Update! Officer challenging Obama's eligibility can't see evidence

Originally posted by adifferentbreed
Funny, the birthers are hateful, moronic, stupid....you pick the adjective, and yet it seems to be the Obama supporters with the vast majority of negative name calling responses.......

I don't make a habit of calling names and I'm not posting here because I'm an Obama supporter. I'm posting here because people are making up stuff to suit their agenda and I'm posting the facts to refute it. I like the truth.

Look, if Obama is found to be NOT a natural-born citizen, I'll be the FIRST one to get in line to have him impeached.

The military has done nothing but follow military procedure. It's only those who have the birther agenda and are ignorant of the law that are holding this as some kind of assault on Lakin's rights.

I don't know what I would do for entertainment if not for these birther threads.

[edit on 9/5/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Trust me, I wasn't by any means referring to you.......I don't agree with you on alot of issues, but I've never seen you be purposely mean. I don't want to get a T&C violation by naming names, but they aren't hard to figure out. I disagree with you on this one though, I think there is more to it than we are seeing....and after all, this is a conspiracy site. Have a great day though.

Here is another article (CNN) on this issue. I do wish people would read a little more from credible sources than to believe every blogger that comes along with an agenda and a made-up story to tell...

Obama didn't give Lakin an order. Lakin's superiors did. Obama isn't relevant in this case. Even Lakin's lawyer (Jensen) agrees with that. Lakin should have gotten a real lawyer. I know more about the law than this happy fellow.

Lind also said that military law says that a soldier's personal beliefs or convictions are not sufficient to allow that soldier to determine that an order is illegal. The soldier has to have "no rational doubt" that the order is illegal before he or she can ignore it.
...
Afterward, Jensen said he respected the judge's ruling, but called it distressing.

CNN

Of course it's distressing. He lost! And out of total ineptitude on his part! He should have known that he was sending his client into something he couldn't possibly win. I feel sorry for Lakin. He was almost as stupid as his lawyer.

He reminds me of this lawyer from "the Castle" - Hilarious! (Excellent movie, by the way)



[edit on 9/5/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]

quote'Obama didn't give Lakin an order. Lakin's superiors did. Obama isn't relevant in this case. Even Lakin's lawyer (Jensen) agrees with that. Lakin should have gotten a real lawyer. I know more about the law than this happy fellow. '

How wrong you are.
It does not matter who gave the order. It is irrelevant.
The problem is that the buck stops with the C in C who is Soetoro aka
Obama. His is the ultimate authority.
Under international law if an act of violence or a killing etc is committed by military personnel who have not committed said act in the name of lawful command of their CinC then that military person is personably liable for the act and it is a crime - not an act of war.
Mr Lakim needs to know that his military service is covered by a legal sanction and CinC otherwise he will be personally liable under international law if he were to kill, maim or commit any act that could be construed as criminal. In fact it could be claimed that he would be in Afghanistan an an enemy combatant because he had no other reason to be in the country .
People should be aware that when Soetoro/Obama is shown to be bogus every soldier serving under him as CinC have in fact no international protection and can be held accountable for all actions committed in their service outside the USA during his term of imposture..
This is how dangerous the whole business is for the military and why much of the questioning is coming from them.
Mr Lakim has a lot of support within the military because the questions he wants answered are vitally important to all.
If you think it matters two hoots about who issued the deployment order you are whistling in the wind. Its the deployment itself without legal authority of the CinC which is the problem.

reply to post by Emilymary


Maybe we can make this simple for you. Lakin needs to have proof that he was given an unlawful order. Where is his proof?

Originally posted by Emilymary
Under international law if an act of violence or a killing etc is committed by military personnel who have not committed said act in the name of lawful command of their CinC then that military person is personably liable for the act and it is a crime - not an act of war.

And this has what to do with Lakin? He was ordered to deploy, not to kill someone. Deployment is clearly not an illegal order.

Where do you get this stuff? Seriously, you HAVE to be making it up. I haven't see a source from you yet. You just ramble on about things that have nothing to do with the case or reality, for that matter. Give me a link.

And it's LAKIN - L-A-K-I-N ... It has an N on the end. Not an M.

Maybe we can make this simple for you. Lakin needs to have proof that he was given an unlawful order. Where is his proof?

