Major Stefan Frederick Cook v [et. al] (RE: Obama eligibility - Dr. Taitz)

Originally posted by mmiichael

OK. I'm only able to speculate with incomplete information and no access to prime sources. But a leg up with info from someone who has tracked this story professionally.

There is some issue with Obama's actual birth place, his citizenship, his technical legitimacy as President. There was a story of a private investigator who tracked down the Obama-Dunham divorce papers and allegedly it gave BO's place of birth as Kenya. Either a hoax or the story was squashed.

The avoidance of supplying the full paperwork is probably a flashing red light. That said, it was decided that he should be the Pres based on his overwhelming popularity and the wish not to compromise US credibility when the economic future and negative perception were becoming a worldwide concern in the final quarter of 2008.

So he's sworn in and in the Oval Office now. If not legitimately, only a dozen people know that and they would have more to lose than gain by going public with the knowledge.

The Supreme Court will not entertain any claims trying to remove him.
Just as they took a pass on the recount demand for Florida in 2000.

But it's 2009 and there are things happening in the background that we only can surmise.

Who benefits from Obama losing his job? Is it conceivable this was a setup?
Was he parachuted in as part of a program to destabilize the US.

Is everything above unfounded rumours and paranoid suspicion?

Someone who has a pretty good idea says: Yes to some, but not all.


Mike

I believe I mentioned to you before Michael that the Powers that Be would have only broken with tradition in selecting Obama to be President if there were an exquisitely diabolical avenue to be exploited in it.

Rome loves to practice divide and conquer warfare and for a New World Order of Corporate Oligarchs to successfully introduce a one world Government, America does have to be divided and conquered first, and it would have been the only conceivable talent someone with absolutely no credible experience in any traditional venue or enterprise would possess.

The ability to be divisive with absolute polarizing affect, the fall out will be brutal with America divided between two camps based largely on racial and political party lines. A widely popular personality seemingly victimized in a culture long indoctrinated into victimization based belief system.

Nothing will appear credible to some people and this could shed some light on amongst the other fundamentally flawed and potentially debilitating legislation pushed hastily through Congress why a Hate Crimes Bill is one of them.

Cast enough doubt in the minds of Obama’s supporters that the evidence though apparently credible has been manufactured by foreign or domestic powers unfairly aligned against him and it is all just a covert attack on the stability of the nation and then you can invoke the National Security Act and make even the evidentiary finding classified for intelligence reasons.

With so many citizens already suspicious from a number of stories in the paper from both opposing camps rhetoric will heat up rapidly and that rhetoric will likely be deemed a hate crime.

The long and short of it Michael is so much fraud and theft and illegal activity has taken place in successive administrations, congresses and Wall Street the only way the real perpetrators can ultimately get away with it is through bringing the whole system down, collapsing America from within, and then using their extreme wealth, privilege and influence to reconstitute a new system one more step removed from the events that would have many in prison for life and some even possibly executed.

Ultimately they have to collapse the system before the full effects of the bailout run their course and they become recognized for what such actions always are, the last act of any government is to loot the treasury and that is just what has already been done through the bailouts and the massive open ended non-Constitutionally declared wars.

This was a master stroke of planning on the Power that Be’s parts.

He was selected to be the last President of the United States and to tear it apart from within.

The beauty of the plan is all they had to do was get him in office. It’s a dummy proof plan from there. Then it’s just a matter of selecting the most opportune time and finding the right person to leak the information to and the right venue and approach to really run it up the flagpole.

Divide and conquer. It’s the Roman way.

These people are far smarter than you think Michael. There is a rarified environment where your friends are never invited and most conversations take place behind walls with faraday cages built into the buildings they are carried out in.

Assuming that Ob knows about his own past, along with TPTB, there exists the possibility that he was put into power on condition that if he step out of line with said PTB, they have a way to get him out, ordo ab chao style such that the resulting chaos creates useful new opportunities?

Jay McKinnon admits making Obama certificate of birth forgeries that were posted by Daily KOs.

Story Here

Jay McKinnon, a self-described Department of Homeland Security-trained document specialist, has implicated himself in the production of fraudulent Hawaii birth certificate images similar to the one endorsed as genuine by the Barack Obama campaign, and appearing on the same blog entry where the supposedly authentic document appears.

The evidence of forgery and manipulation of images of official documents, triggered by Israel Insider's revelation of the collection of Hawaii birth certificate images on the Photobucket site and the detective work of independent investigative journalists and imaging professionals in the three weeks since the publication of the images, implicate the Daily Kos, an extreme left blog site, and the Obama campaign, in misleading the public with official-looking but manipulated document images of doubtful provenance.

