It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Soldier balks at deploying ; say's Obama isn't president

page: 7
41
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:10 PM
link   
In my view this just continues the left/right game.The bases of both parties eats this stuff up,man the simple fact of the matter is this:We here in this nation have not had a real say about who will become president for years now it's fixed we vote,but the end result is the same.




posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:16 PM
link   
I've been going around and around with Whatyouknow in regard to the issue of "legal standing", in this thread..

It's my assertation that the cases filed in regard to President Obama's place of birth were NOT heard, but dismissed due to not having "standing" to file them.

I also believe that the only body that the courts do recognize as having legal standing is Congress, and the SCOTUS. Obviously, both are supportive of the President and are not going to file suit themselves.

Let's examine more precisely what "standing" means. It does NOT mean, as some have inferred, a lack of evidence.


Standing, sometimes referred to as standing to sue, is the name of the federal law doctrine that focuses on whether a prospective plaintiff can show that some personal legal interest has been invaded by the defendant. It is not enough that a person is merely interested as a member of the general public in the resolution of the dispute. The person must have a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy.

The standing doctrine is derived from the U.S. Constitution's Article III provision that federal courts have the power to hear "cases" arising under federal law and "controversies" involving certain types of parties. In the most fundamental application of the philosophy of judicial restraint, the U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted this language to forbid the rendering of advisory opinions.

Once a federal court determines that a real case or controversy exists, it must then ascertain whether the parties to the litigation have standing. The Supreme Court has developed an elaborate body of principles defining the nature and scope of standing. Basically, a plaintiff must have suffered some direct or substantial injury or be likely to suffer such an injury if a particular wrong is not redressed. A defendant must be the party responsible for perpetrating the alleged legal wrong.
standing

The person must have a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy.

Basically, a plaintiff must have suffered some direct or substantial injury or be likely to suffer such an injury if a particular wrong is not redressed.

So, it's a matter of the courts interpreting standing as an inability of those filing suit to demonstrate damages.

Now, how can any suit against a sitting President be brought to court? It apparently can't happen.

For the People by the People............ unless you have the iron to quash it. If the People, the rightful and legal citizens cannot challenge the State, then that is NOT Due Process. That is a Presidential coup. Thus, the POTUS will always be able to keep hidden his long form.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by STFUPPERCUTTER
if he didnt want to go all over the world killign innocent peopel he shoudl not ahve signed up to begin with. wether its obama or bush is irrelevant, the message is the same.



Nobody signs up to kill innocent people.....Are you serious?

They go in with good intentions, and then get molded into a killing machine who acts without question....



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by mike dangerously
In my view this just continues the left/right game.The bases of both parties eats this stuff up,man the simple fact of the matter is this:We here in this nation have not had a real say about who will become president for years now it's fixed we vote,but the end result is the same.

To some people, this may be a left vs right issue, but to me it's not, I don't consider myself left or right. I consider myself a truth seeker. And I have nothing against Obama. If all Obama has to do is provide the long form instead of the short form to make all this go away, I don't understand why he doesn't just do it. Seeing him spend millions on legal fees to NOT do that sort of makes me wonder what the real truth is.



Originally posted by argentus
Basically, a plaintiff must have suffered some direct or substantial injury or be likely to suffer such an injury if a particular wrong is not redressed.

Good point. so what the military people seem to be arguing is they could be tried themselves for following order from a commander in chief who was not qualified to be commander in chief and that is what they are claiming would be the injury they could suffer when this comes out. Since their job is taking orders from the commander in chief to kill other people (sort of), it's not a trivial matter, they can make an argument for standing, but the judge has to decide whether it's a valid argument.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by observe50
 


I reask the question. WHO are YOU Americans fighting? You don't know. Do you. Is it Afghanies? Iraqies? Hmmm. Sounds like a good explanation. Why not pull out ? Or is the Oil you steal worth too much as a "sweet" as it may get. I believe in protecting one's self, but bullying people in their own country has paybacks eventually. I hope you haven't overstayed your welcome.

