Thread: Barack Obama's citizenship questioned

Originally Posted by PatriotofPast

Considering the Army Judge basically told Terry to "Sit down and Accept your Punishment"... Mr. Lakins Defense team should ACCEPT the help of the Veterans Council.
After what I read about what took place at the Hearing on the 27th, Mr. Lakin will be going to Prison, no Ifs, Ands or Buts about it.
Ramos and Compean are perfect examples of the "Power of The Pen". I'm sure Obama sits in the Oval Office EVERY night, with his feet up on the desk just Laughing at us Stupid Americans. As a person who has said from the FIRST TIME I saw this POS, he was NOT Eligible to be President, and I see all these COURT cases, being held in "FEDERAL COURT".
Lets look at that word once "Federal" i.e. THE GOVERNMENT!!!!
Barack Obama = THE GOVT.!! Understand this... There will NOT BE ANY JUSTICE IN THE COURTS! They are ALL working TOGETHER...
Like ON THE SAME SIDE!!!! I just had to get that out there, I hope someone sees' what I'm pointing out.
God Bless Mr. Lakin & ALL American Patriots.

PatriotofPast, it has been suggested that the states are the only mechanism available with enough raw power to curb the federal government, that there is really nothing the individual can do that will affect the tyranny coming from the federal government.

The states ARE sovereign (should they choose to act that way), and they did create the federal government, and it really is up to the states to fix or shut down this outlaw federal government:

http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/08/12/ ... vereignty/

Much of our current day problems with government can be directed to the shadow government created by the power elites and by George Soros (Number 1 on my list of dangerous criminals):

http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/1 ... ss-and-the
http://www.scribd.com/doc/38418255/Jim- ... ic-Enemy-1

On an individual level, people like Lakin will always lose unless they can provide enough 1) money, 2) fear, or 3) embarrassment to influence the feds to back down. The feds are no longer responsive to or answerable to the people, as the article on George Soros shows so clearly - he's bought and paid for this government. It's his, not ours.

Note that million man marches on Washington are futile because the feds just don't care what the peons think. The states, however, would respond if 1 million citizens marched on the state capitals.

I still haven't figured out why the people don't use their state governments to impose their own state's will on the errant federal government. I hope they start doing so in the very near future.

Soros' government needs to be re-captured or completely shut down.

Maybe it's time to re-invigorate the state militias and get the three percenters out of retirement.

///

Originally Posted by [url=http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=209357

For WorldNetDaily, Brian Fitzpatrick[/url]]Army judge tells officer: Shut up and be punished!
Defense counsel warns 'fair trial' impossible under military rulings
Posted: September 28, 2010
9:01 pm Eastern

By Brian Fitzpatrick
© 2010 WorldNetDaily


Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin

FORT MEADE, Md. – An Army judge has made it "impossible" for a career medical officer to get a fair hearing on charges he refused to deploy to Afghanistan because of concern that obeying orders in the chain of command under an ineligible commander in chief would be illegal, his attorney says.

The rulings came today from Col. Denise Lind, who, in effect, told Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin to pound sand. Rocks actually. He faces up to four years at hard labor if convicted in his case.

"We got absolutely slammed today," said Paul R. Jensen, lead counsel for the defense. "It's impossible for us to have a fair trial under these rulings."

Jensen continued, "The judge did what she thought was right, but the result is to deprive us of any opportunity to have a defense."

Lakin believes any order issued under Obama's authority as commander in chief of the armed forces may not be valid because his eligibility to serve as president is unproven. After fruitlessly requesting the Army to verify Obama's eligibility to serve as president, Lakin wrote directly to Obama asking for proof of eligibility.

But without a response, Lakin decided it was his duty to refuse an order to deploy with his unit as part of Obama's Afghanistan surge. As one of the defense briefs states, he "... [took] the distasteful route of inviting his own court martial."

Note: A legal-defense fund has been set up for Lt. Col. Terry Lakin. Click for information.