Let me make it simple for you.
The proof is in the records being so extraordinarily held secret and sealed.
This is why his lawyer issued for discovery.
The fact that records are open showing Barry Soetoro as an indonesian citizen are sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt as to whether he is a leagl POTUS with legal US citizenship etc.
The birth certificate is partly a red herring as his place of birth is but one questionable facet of the whole affair.
Where ever he was born he was born a dual USA/British citizen - immediately not'natural born' as the constitution requires.
However when he was adopted in Indonesia he unquestionably became an Indonesian Citizen losing his US citizenship.
It is alleged he travelled on an Indonesian passport but all records of his passport holdings - Indonesian or American are sealed.
There is no record that he ever gave up his Indonesian citizenship and took US citizenship and no record he ever changed the legal name of Barry Soetoro to Barack Obama.
It is alleged he attended American education as an overseas student. All records are sealed.
Mr Lakim needs to know that he is serving under a legitimate CinC.
If all the records are sealed he cannot know this unless they are released. Under law he could expect the records to be released as they are vital to his case. He refuses to deploy unless his orders have legal sanction.
He has now been denied what is basic justice by the refusal to release the records to save Soetoro 'embarrassment'. The judge claims the question is for Congress.
This of course is nonsense. Congress only allows other peoples children to fight its mostly illegal wars and put their lives on the line.
To Lakim it is a question of vast importance. It decides whether he becomes a legitimate serving soldier or international war criminal.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Doesn't make sense, does it? That's because she didn't say that.

your source says Philip Cave said she didn't mean that. There is no quote of the judge saying she didn't mean or say that so your point is moot.

Originally posted by Emilymary
Let me make it simple for you.
The proof is in the records being so extraordinarily held secret and sealed.

How do you know that if it is being kept secret? He has to HAVE proof, not think that maybe there might somewhere be some proof that someone else can get for him. He has to HAVE proof. According to you, it is locked away and kept secret. So how do you know it exists and how do you explain a case built upon proof not had?

This is why his lawyer issued for discovery.
The fact that records are open showing Barry Soetoro as an indonesian citizen are sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt as to whether he is a leagl POTUS with legal US citizenship etc.

According to whom? You write a lot for someone who has not one shred of evidence for anything.

The birth certificate is partly a red herring as his place of birth is but one questionable facet of the whole affair.
Where ever he was born he was born a dual USA/British citizen - immediately not'natural born' as the constitution requires.

Partly a red herring? Explain that to me. What is questionable about it? I am sure any question you have has been covered at least a dozen times on ATS already. I am going to guess you know that as well but I am a sucker. Please tell me what is questionable about the birth certificate?

Show me where the constitution says that. Please also show me proof that the US honored another countries claims of citizenship. Then I guess I am going to need you to explain how Kennedy got to be president.

However when he was adopted in Indonesia he unquestionably became an Indonesian Citizen losing his US citizenship.

Any proof of any of that?

It is alleged he travelled on an Indonesian passport but all records of his passport holdings - Indonesian or American are sealed.

It is alleged he is the antichrist as well. Unfortunately the reasoning for both is equally sound. Again, I ask for proof.

There is no record that he ever gave up his Indonesian citizenship and took US citizenship and no record he ever changed the legal name of Barry Soetoro to Barack Obama.

There is probably no record of him denouncing his Plaedian citizenship or changing his name from Achtuckula Bandahaamamamahnarannlammadingdong either. Hard to find records of things that kind of need to be real in the first place.

Any proof he was legally named Barry Soetoro? Any proof he was an Indonesian citizen? Any proof the US wouls care if Indonesia claimed him?

It is alleged he attended American education as an overseas student. All records are sealed.

I can allege that he was a coc aine smugggler. I cannot prove it, all those records seem to be sealed. Can I go to court and demand the court provide me access to everything private to Obama until I find the proof of my allegation? Is that how courts work in your country?

Mr Lakim needs to know that he is serving under a legitimate CinC.

Nope. He needs to know that his orders are sound. His supperiors need to do the same and theirs as well all the way up the chain of command. Not every soldier gets to peruse the presidents personell files just cuz they feel like it.