Your freindly neighbour from CANADA.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by LucidDreamer85
 


I never signed up to kill anyone. I joined to serve my country, learn skills and get an education. However, I knew that if I were ever called upon to fight, then I would do so to the best of my ability and I would be praying that it was the right thing to do. Of course, when I served, Russia was the enemy.

It could be that this officer really has a beef with Obama's legitimacy as POTUS. And, morally, he could object if there is doubt and he could be subjected to war crimes if he were to follow his actions. The oath of enlistment does state that we are to follow the orders of the POTUS and the officers appointed over me. Maybe he feels an obligation to the men his is overseeing?

This whole thing with Obama's birth is just baffling. I don't think and at least I don't recall an administration going to such extreme lengths to hide just about every trace of evidence that would shed some light on Obama's origins. This is the bigger story. Don't you wonder at all why his past is so secret? Why the team of lawyers supressing anything related to his past.

Why are hospital websites scrubbing previous articles or letters supposedly from Obama stating where he was born? Now those same websites won't verify that he was born there. Why not? Was it all made up? If a future POTUS was born in your facility, wouldn't you happy about acknowledging that?

But...Obama is never going to resign and he will never be challenged by anyone in Congress. Face it, the dude is here for another 3-1/2 years.

My personal opinion is that this man and this adminsitration is the biggest smoke and mirrors act to come out of Washington since Woodrow Wilson. Change? Hope? How about secrets and lies and lots of them. Ramming through legistlation without even one congressman or congresswoman reading it? Just shove it through because we need to? What moron does this? Now we are ramming through national health care?



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by RRconservative
 


Sigh, orders were not quite "revoked" under the manner you think they were. Keep hunting.

For a little more understanding, his orders were "revoked", because .........
Because he's a reserve soldier who volunteered for an active duty tour he can "ask for a revocation of orders up until the day he is scheduled to report for active duty," a public affairs officer explained


Inciting mutiny, and encouraging people who don't want to deploy to use this birther *snip bs* as an excuse to stay home (Or more likely, in the brig.) Is perfectly acceptable, patriotic behavior. Protesting a war, or criticizing a Republican on the other hand, is of course high treason. Makes perfect sense.


OH, and the courts are supposed to be starting to deal with this on THURSDAY!

Sigh, tired of hearing that Obama is not a legal citizen. If you believe that, then find the proof and deal with it.

Harm None
Peace



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by BigandRich
reply to post by observe50
 


I reask the question. WHO are YOU Americans fighting? You don't know. Do you. Is it Afghanies? Iraqies? Hmmm. Sounds like a good explanation. Why not pull out ? Or is the Oil you steal worth too much as a "sweet" as it may get. I believe in protecting one's self, but bullying people in their own country has paybacks eventually. I hope you haven't overstayed your welcome.

Your freindly neighbour from CANADA.


Can you give an example of the oil we are stealing? Where is it going, because the last I checked we are paying the same market price for a barrel of oil as the rest of the world?



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 03:01 PM
link   
Sounds like someone getting cold feet is pulling out all the stops to avoid getting deployed. When I served in the Army, I heard all sorts of weird reasons from folks about why they couldn't be deployed here or there. I highly doubt this guy refuses to go solely because thinks he is being ordered by Obama directly. This is just a whole bunch of stupid, and I'd guess non-deployment is simply to avoid ongoing issues with something this... stupid.

As far as the birth certificate goes, I've not had my orginal since... well, ever. Are you suggesting that my official copy produced for my by the state wouldn't allow me to get ANY job where I had to prove citizenship? I find that hard to believe.

I still also find it incredibly hard to believe that the NSA, CIA, FBI, and many other agencies, wouldn't have gone over the entire history of Obama with a fine-tooth comb before he took office. He wasn't applying for McDonalds you know, I think they have a few procedures in place to ensure he is actually eligible to hold the job of POTUS.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by BigandRich
 


As it turns out, most of the oil imported to the United States comes from................ wait for it...................Canada!, followed by Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Venzuela (not for long, I bet), Nigeria, THEN Iraq.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by manmaidslave
Okay this Major is a nut case. He should be court martialed. President Obama took the oath, he is the President. The whole thing about him not being a natural born citizen is getting real old. Time after time, evidence has been givent to prove his is a citizen. Give it up people. i'm really getting tired of this "Obama is not a citizen" subject.