In her decision, Lind, acting as judge in the case, censored the last remaining arguments Lakin planned to make in his defense: motive and duty. Lakin had intended to explain his motive for disobeying the order and contend that it was his duty as a good soldier to disobey orders that he believes to be illegal.

The defense also planned to call as witnesses Ambassador Alan Keyes and retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney. Keyes was to explain the constitutional issues involved in the case, and McInerney was to talk about the training soldiers receive regarding when they should question and even disobey orders.

Lind was following up on her rulings from Sept. 2, when she rejected defense plans to introduce evidence concerning Obama's eligibility. The defense also requested for Lakin's defense documents referencing Obama's birth records on file in Hawaii, but Lind refused to allow that either, noting that providing the documents might prove "embarrassing" to Obama.

"Our arms were cut off last time," said Jensen. "Our legs are being cut off this time."

In rejecting Lakin's right to discovery of Obama birth documents, Lind joined a host of other judges – in civilian courts – who have refused to allow plaintiffs suing Obama to obtain his birth records. Jensen told WND he had hoped the court would permit Lakin to go to discovery, because Lakin is the defendant in a criminal case and has the right to mount a full defense.

In objecting to the participation of Keyes and McInerney and the presentation of Lakin's planned arguments, the prosecution argued that all issues related to Obama's eligibility, Lakin's motives and the good soldier doctrine were "irrelevant."

"We have to have the opportunity to present some defense!" Jensen countered.

Just before Lind recessed the hearing to prepare her decision, Jensen asked rhetorically whether the government intended to allow him to call any witnesses at all and thundered, "This is all we had left!"

Jensen's pleas fell on deaf ears. Less than two hours after the court recessed following arguments, Lind returned to the bench to render a lengthy, detailed decision. Reading in a dry monotone, Lind reaffirmed her Sept. 2 decision and ruled out discussions of motive and duty.

Lind, with her rulings, effectively has restricted the scope of Lakin's trial to what the government wanted: the simple questions of whether the officer had received orders to deploy to Afghanistan and whether he complied.

Neither of these facts is in dispute

But Jensen said the trial will not end the case.

"We will look to appellate courts for justice. With these constraints it's not possible here," he said.

When Lind made her earlier rulings, denying Lakin access to potentially exculpatory evidence in his case, Judge Roy Moore, who battled political correctness as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court a decade ago, said Lind has forgotten the Constitution.

[Col. Lind has, in effect, disqualified herself by her rulings and kicked the case upstairs to the appeals court.]

Judge Moore, who now operates through the Foundation for Moral Law, has personal experience with challenging the powers-that-be to follow the Constitution. His dispute centered on a Ten Commandments display he put in a state building to recognize the God who inspired the Founders of America. He ultimately was removed from office by those who followed a federal judge's order that the Ten Commandments be removed without questioning whether it was right.

"The highest law in this country is not the order of the Supreme Court of the U.S., not the order of the commander in chief, or any subordinate officer," Moore said.

Instead, it is the Constitution, Moore explained, which in Lakin's case demands that the president be a "natural born citizen."

There have been dozens of lawsuits and challenges over the fact that Obama's eligibility never has been documented. The "Certification of Live Birth" his campaign posted online is a document that Hawaii has made available to those not born in the state.

"Lt. Col. Lakin has every right to question the lawfulness of the orders of the commander in chief," Moore has said.

It doesn't matter, he said, that orders come from a colonel, or a general or even the Pentagon.

"The same thing applies in the military as in the judicial system," he explained. "The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, it's not the order of a higher officer, not the order of a judge."

Lakin has been charged by the Army with missing a movement, disobeying a lawful order and dereliction of duty.

Lind's first round of censorship decisions came just days after a retired U.S. Air Force lieutenant general who commanded forces armed with nuclear weapons said the disclosure of Obama's documentation is not just critical to Lakin's defense, but to the preservation of the nation itself.

The vehement statements came in an affidavit from McInerney, a Fox News military analyst, that was disclosed by an organization generating support for Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin.

McInerney, who retired in 1994 after serving as vice commander in chief of USAF forces in Europe, commander of the 3rd Tactical Fighter Wing and assistant vice chief of staff of the U.S. Air Force, among other positions, said the chain of command issue is critical, since officers are obligated both to follow orders and to disobey illegal orders.