McKinnon, who says he is 25-30 years old, operates a website called OpenDNA.com and uses the OpenDNA screen name on various web sites and blogs, including his comments and diary on The Daily Kos. In recent years he has divided his time between Long Beach, California and Vancouver, British Columbia. He is a Democratic political activist, frequent contributor to the left wing Daily Kos blog, and a fervent Barack Obama supporter.

Next time someone makes a forgery he/she should try to remember that 'African' is not a race, it's a continent. That was a pretty lame forgery ....


atlas shrugs

more atlas shrugs

There have been several lawsuits regarding President Obama's birth certificate. To date, all of them have been ruled by the courts that the person or group bringing the lawsuits "Don't have standing" to bring such a case. It wasn't that the cases were heard and dismissed.

Now, who or what group might have legal standing to challenge the legality of President Obama's birth certificate, place of birth and Constitutionality of his holding office? yup. Congress, or so it was ruled.

That seems to me somewhat akin to a court ruling that the only person who can bring a case against me is................ my mother.

One of these cases will be heard, somewhere. It's a Constitutional issue, and I believe vital for the progress of the United States to settle the issue. Merely labelling it as a sour-grapes rightwing movement or "fringe" really doesn't address the issue nor the questions. It needs to be heard and settled, and then the country can go on; right now, this keeps the nation polarized, and I think that's extremely detrimental.

reply to post by argentus

would it help if we contacted the judge that is reviewing the case?

Federal District Judge Clay D. Land
Middle District of Georgia
Columbus Division
PO Box 124
Columbus GA 31902

Originally posted by argentus
It's a Constitutional issue

If it’s a constitutional issue then it should be challenged by constitutional evidence, which as the other previous lawsuits have shown, could not be proven. Until there is a lawsuit that proves that Obama is constitutionally ineligible these lawsuits won’t get anywhere.

Merely labelling it as a sour-grapes rightwing movement or "fringe" really doesn't address the issue

Regardless of whether the rightwing fringe are sour grapes over the elections or just hateful or concerned in the fairest sense it is the constitutional evidence that is relevant under the court of law. Thus far none has been provided for these lawsuits to get some ground. You hold the constitution in your hands, yet you don’t cite anything relevant to prove your accusations.

One lawsuit said during the 60's foreign children were able to attain a Hawaiian birth certificate; truth is the law regarding that only came in place following 1982, before that you had to have been born in the US to have attained a birth certificate.

Another past lawsuit argued Obama attained Indonesia citizenship, due to Indonesian laws you had to give up your US citizenship thus making Obama ineligible, however the laws at the time of Indonesia disprove this fact as Obama was too old to automatically gain Indonesian citizenship as he resided there less than 6 years, over the age of 5. In addition his natural born citizenship does not recognize the laws of other nations so it was irrelevant. Regarding his attendance in public school his step father obviously lied because the laws did not allow under any circumstance Obama to gain Indonesian citizenship.

Yet another lawsuit came out arguing his Kenyan/British dual citizenship where the constitution forbids.... however Obama lost his Kenyan citizenship at the age of 21 as he did not give up his natural born American citizenship. The laws of Kenya at the time were also not recognizing by the US in anyway thus the laws there did not affect Obama. The constitution also states dual citizenship at the time of running for the presidency.

And then there was one lawsuit that argued that his mother was too young to pass her citizenship on to Obama when he was born.... yet Obama was born on US soil in any case so he is by all means natural born, in addition the marriage of his mother and father was not valid as his father was already married in Kenya, so any complications there don’t work out. This notion that somehow Miss Dunham went to Kenya at such a young age, 8-9 months pregnant, had Obama there, then rushed back makes no sense, especially considering his announcement in the Hawaiian papers at the time, that required you to have a birth certificate.

The only arguments that are left apart from the debunked ones are speculative at best. His trip to Pakistan to which Pakistan actually did not ban US tourists as many claimed. His supposed grandmother’s audio tape which actually turned out to be his estranged step-grandmother who said Barrack Obama senior was born in Kenya. The of course, there is the allegations of his deception, his multiple identities, which really go around the realm of story telling. Obama had another name before, yet him as a child can hardly be blamed for the actions of his folks.

And then of course lastly it’s the "why doesn’t he just show his long birth certificate" which is a moot of course because there will always be something he will need to show to somebody. Also given the fact not every president in the past can be accounted for presenting their long form.