I have not seen any of this so called evidence and if you could point us non believer in the direction of said evidence



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 03:21 PM
link   
Well, the truth hurts, huh, Obama?



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 03:22 PM
link   
So...we just learned that because he spoke up and questioned the grand poobah, the Pentagon compelled his employer to fire him.

Won't be long before the gubment has the say on whether ANY of us have a job.

Ridiculous. If he has a question, answer the question. The Pentagon has used bullying and the loss of a job to make this guy shut up and the problem disappear.

Yup, those are the folks I want in charge. Barf.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 03:48 PM
link   
I'll try to make this very clear - as the law (federal) stands; no candidate is required to PUBLICLY PUBLISH a long form, short form, or any other type of birth certificate. When a candidate files to run for office, he/she submits various documentation and the "authorities having jurisdiction" of the federal elections process approve or disapprove. No candidate is required to put his CV on the internet, New York Times or Townhall magazine. Obama may have been born on Pluto, but he is not LEGALLY required to prove it to YOU! As a famous fictional attorney once said:"The law isn't about fairness or justice, it's about the law". You may not like it, but it is the truth.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Office 4256
I'll try to make this very clear - as the law (federal) stands; no candidate is required to PUBLICLY PUBLISH a long form, short form, or any other type of birth certificate. When a candidate files to run for office, he/she submits various documentation and the "authorities having jurisdiction" of the federal elections process approve or disapprove. No candidate is required to put his CV on the internet, New York Times or Townhall magazine. Obama may have been born on Pluto, but he is not LEGALLY required to prove it to YOU! As a famous fictional attorney once said:"The law isn't about fairness or justice, it's about the law". You may not like it, but it is the truth.


Not exactly true. They have to prove they qualify. The fact the media shoved him down everyone's throat does not mean he is qualified. People who ask for it are not racists just because they expect him to obey the laws. No matter what the media and left say.
Everyone who enlists in any branch of the service has to provide a long form birth certificate, it does not matter if you are white, black, yellow or brown. Since he is the commander in chief he should have to show the same information everyone else does. So hopefully after this more officers and enlisted men will do the same thing. If enough of them question it something has to give. After all they are not asking for anything they have been asked for.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by argentus
 


Is that what you have read or know? Then who other than China and India ns Russia is useing the oil? They produce the sweetest crude in the world and you don't think Obama doesn't have his mitts in there. ? Are there aliens? secret societies? moon mining? Or is this all fabricated too. Our oil in Canada right now is being slowed in production because of BBL prices and takes major bucks to refine. Get a grip on what your Government feeds you. 9/11 , was it an inside job? I'm sure the Saudis and the Iraqies and Kuwatais would love you to leave the middle East. You can't because there's OIL there. If there wasn't I'm sure you Americans could find some purpose for the sand, if someone showed you.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Wasn't it YOU the People who voted in a Black guy who has the msddle name Hussein and used to be Muslim? Crazy when you hate them so much. I hear that the USA will soon implement Punjabby as a 2nd language over Spanish just to keep Obama happy.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 05:28 PM
link   
This is exactly the reason why Obama should, once and for all, finally reveal his official birth certificate to the American public and to the world, just to put all doubts to rest.

But of course, such an official document does not exist does it?

I wonder if my next employer will ask ME for a copy of my birth cert?



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by GingerR
 

McCain was born on a US Naval Base, which is considered to be American soil, much the same as an American embassy would be. So there is no need to question McCain's citizenship. There was actually no reason for Congress to pass the resolution. Perhaps it was to honor his years of service?



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dragonsbreaths
Not exactly true. They have to prove they qualify.


Yes, and under article II of the constitution they leave that to congress and the electoral college to do the qualifying. On December 2008 he was approved by both congress and the electoral college.

SG



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join