"Officers in the United States military service are – and must be – trained that they owe their highest allegiance to the United States Constitution," he said in the affidavit.

"There can be no question that it is absolutely essential to good order and discipline in the military that there be no break in the unified chain of command, from the lowliest E-1 up to and including the commander in chief who is under the Constitution, the president of the United States. As military officers, we owe our ultimate loyalty not to superior officers or even to the president, but rather, to the Constitution."

He explained "good order and discipline requires not blind obedience to all orders but instead requires officers to judge – sometimes under great adversity – whether an order is illegal.

"The president of the United States, as the commander in chief, is the source of all military authority," he said. "The Constitution requires the president to be a natural born citizen in order to be eligible to hold office. If he is ineligible under the Constitution to serve in that office that creates a break in the chain of command of such magnitude that its significance can scarcely be imagined."

Lakin is being supported by the American Patriot Foundation, which said the affidavit is for use in Lakin's trial, scheduled Oct. 13-15.

Lakin is a physician and in his 18th year of service in the Army. He posted a video asking for the court-martial to determine Obama's eligibility.

He is board certified in family medicine and occupational and environmental medicine. He has been recognized for his outstanding service as a flight surgeon for year-long tours in Honduras, Bosnia and Afghanistan. He was also awarded the Bronze Star for his service in Afghanistan and recognized in 2005 as one of the Army Medical Department's outstanding flight surgeons.

The controversy stems from the Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, which states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

A number of challenges and lawsuits have been based on the constitutional requirement, some alleging Obama does not qualify because he was not born in Hawaii in 1961 as he claims. Others say he fails to qualify because he was a dual citizen of the U.S. and the United Kingdom when he was born, and the framers of the Constitution specifically excluded dual citizens from eligibility.

Complicating the issue is the fact that besides Obama's actual birth documentation, he has kept from the public documentation including his kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, files from his years as an Illinois state senator, Illinois State Bar Association records, baptism records and his adoption records.

Lakin had posted a YouTube video challenging the Army to charge him over the issue.

In a later video, Lakin said the issue of evidence is important:
Lieutenant Colonel Terry Lakin discusses the denial of access to key witnesses.

Note: A legal-defense fund has been set up for Lt. Col. Terry Lakin.

Joseph Stalin would have been proud.

http://tinyurl.com/mapuzzo
Please pray for the United States, that we be spared a dismal future as slaves of Is|am and penniless serfs under a Eurocentric one-world government.
Please pray (even if you don't believe this) that the U.S. be delivered from a Constitutionally ineligible usurper of the Presidency (a Kenyan son of a Kenyan,
a British Protected Subject at birth), and that the U.S. be rescued from this coup d'état and restored to a Constitutionally legitimate government.

Originally Posted by The 700 Club Prayer Counseling Center of the Christian Broadcasting Network

It is a blessing to receive your prayer request and to know that you are trusting God to move in those circumstances. We praise God for your faith to believe and for His faithfulness to answer!

We also want to share with you today some mighty promises of God's Word. Our faith is greatly increased as we listen to the Word of God and confess the truth that we hear. And our hearts find rest as we realize how very much the Lord loves us.

In Deuteronomy, we hear Moses speaking to the children of God saying, "Know, therefore, that the Lord your God IS God; He is the faithful God, keeping His covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love Him and keep His commands" (Deuteronomy 7:9). Later Moses blessed God's people and said, "He is your shield and your helper and your glorious sword" (Deuteronomy 33:29).

Throughout II Chronicles [about God's faithfulness - and discipline - during Israel's apostasy] we hear of God's great love for us and how His love endures forever. Psalm 32:10 declares the Lord's love surrounds the man who trusts in Him, and Psalm 33:5 tells us God loves righteousness and justice.

Many sorrows shall be to the wicked;
But he who trusts in the LORD, mercy shall surround him.

He loves righteousness and justice;
The earth is full of the goodness of the LORD.