This lawsuit now, where are now claims suspicions regarding social security numbers, is something the plaintiff should then show us. By all means if somebody wants to prove something they have that right, yet like the lawsuits before, this is another hype attempt, attention grabber and nothing more.

argentous you say this needs to be settled, what makes you think in your mind that the rightwing fringe will settle with Obama as president, ever? There will always be issues, always be some accusation, and when one is debunked, there is something else. I hardly think the president should waste his time until somebody actually comes up with legit evidence.

I hope you took the time to read what I posted here, as well as the others, and I will try my very best to read with an open mind the concerns of others here, but thus this just highlights the reasoning behind my attitude of the whole situation, and the attitude of the rest of the world.

Implicating a government cover-up only merely works as an excuse for the lack of evidence behind the accusations.


[edit on 11-7-2009 by Southern Guardian]

reply to post by Southern Guardian


It would be enough for me to find out WHY he needed 39 fake social security numbers.
Did he collect college grants and student loans with them and never paid back? Did he use fake numbers because he couldn't get a real one?
And why could he NOT get a real one? only reason I can think of is that he is not a citizen. I mean even legal immigrants can obtain legal SS numbers. Is Obama an illegal alien? Now that is the question...

reply to post by Southern Guardian


Sorry, but you are misinformed on almost every count. No hospital has verified anything regarding Obama's birth and the Dept of Vital Statistics (Or whatever) would only confirm that he has a BC on file with them - they would not state where he was born or verify any information that it may contain.

The claim that the published Cert of Live Birth may be fraudulent is legitimate. True, the law may have come into existence in 1982 (So what? I will verify that), so he could have secured his Cert of LIve Birth during any number of years after that point. That brings up an interesting point... His father's Nationality is listed as African on the COLB. When barky was born all COLBs listed black nationality as "Negro", not "African". The term African was not adopted for use on COLBs or BC until the late 1980s. This is the speculation of it being fraudulent. So perhaps it is legit, only secured at a much later date - which of course does nothing to prove his citizenship or where he was born.

Now, please let us employ some logic and reason. He has sealed his Occidental College records - why!?!? Many believe, and some who knew him at that time, have stated that he attended Occidental as a foreign exchange student on a student Visa. Further, it has been implied that he attended on scholarship reserved for foreign students. So, he either committed fraud then, or is doing so now. Either way, this would explain his need to protect those records.

Also, notwithstanding, are the army of attorneys that he has retained and the literally millions he has paid to ensure that any and all investigations or trials attempting to illuminate his very murky past are stopped at the door. Why!?!? He is very obviously hiding something. One does not go to such lengths unless there is deep dark secret that they never want revealed.

This case is very interesting and has obvious merit - although all of the others did as well - despite the Court's rulings. A military officer, under the command of the Commander In Chief, who may be ordered at such times to risk life and limb, at the leisure of said CIC, or execute orders that may or may not be Constitutional, the very document that this military officer has sworn to uphold and protect, has every right to ensure that the chain of command is in accordance with all laws, regulations and in keeping with the Constitution. If the courts dare tell this man that he has "No standing" you can fully expect to see barky's authority over the military erode significantly. I would expect to see a litanny of military officers begin refusing orders on the grounds that they are illegal.

Folks, this may be the one that finally untangles this web of deceit that barky and his handlers have woven!

Originally posted by JulieMills
It would be enough for me to find out WHY he needed 39 fake social security numbers.

Lets take into mind this hasnt been proven yet, its just been listed under the argument of the Plaintiff. If your going over this who accusation for the fact you have real concerns other than one of partisan/ideological, you wouldnt be jumping the gun. I suggest you wait until this lawsuit actually presents the evidence.

reply to post by Southern Guardian


OH, and by the way... your most recent post is rife with speculation. You make assertions that you feel are true, like "he was born on American soil anyway" and are in no way based in fact. THAT is precisely what we are trying to get to here.

Again, I ask... Why not simply present the Birth Certificate? I have had to show mine to secure a Driver's Licenense, a Marriage License, register for Selective Service, and every time I take a new job when completing my I-9. This man is holding the highest office in the country, why will he not show his Birth Certificate? Why has he retained the counsel of over a dozen attorneys and spent millions of dollars battling its release??? Why has he also had these same attorneys work to protect is college records and his records from his service in Illinois? You don't work this hard to hide things unless you have something to hide - simple logic dictates that much!

Originally posted by kozmo
Sorry, but you are misinformed on almost every count.

If so go under each of my points in my previous post (before my reply to ms Mills) and explain to me how I was misinformed.