If all the records are sealed he cannot know this unless they are released.

Then again I ask you, what proof does he HAVE?

Under law he could expect the records to be released as they are vital to his case.

Prove they are vital to his case. You have to KNOW the proof is there and being covered up. What is that proof?

He refuses to deploy unless his orders have legal sanction.

If you are talking about law, then he is just plain wrong. LEGALLY Obama has been declared eligible to run for president of the United States of America. LEGALLY He was elected to that position. LEGALLY he now holds the position of Commander in Cheif. So LEGALLY any orders he gives would be LEGAL.

I am just so stupid though so perhaps you can explain that to me differently?

He has now been denied what is basic justice by the refusal to release the records to save Soetoro 'embarrassment'.

He has not been denied any justice. I cannot take you to court, accuse you of a crime, and then order the court to give me access to your personal records until I find proof of me allegation. Discovery and the right to investigate are two different things. Lakin has to HAVE proof. Again, I ask what proof does he HAVE that his orders are unlawful? He cannot claim he has a hunch and if the judge will just let him look around some more, he might prove it. Sorry, it just does not work that way.

The judge claims the question is for Congress.
This of course is nonsense. Congress only allows other peoples children to fight its mostly illegal wars and put their lives on the line.

That has plenty to do with anything huh?

To Lakim it is a question of vast importance. It decides whether he becomes a legitimate serving soldier or international war criminal.

What question?

Originally posted by soleprobe
your source says Philip Cave said she didn't mean that. There is no quote of the judge saying she didn't mean or say that so your point is moot.

Because there is no quote of someone saying they did not say something, you get to assume they did say it? How about the fact that there is no quote of the judge actually saying that?

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Here is another article (CNN) on this issue.

I disconnected my cable back in 06 and threw out all the garbage that came out of CNN. Then I come to a "conspiracy" website in 2010 and I see tons of references back to the garbage I threw out. For me to ingest what comes out of CNN would be like a dog going back to his own vomit.

The records exist but are sealed.
The information needed is in those records. They exist. They are. They are sealed. There is no dispute as to the information therein.
What is in the record - for instance an application for passport has to exist within the record.
If it is sealed then the information is required to show whether or not Soetoro/Obama is legit.
I cannot follow the argument that we don't have proof to request the opening of the files.
The file is the proof. Under law those files should be made available to the defendent.
To save Soetoro 'embarrassment' they are being denied.
As the clip I posted from revolutionary politics explains this is total injustice and an abuse of power and a denial of the defendent's rights.

Originally posted by Emilymary
The records exist but are sealed.

You keep saying that. How do you know that? If they're sealed, how do you know what's there?

There is no dispute as to the information therein.

I dispute it! Millions of people dispute it. There is a dispute or we wouldn't be talking.

The file is the proof.

Prove this "file" exists anywhere but in your imagination.

Well like any action to 'discover' documents in any court action you apply for the document to dicover what is in it - hence the word 'discovery'.
This happens all the time.
Why in this case do you demand that the defendent prove what is in them first.
Defeats the object completely.
If they knew they wouldn't need to ask for them.
I fail to understand why the normal practice and concept of 'discovery' be suspended when it comes to Soetoro/Obama.
Why would anyone issue a writ for discovery if they had to have PROOF of what they wanted to discover.
Its ludicrous.

Originally posted by Emilymary
If they knew they wouldn't need to ask for them.

Exactly! Lakin has NO CLUE what might or might not exist. This is called a Legal Fishing Expedition and it's not permitted in court.

Using the courts to find out information beyond the fair scope of the lawsuit. The loose, vague, unfocused questioning of a witness or the overly broad use of the discovery process. Discovery sought on general, loose, and vague allegations, or on suspicion, surmise, or vague guesses.

I fail to understand why the normal practice and concept of 'discovery' be suspended when it comes to Soetoro/Obama.

Discovery is not being suspended.

You also fail to understand that Obama is not on trial here. LAKIN is on trial for disobeying an order. Obama's papers have NOTHING to do with that and are therefore irrelevant.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Give it up unless you like beating you're head against the wall. There is no point in presenting a logical argument in these threads as the birther argument follows no logic. The arguments I've seen in this thread from the birther side show a total lack of knowledge on how the legal system works. And as you pointed out "Fishing Expeditions" aren't allowed.