We stand in agreement with you on these promises: God is loving, faithful, just, and righteous. He will defend us and protect us as we live for Him. May you begin each day with Lamentations 3:22-24:

"Because of the Lord's great love we are not consumed, for His compassions never fail.
They are new every morning; great is Your faithfulness.
I say to myself, 'The Lord is my portion; therefore I will wait for Him.'"

If you would like a CBN prayer partner to pray with you, please call our 24-hour prayer line at 1-800-759-0700. We care about you and are always here for you. God bless you!

The Christian Broadcasting Network
Website - www.cbn.com
The 700 Club Prayer Counseling Center - 1-800-759-0700

Originally Posted by The prayer ministry of "Guideposts", Our.prayer.org

MinutemanCDC_SC
"Call upon me in the day of trouble; I will deliver you." Psalm 50:15

We never know when the day of trouble will come, do we? One thing we can be sure of, however, is that it will come, sooner or later. Difficulties come to all of us: sinners, saints, even our Lord Jesus Christ. But there's another thing we can be sure of, God does not leave us alone and comfortless in our time of trial. If we call upon Him He will give us the strength and resources to overcome our troubles.

By turning to God in prayer you have taken a decisive step toward conquering your difficulties. Thank you for entrusting us with your prayer request. Be assured that we will lift up your request to the Lord by name and need, and He will answer according to His Almighty wisdom. We have His promise for that.
God bless you.

[quote="[url=http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/09/petition-for-writ-of-certiorari-filed.html]For Atty. Mario Apuzzo, puzo1.blogspot.com[/url]"][size=117]Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed with the U.S. Supreme Court
for Kerchner et al vs Obama/Congress/Pelosi et al Lawsuit



JAMESBURG, NJ – (Sept. 30, 2010) - Attorney Mario Apuzzo of Jamesburg, NJ, today filed a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington DC, on behalf of plaintiffs, Charles F. Kerchner, Jr., Lehigh County, PA; Lowell T. Patterson, Burlington County, NJ; Darrell J. LeNormand, Middlesex County, NJ; and Donald H. Nelsen, Jr., Middlesex County, NJ. Plaintiffs are challenging the recent decision of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia, PA, which affirmed the dismissal by District Judge, Jerome Simandle, sitting in the Federal District Court, Camden, NJ, of plaintiffs’ lawsuit in which they charge that Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, has NOT conclusively proven to any controlling legal authority that he is an Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 “natural born Citizen of the United Statesâ€

Originally Posted by [url=http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=210521

For WorldNetDaily, Bob Unruh[/url]]Supremes get case against 'putative' President Obama
Petition: 'There exists possibility that he could be an illegal alien'
Posted: October 02, 2010
12:35 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

A new court filing that returns the issue of Barack Obama's eligibility to the U.S. Supreme Court warns that unless the judiciary makes a definitive decision in the dispute, it will be the same as allowing the political interests in the United States to amend the U.S. Constitution at will.

A petition for writ of certiorari has been filed with the high court in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision to uphold the dismissal of a case brought by attorney Mario Apuzzo on behalf of Charles F. Kerchner Jr., Lowell T. Patterson, Darrell James Lenormand and Donald H. Nelson Jr.


Mr. Barack Obama speaking at a DNC
fundraiser at DAR Constitutional Hall in
Washington, D.C., on Sept. 30, 2010.

Named as defendants are Barack Hussein Obama II, the U.S., Congress, the Senate, the House of Representatives, former Vice President Dick Cheney and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

The case alleges Congress failed to follow the Constitution, which "provides that Congress must fully qualify the candidate 'elected' by the Electoral College Electors."

The trial court rejected the case based on issues of "standing" and never addressed the core issues presented. The appellate court did the same.


Mario Apuzzo

Now Apuzzo has escalated the issue to the highest court in the land, suggesting that "the constitutional issue … cannot be decided by the political parties and a voting majority. Our nation is ultimately guided by the Constitution and the rule of law, not by majority rule. Allowing the political parties and the voting majorities to decide constitutional issues would be tantamount to amending the Constitution without going through the amendment process prescribed by Article V of the Constitution and abandoning the basic principles of republican government."