No hospital has verified anything regarding Obama's birth and the Dept of Vital Statistics (Or whatever) would only confirm that he has a BC on file with them

His birth certificate was confirmed as an authentic Hawaiian one by the Hawaiian state health department:

To verify we did indeed have the correct document, we contacted the Hawaii Department of Health, which maintains such records.
"It's a valid Hawaii state birth certificate," spokesman Janice Okubo said June 13, 2008, after we e-mailed her our copy.

www.politifact.com...
These guys are more than qualified in the matter to verify Obamas short form birth certificate, in addition politifact among the other fact checkers and WND themselves to name afew have all verified the short form birth certificate.
There are calls regarding which doctor, nurse and so forth by the rightwing fringe, and I hardly feel these individuals need to be harassed. (Most of them have probably passed on by now).
Another link that may prove useful:
blogs.starbulletin.com...

The claim that the published Cert of Live Birth may be fraudulent is legitimate.

Of course you believe so, you have a personal motive behind the accusations, personally driven so likewise you throw back everybody else and trust the masked blogger who told you he was a millionaire expert of birth certificates. Its your feelings over the matter, doesn’t make “fact”. The certification of live birth has been validated by officials, individuals who have actual authority over the matter, not bloggers with “citizens action group” credentials.

True, the law may have come into existence in 1982

Well yes you may see for yourself here:
24ahead.com...

so he could have secured his Cert of LIve Birth during any number of years after that point.

So Obama as a child, or his parents, secured his birth certificate despite him already been a citizen in anticipation for his 2008 presidential run decades down the track. Yes that seems to make sense for you.

That brings up an interesting point... His father's Nationality is listed as African on the COLB. When barky was born all COLBs listed black nationality as "Negro", not "African".

Im sorry are you a birth certificate expert? Your taking tablets now the back up your argument, atleast now though Im seeing something from you. That doesn’t mean his birth certificate is fraudulent, there are a bucket load of ways in which birth certificates can come in, we are a diverse country, 50 states, local and federal governments. I don’t see that argument of your as valid enough to say his birth certificate was fraudulent and it certainly will not get your lawsuit taking seriously under the court of law.

Now, please let us employ some logic and reason. He has sealed his Occidental College records

And? Despite your suspicions the mans not obligated to release it. Of course your free to speculate what you want but at the end of the day God himself will know your arguments are merely suspicions, speculation. By all means you can dream up anything but him merely not showing you every record of his life doesn’t automatically validate your accusations.

If you want to actually uphold the constitution then start proving to us constitutionally, and you can start by countering my previous post one by one.

SG


[edit on 11-7-2009 by Southern Guardian]

Is this any surprise to those who frequent ATS. Of course not for the truth cannot be hidden forever. (He) will not allow it but for a time they will have their way, but only for a time. This evil is now exposing itself for it knows its time is short, ie dated. It will destroy as much as it is allowed to destroy for still (it) this evil must follow the outline of him who has always been. Fools will come and go but truth and love will in the end prevail. How do I know these things to be "true".....they have eyes that can not see nor ears that do not hear". I laugh at the insanity of the blind. Your days are numbered as is the days of this "lier in Chief".

Originally posted by kozmo
OH, and by the way... your most recent post is rife with speculation. You make assertions that you feel are true, like "he was born on American soil anyway"

You havent proven otherwise now have you?

and are in no way based in fact.

How can your accusation be fact if you have not proven anything? If you and fringe buddies think you have case, come up with the evidence please.

Again, I ask... Why not simply present the Birth Certificate?

His shown it. Any more requests and the next thin you know yall be asking him proof that his first car was american made. Jeeze.

reply to post by Southern Guardian


Look, if you can't distinguish between a Birth Certificate and a Certificate of Live Birth then I can't afford to waste my time on this discussion.

I've already acknowledged that it could very well be a legitimate Certificate of Live Birth, received any time after 1982 - hence the use of the term "African" under his father's race as opposed to "Negro" which is what it would have read had it been produced in the 1960s or 1970s.

Ona different note, I was just thinking now that there has been TWO NEW FRIVALOUS ETHICS COMPLAINTS filed against Gov. Palin AFTER she made her announcement (underscoring her reason to step down).
It made me wonder, can an ethics complaint be filed against President Obama because of these fake addresses and SS numbers? Or how about an ethics complaint for getting elected president and not being a legal US citizen?

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
reply to post by expat2368

Sandra Ramsey can get in the back of the line. The short form birth certificate has been authenticated by The Hawaiian health department, politifact, and the Hawaiin state government.

