the deadline has passed?

The deadline is the 8th of Jan, but we all know your trying to confuse the issue for Obama/Sutoro/Soetoro's benefit. You can do a better job of sabotaging than this, I've seen better out of you.

[sidster]

Okay, I'll bite, why is he allegedly not qualified to be CINC?
OK, I'll bite: Why is he allegedly qualified to be POTUS/CINC?




Old Orly better get on the stick. He's about 11 days past the deadline...

She, not he.

[libertarian4321]

The deadline is the 8th of Jan, but we all know your trying to confuse the issue for Obama/Sutoro/Soetoro's benefit. You can do a better job of sabotaging than this, I've seen better out of you.

From your original post:



Attorney Taitz would like to file in California soon in December, so that this lawsuit can eventually reach the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) before the joint session of Congress (on 8 January, 2009) can officially count and certify the Electoral College votes of December 15th 2008.

It certainly looks like one date has been missed already.

[libertarian4321]

OK, I'll bite: Why is he allegedly qualified to be POTUS/CINC?



He meets the Constitutional requirements to be POTUS, and was elected POTUS, and the POTUS is the CINC.

How hard is that to understand?

[sidster]

He meets the Constitutional requirements to be POTUS, and was elected POTUS, and the POTUS is the CINC.

How hard is that to understand?

PROVE to us that he in fact "meets the Constitutional requirements"
to be POTUS.

When I went to apply for my job at my current employer, after the interview
process, and after I had been offered the position and agreed on the
terms of employment, I had to produce DOCUMENTS that I was in fact
eligible to be employed in the United States of America.

How difficult is it for YOU to understand this VERY BASIC concept?!

[libertarian4321]

PROVE to us that he in fact "meets the Constitutional requirements"
to be POTUS.



He was born in the USA (Hawaii), he's over 35 years of age, has lived in the USA for more than 14 years, and has no felony convictions.

Those are the requirements to be POTUS and CINC.

He has shown more "proof" than Bush Jr. or Clinton or Bush Sr or any other President.

I know it scares some of you that a black guy with a funny name won the election- but this stuff just makes us look petty and vindictive at best, and like xenophobic racists at worst.

Ron Paul doesn't support any of this stuff. Supporting this nonsense doesn't help us, nor does it "defend the Constitution."

We should go after him on the issues - just like we did with Bush (or any other bad President).

[Catatonic]

He was born in the USA (Hawaii).

Prove it

[libertarian4321]

Prove it

Look, I know some of you are going to carry on with this nonsense no matter what.

The fact is, according to the Constitution, neither I, nor Obama, or anyone else is required to "prove it" to you or Berg or Keyes or Donofrio or (insert name of wacko lawsuit here) UNLESS the electors (this would have had to happen on Dec. 15th) or the Senate (in January) requires him to do so.

So unless you can convince the Senate to question his qualifications when counting the votes, this is a waste of time and its going nowhere fast...

[bojo68]

It is the sworn obligation of every congresscritter to uphold the constitution.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEnaAZrYqQI&eurl

[sidster]

He was born in the USA (Hawaii) ...

No you are wrong. The requirement isn't that he be born in
the USA, but rather, he MUST be a Natural Born Citizen. That
means, there should be no doubt as to what country he is
loyal to. According to his own web-site (fight the smears) he
was a subject of British government at the time of his birth.
This is what it says word for word:



As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.'s children.

Therefore, Barack Obama Jr. could not have been a Natural
Born Citizen of the United States of America. End of sentence.
Period!


I know it scares some of you that a black guy with a funny name won the election- but this stuff just makes us look petty and vindictive at best, and like xenophobic racists at worst.

You are making far too many assumptions. There are bigots out
there that are getting on this bandwagon. But for you to lump
everyone who cares about the Constitution into one clump of
bigots makes you just that, and ignorant to boot.



The fact is, according to the Constitution, neither I, nor Obama, or anyone else is required to "prove it" to you or Berg or Keyes or Donofrio or (insert name of wacko lawsuit here) UNLESS the electors (this would have had to happen on Dec. 15th) or the Senate (in January) requires him to do so.