In an announcement about the filing, Apuzzo said Obama not only has not proven, as required under the Constitution, his status as a "natural born citizen," but "he has hidden all his early life records including his original long-form birth certificate, early school records, college records, travel and passport records needed to prove he is even a born citizen of the United States."

His case argues, essentially, that even if Obama was born in Hawaii as he claims, he still fails to reach the Constitution's mandated eligibility requirement.

And it could be even worse.

"Putative President, Barack Hussein Obama … has not yet conclusively proven that he was born in the United States … His father was never a United States citizen nor was he even a permanent resident … They both became Kenyan citizens when Kenya got its independence in 1963 … Obama's relationship to his Indonesian stepfather and move to Indonesia when he was a child … and his travels to Pakistan in 1981, also raise doubts," the petition explains.

"If Obama was not born in the United States, there exists a possibility that Obama could be an illegal alien," it states.

"Obama was born a British subject/citizen to a British subject/citizen father and a U.S. citizen mother. Obama's father was not a U.S. citizen and never intended to be one. Obama's father was never even an immigrant to the USA nor was he even a permanent legal resident. Obama's father was a foreign national sojourning in the USA to attend college. Obama is still a British subject/citizen to this day because he has never renounced that citizenship. According to this lawsuit, Obama was born a dual-citizen with dual allegiance and loyalty and is therefore not constitutionally eligible to be the president and commander-in-chief of our military," Kerchner explained.

"The founders of our country and framers of our Constitution required the president to have unity of citizenship and sole natural allegiance to the USA from the moment of birth, which Obama does not and cannot have. This was a national security issue to the founders and framers," he said.

Besides Obama's British citizenship, which "converted to Kenyan citizenship at age 2," Kerchner writes, "Obama was also an Indonesian citizen as a youth when he was adopted or acknowledged by his Indonesian stepfather when he married his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham."

The lawsuit simply seeks a trial on the merits "to determine the true facts of Obama's legal identity and exact citizenship status and to require Obama to prove to the courts that he is eligible for the federal office he sits in per our Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, which states: No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law by Emer de Vattel, published in 1758 and "used by … the Continental Congress during the formation of our country…" defines natural born citizen as "a person born in the country to two parents who are both citizens of the country."

That phrase was left undefined in the Constitution, and Apuzzo argues only the judiciary can fully define it now.

"If neither Congress nor the Executive branches of government will give the petitioners that protection to which the Constitution entitles them, they should have access to the courts to be able to protect and vindicate their own rights to that protection," he wrote in the petition.

"This right to access to the courts is more critical when both the executive and legislature are acting in concert to deprive the petitioners of their right to this protection. Since Obama has already been sworn in, it could be argued that only Congress has jurisdiction over the question of whether he is a 'natural born citizen.' But what happens when Congress also refuses to perform its constitutional duty … to make sure that only a 'natural born citizen' is given the great and singular powers of the office of president and commander in chief of the military?

"Surely the Constitution would not leave someone like the petitioners without any remedy to protect the same rights which the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution recognize as their unalienable rights to life, liberty, and property," the petition states.

The petition explains the nation's Founders required the "natural born citizen" status "to provide a 'strong check' on foreign influence making its way into our government and specifically in the office of president and commander in chief of the military."

Apuzzo continues, "Whether he is legitimate is also vital in maintaining the proper chain of command in our military and in giving legality to all military orders … Since the president signs all acts passed by Congress into law, it is vitally important that the president be legitimately in power so as to give those laws domestic and international legality."

And the polls are no legitimate remedy, he suggested.

"The rule of law does not allow that the will of the people or the popular vote should determine the meaning of the 'natural born citizen' clause and that Congress should defer to that will on such vital constitutional questions."

And the plaintiffs have standing because, "the threat to petitioners' life, liberty, safety, security, tranquility, and property is actual and concrete rather than merely conjectural or hypothetical. The Declaration of Independence recognizes these rights as 'unalienable' and as having been endowed upon an individual by his or her 'Creator.' The Constitution recognizes these rights not as being abstract or theoretical rights but rather as concrete and real and needing protection from government abuses."