By God man, what does it take? The Hawaiian officials said nothing of the sort. Nothing more than "I certify there is a birth certificate on file". Period. How you or anyone else can read into this some form of "validation" or "certification" is beyond my ability to comprehend.

Secondly, the so-called "birth certificate" is not a birth certificate. Even if the MS-Paint cut-and-paste job on "fightthesmears" is real (and it's been removed even from Google caches and the wayback machine), it proves nothing.

My birth certificate is on paper, with signatures, typewritten facts pertaining to the hospital, both my parents, their occupations, signatures of doctors and mother etc. This computer generated thing proffered by Obama is merely -- even if it's real and that defies objective belief -- a print out of a computer record that itself could be easily fabricated.

It simply amazes me, neither democrat nor republican, the extent of willful delusion on the part of partisans but especially Obama people. They will endure all manner of cognitive distortion to prevent the merest scintilla of doubt about their totem.

SHAME! SHAME! SHAME! on you for shutting down your critical thought process merely to fulfill a wish of a post-racial world.

Obama could stop this within hours by taking his real, honest-to-goodness birth certificate from his mother's box of papers and submitting it for forensic review.

The fact he won't do this proves to me one of two things:

(1) Obama suffers a delusion of grandeur that he is uniquely beyond suspicion and under no obligation to prove any claim he makes, since to do so would lower his pretend-regal dignity (divine right of kings and all that) or

(2) He's hiding something big.

Either of these ought to disqualify him from controlling the US Armed Forces and the US Treasury.

Hell -- you could not get a job with a public corporation today without enduring an intrusive background check and verification of all your pertinent records.

WHAT MAKES OBAMA SO SPECIAL HE GETS A PASS?????

Nothing in my book -- except that he's black and a lot of people want to use him to prove their anti-racist bonafides.

And that is a perversion of justice, not to mention the Constitution.

[edit on 11-7-2009 by joeofthemountain]

Although it might be expecting to much,shouldn't the American people be allowed to know all they can about the man that holds the highest office in the land? Holding the office of President is a heavy burden. The citizens place "trust" in the person holding that office. That "trust",should be tempered with all the facts,about the President. It is apparent that "transparancy" is a "fallicy". There seems to be far more questions than there are answers. The lack of true openess,lends itself to speculation,and rightly so.

A person in the political spotlight must expect people to question their motives. They should expect to be held to a higher standard,and answer the hard questions. There are few jobs in this country that you don't have to submit to a background check. Even mall cops have background checks.

Why is it so hard for our standing President to allow an open background check? How hard would it be to show his origional U.S.passport? Show the date it was issued. Prove to the country that he IS a natural citizen and has never held a foreign passport,or held dual citizenship.

The questions are simple,the answers would be simple. I just don't understand the subversion from the truth!!!

All the evidence is so far is an affidavit that some shmo has real evidence. There as of yet is nothing and I mean NOTHING to get excited about people. Please, put the pitchforks and torches down for a second.

Of course you realize that these are the same few men that have been doing this and FAILING for a while now right?

[edit on 7/11/2009 by whatukno]

Years ago, as a lowly enlisted E-3 there were a number of orders I was given that were flat out ridiculous, so I flat out disobeyed them. Consequently I ended up attending numerous captain’s masts, many times coming face-to-face with the UCMJ.

It was always principle with me, if the orders were irrational or unethical I’d disobey them. It never had anything to do with being a coward; on the contrary I always embraced dangerous duty. But when it came to political BS, that’s where I’d draw the line.

Americans need to make their stand, our system is absolutely corrupt. It’s time to start disobeying many of the government’s orders. You’d be surprised at how fragile a “powerful” system is, when its people begin to flat out tell them “NO, I WILL NOT OBEY YOU!”

Barry’s no “commander-in-chief.” He’s an inept puppet who’s now at the helm and is being ordered to steer a course that’s intended to destroy America. In my opinion, he’s a weak man who does not have the courage or morals to disobey dishonorable orders.

BTW, I ended up with an honorable discharge, primarily because the military realized I was more than willing to put my life on the line at anytime, when rational and ethical circumstances warranted it.

Hope this hasn’t sounded to arrogant, I’m just trying to help wake America up.

Peace on Earth


[edit on 11-7-2009 by seasoul]

reply to post by Southern Guardian


The thing is is that proof is a condition established in a court of law. If it is now allowed to be presented as evidence in court, and suits filed are ruled as the presenter as not having standing, then how can it be construed that there is no proof or evidence?

It seems somewhat circular to me. If the cases brought have insufficient evidence to prove the case against President Obama, then what is the harm in hearing them?