Lakin threw away his career because he is a moron. He had no problem volunteering for a deployment earlier in the year to Afghanistan and Obama was President then also. He's a classic example of people that get caught up in the hype without any proof to back up the allegations.

If the military allowed this to proceed it would open up a flood gate of troops using this to dodge deployments. As has been repeated many times, it's up to Lakin to come forward with documents to prove his case which is to explain why he refused the orders of his immediate superiors.

If Obama had ordered troops to start killing women and children then Lakin would have a case. But in this instance he has no case.

quote
Exactly! Lakin has NO CLUE what might or might not exist. This is called a Legal Fishing Expedition and it's not permitted in court.

Absolute piffle.
If a document is on record which contains Soetoro/Obamas passport application records there is every expectation that that is what is contained. Its not going to be anything else.
If there is expectation based on the fact that Soetoro is a known Indonesian citizen and therefore a bogus POTUS and therefore not a legal CinC then the records will obviously confirm or refute.
No fishing there.
A question of confirmation.
Under what circumstances would you deem 'discovery' to be not 'fishing' as you put it.
Explpain!

Originally posted by Emilymary
If there is expectation based on the fact that Soetoro is a known Indonesian citizen

The problem with that is it is not a fact, therefore the remainder of your argument is false as well!

Originally posted by Emilymary
The records exist but are sealed.

What "records" are you referring to?
Do you even know?

The information needed is in those records.

You keep insisting things as if they are true. Fine, I told you I was stupid. I want to believe you so badly so if you say the information needed is in those records then you must have proof of that, right? Or are you just guessing and hoping but saying it as if it is already somehow proven true? You are going to have to settle with reality at some point. Why did you not respond to any of my questions? Typical birther tactic of just repeating lies and moving on? Where is your proof? Put your money where your mouth is.

They exist. They are. They are sealed. There is no dispute as to the information therein.

Then proving that the information needed to demonstrate that Obama is indeed not eligable to be presdident is contained therein should be no problem for you.

What is in the record - for instance an application for passport has to exist within the record.

What record? What record are you talking about that contains passport application information? Can I request this same "record" on myself? Please makes some sense.

If it is sealed then the information is required to show whether or not Soetoro/Obama is legit.

What do you KNOW is on his passport application that would show he is not natural born?

I cannot follow the argument that we don't have proof to request the opening of the files.

That really sounds like a personal problem.

The file is the proof. Under law those files should be made available to the defendent.

Prove the file is the proof. You have to be able to do that. Why is it taking you so long? Why is it taking Lakin so long? Just prove it already and be done with it.

To save Soetoro 'embarrassment' they are being denied.

You are purposely twisting the judges words in order to portray an entirely different scenario. If the truth is on your side, why would you need to do that at all?

As the clip I posted from revolutionary politics explains this is total injustice and an abuse of power and a denial of the defendent's rights.

Yet you cannot explain how or why that is even remotely true.

How many times should I watch you dodge questions before just giving up and realizing you are a troll purposely trying to ruffle feathers with no interest in reality or truth?

Originally posted by Emilymary
Well like any action to 'discover' documents in any court action you apply for the document to dicover what is in it - hence the word 'discovery'.

You have no clue what you are talking about.

This happens all the time.

Discovery, sure. This, no.

Why in this case do you demand that the defendent prove what is in them first.

The nature of the case. Are you brain dead?

Defeats the object completely.

Only when you try to change the rules to match whatever made up nonsense you are pretending to have some knowledge of.

If they knew they wouldn't need to ask for them.

Then you admit he has no defense and his case is lost already right there.
He has to KNOW already and be able to prove it. Finally you understand, he does not KNOW anything. He is LOOKING for something. Unfortunately no matter how badly you mangle your understanding of the law, that is not how it ever works, anywhere, for anyone, in any case.

I fail to understand why the normal practice and concept of 'discovery' be suspended when it comes to Soetoro/Obama.

It has not been. You do not seem to understand what "discovery" actually is.

Why would anyone issue a writ for discovery if they had to have PROOF of what they wanted to discover.
Its ludicrous.

Then what is that proof?