Older material continues at http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=210521

Originally Posted by [url=http://www.wusa9.com/rss/local_article.aspx?storyid=113264

For WUSA9.com in Washington, D.C., Bruce Leshan[/url]]New Setback For Birther Flight Surgeon Who Refused Deployment

All Evidence Denied

Bruce Leshan Sept. 29, 2010



FORT MEADE, Md (WUSA) -- Another big legal setback for the Walter Reed doctor who refuses to deploy to Afghanistan until he sees President Obama's original birth certificate.

A military judge ruled the President's birth records were irrelevant to the case that could send Lt. Col Terrence Lakin to federal prison for four years of hard labor.

This is the controversy that just won't go away.

Polls suggest about a quarter of Americans doubt President Obama was born in the US, even though all kinds of mainstream news organizations have debunked the so called birther arguments.

You can go on the web and look at pictures of a his Hawaiian certification of live birth that shows he was born in Honolulu.
There's even a birth announcement in the Honolulu Advertiser newspaper from 1961.



But Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin still doesn't believe it. The flight surgeon was back before a judge in a last ditch attempt to salvage some kind of defense case. A case funded by the conservative American Patriot Foundation and publicized on YouTube.

"I am disobeying my orders to deploy," says Lakin on YouTube, "because I, and I believe all servicemen and women and the American people deserve the truth about President Obama's constitutional eligibility to the Office of the Presidency and the Commander in Chief."

But things aren't going well for Lakin as his case heads toward trial on charges of missing a movement, disobeying lawful orders, and dereliction of duty.

The judge turned down two more witnesses... ruled the orders at issue ARE lawful ... and found that Lakin's motives are irrelevant... at least until sentencing.

"It is impossible for us to put on a defense without them," says defense attorney Paul Rolf Jensen. "We've been deprived of everything, what else is left."

The Obama campaign did release a short form Certification of Live Birth that shows the President was born in Honolulu.
The state health director and registrar of vital statistics say state law prevents them from releasing the original birth certificate with the doctor's signature.

"And President Richard Nixon said he wasn't a crook, and President Clinton said he didn't have sex with that woman," says Jensen. "The point is, we are in a court of law, let him come in and be subject to cross examination with the original documentation. What do they have to hide?"

The military judge did delay the start of the trial for a month to give the defense more time to ask the court of appeals for help.

Written by Bruce Leshan
9News Now & wusa9.com

Did the military judge delay the trial for a month, from Oct. 13 to Nov. 15(?), at the defense attorney's request for more time, or at Mr. Obama's command to wait until after the elections? This case should have spotlighted Mr. Obama's unlawful usurpation of the Presidency before the elections.

DOJ Whistleblower, former DOJ attorney J. Christian Adams:
Obama Administration DOJ is Enabling November Vote Fraud.

http://www.youtube.com/v/ckIDGpXCS5s - Posted at

http://patriotsforamerica.ning.com/vide ... o%3A197484

MILITARY VETS UNIFY - PLACING OBAMA ELIGIBILITY ON FRONT BURNER


By J.B. Williams
October 2, 2010
http://www.newswithviews.com/JBWilliams/williams110.htm

When courts-martial presiding authority Col. Denise Lind issued a ruling that blocked Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin’s constitutional right to provide a defense by denying him a right to discovery and evidence supporting his decision to refuse what he believed to be illegal orders, thousands of fellow military veterans unified in Lakin’s defense.

The Veterans Council of the The United States Patriots Union, led by respected retired officers like Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely and Col. Harry Riley, and Sgt. Timothy Harrington issued White Paper #1 on September 3, 2010. It recommended a slightly different defense strategy for Lt. Col. Lakin that focused solely upon the historic term natural-born citizen as a constitutional requirement for the office of president. The report called upon the Lakin defense to drop the search for a birth certificate (native-born) and focus on the bloodline of the father (natural-born) issues already known.