Sure you he does. Now if the Supreme court doesn't want to
listen, it just makes them part of the problem, not the right.

How can you expect soldiers to confidently take orders of
someone they can't trust to have the best interest of their
nation in mind?

[Catatonic]

Look, I know some of you are going to carry on with this nonsense no matter what.

The fact is, according to the Constitution, neither I, nor Obama, or anyone else is required to "prove it" to you or Berg or Keyes or Donofrio or (insert name of wacko lawsuit here) UNLESS the electors (this would have had to happen on Dec. 15th) or the Senate (in January) requires him to do so.

So unless you can convince the Senate to question his qualifications when counting the votes, this is a waste of time and its going nowhere fast...

Okay, he doesn't have to prove he's a citizen.

But that means I can accuse him of not being a citizen, and you can't prove otherwise.

So why are you even discussing this? Its your word vs mine.

[libertarian4321]

So why are you even discussing this? Its your word vs mine.

Because someone started the thread, and it was specifically addressing military folks like myself.

BTW, I haven't seen any military (or ex-military) RPF members (and I know there are a bunch of us) saying they would sign onto this thing- most RPF members are pretty sensible.

[sidster]

Because someone started the thread, and it was specifically addressing military folks like myself.

BTW, I haven't seen any military (or ex-military) RPF members (and I know there are a bunch of us) saying they would sign onto this thing- most RPF members are pretty sensible.

So let me ask you this question. Hypothetically, if it were to be
proven that he is in fact not eligible to assume office of POTUS,
you still stand by the potion of "let it go"?

I'm just curious.

[libertarian4321]

So let me ask you this question. Hypothetically, if it were to be
proven that he is in fact not eligible to assume office of POTUS,
you still stand by the potion of "let it go"?

I'm just curious.

If pigs had wings, they could fly.

Until they grow wings, there isn't much point in discussing the aerodynamic abilities of pigs.

Until you PROVE a point, not just throw out accusations, there isn't much point in discussing actions to be taken.

Find a Kenyan Newspaper from 1961 with a photo of the proud parents holding baby Obama at "Nairobi General Hospital," or something to that effect, and this discussion has some legs. Until then, its extremist blather.

[sidster]

If pigs had wings, they could fly.

Until they grow wings, there isn't much point in discussing the aerodynamic abilities of pigs.

Until you PROVE a point, not just throw out accusations, there isn't much point in discussing actions to be taken.

Find a Kenyan Newspaper from 1961 with a photo of the proud parents holding baby Obama at "Nairobi General Hospital," or something to that effect, and this discussion has some legs. Until then, its extremist blather.

you completely avoided the question.

[bojo68]

you completely avoided the question.

But he sure proved he's full of blather.

[coastie]

Because someone started the thread, and it was specifically addressing military folks like myself.

BTW, I haven't seen any military (or ex-military) RPF members (and I know there are a bunch of us) saying they would sign onto this thing- most RPF members are pretty sensible.

I wont, because I'm almost positive there'd be consequences for doing so;)

I'd like to complete the 18 months I have left on my contract...............

[torchbearer]

PROVE to us that he in fact "meets the Constitutional requirements"
to be POTUS.

When I went to apply for my job at my current employer, after the interview
process, and after I had been offered the position and agreed on the
terms of employment, I had to produce DOCUMENTS that I was in fact
eligible to be employed in the United States of America.

How difficult is it for YOU to understand this VERY BASIC concept?!

Thread winner.

[libertarian4321]

I wont, because I'm almost positive there'd be consequences for doing so;)

I'd like to complete the 18 months I have left on my contract...............

I didn't even think of that. I just thought the whole basis for the suit was absurd.

Realistically, probably nothing would happen to you- this lawsuit is going just where the others did- absolutely nowhere.

If you are a Reservist, as I am at this time, you'd likely have nothing to worry about. Reservists can essentially fully participate in the political system as long as they aren't in uniform or representing themselves as members of the military (though you'd probably have to read the lawsuit- if it requires you to represent yourself as military and it attacks the President, you might have a problem).

Active Duty, however, are severely limited in what they can do politically and it would be wise for AD folks to avoid this sort of nonsense.