When the Lakin defense team rebuffed calls from USPU Veterans to alter defense strategy, the Veterans Council issued White Paper #2 on September 10, 2010. It delved deeper into concerns over the anti-constitutional precedents being established in the Lakin case and reinforced calls upon the Lakin defense team to change strategies, offering to bring expert UCMJ and criminal counsel to the table on behalf of Lakin.

The second white paper also established the proper interpretation of the term natural-born citizen – “that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country."

White Paper #2 connected Vattel’s Law of Nations to the Constitution by way of its mention in Article 1, Section 8, Item 10 of the US Constitution, leaving Obama nowhere to run on the subject.

Still, the Lakin defense team stayed the course, despite growing pressure to drop the birth certificate search and provide Lakin with the correct defense. The USPU Veterans Council responded by issuing White Paper #3 on September 27, calling upon Republicans in congress busy campaigning on the Pledge to return America to honor, economic, and judicial sanity.

The document represents a change in tactics for the Veterans Council. It focuses on congressional candidates and media darlings spewing rhetoric about standing with our soldiers, calling upon these folks to take a real stand where it really counts, demanding the LTC Lakin get a complete and fair trial, including his right to discover and present mitigating evidence in his own defense.

Officers in the Veterans Council stayed the course on legal advice, which has been well vetted by constitutional lawyers, constitutional scholars, retired judges, and former JAG attorneys. They were forced, however, to alter tactics by the Lakin defense team, which was still refusing to shift defense strategy.

The Lakin defense team’s decision to stay the course received another blow a day later. "We got absolutely slammed today," said Paul R. Jensen, lead counsel for the defense. "It's impossible for us to have a fair trial under these rulings."

This is exactly what the USPU Veterans Council had tried to advise the Lakin team against in three white papers. So long as the team stays the course in search of a “native-bornâ€

Open Letter to All Active Military Members

WILL YOU ALLOW THE LAST VESTIGES OF FREEDOM TO DIE?

Author: Jeff Tetreault
Date: Sept. 29, 2010
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/09/29/ ... ment-25413

(Sept. 29, 2010) — To all Active Duty Personnel:

I have mentioned what I am about to say on various blogs and received plenty of flak, deletions and blacklists for it.

You are military officers and enlisted, and must stand up and fight for yourselves in large numbers. Otherwise expect the total loss of your freedoms like you’ve had a taste of already. Your right to vote has been prevented. Your second amendment right has been compromised. Your first amendment right has been squashed. And your right to military trial by jury has also been stripped away. Why are you still serving when you don’t file grievances against the government or take action??? There is no point in serving when you lose your inalienable rights granted to you by God and protected by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution you swore to uphold! There are no exceptions!

Heroes understand the Constitution and protect it. Cowards run and hide in fear of their careers or wrongful imprisonment. Strong words? Perhaps. But ask yourselves what the Rebels would classify you as in 1775. Would they deem your “hush-hushâ€

[quote="HighlanderJuan"]Open Letter to All Active Military Members

WILL YOU ALLOW THE LAST VESTIGES OF FREEDOM TO DIE?

Author: Jeff Tetreault
Date: Sept. 29, 2010
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/09/29/ ... ment-25413

(Sept. 29, 2010) — To all Active Duty Personnel:

I have mentioned what I am about to say on various blogs and received plenty of flak, deletions and blacklists for it.

You are military officers and enlisted, and must stand up and fight for yourselves in large numbers. Otherwise expect the total loss of your freedoms like you’ve had a taste of already. Your right to vote has been prevented. Your second amendment right has been compromised. Your first amendment right has been squashed. And your right to military trial by jury has also been stripped away. Why are you still serving when you don’t file grievances against the government or take action??? There is no point in serving when you lose your inalienable rights granted to you by God and protected by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution you swore to uphold! There are no exceptions!

Heroes understand the Constitution and protect it. Cowards run and hide in fear of their careers or wrongful imprisonment. Strong words? Perhaps. But ask yourselves what the Rebels would classify you as in 1775. Would they deem your “hush-hushâ€