Obama Birth Certificate Eligibility ObamaCare rally update, Philip J Berg, September 4, 2010

Obama Birth Certificate Eligibility ObamaCare rally update, Philip J Berg

Just in from Philip J Berg September 4, 2010.

For Immediate Release:  – 09/04/2010
For Further Information Contact:
Philip J. Berg, Esquire         
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12                         
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
Cell (610) 662-3005
(610) 825-3134
(800) 993-PHIL  [7445]
Fax (610) 834-7659

philjberg@obamacrimes.com
The Obama Birth Certificate / Eligibility / ObamaCare
Rally in Washington
will be Saturday, October 23, 2010
U.S. Capitol – West Front
(Lafayette Hill, PA – 09/04/10) – Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the first Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States stated that “WE THE PEOPLE” by and through Philip J. Berg and Obamacrimes.com is sponsoring the OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE / ELIGIBILITY/ OBAMACARE Rally in Washington on Saturday, October 23, 2010 – 12 Noon to 4:00 p.m. at U.S. Capitol – West Front.
 
Berg was at the Glen Beck Rally at the Lincoln Memorial on Saturday, August 28th for the purpose of handing out flyers regarding his October 23rd Obama Rally.  Berg said, “I was overwhelmed at the number of people who recognized me, coming over to me and thanking me for my efforts in leading to expose Obama/Soetoro for the imposter he is and the biggest ‘Hoax’ in the history of our country, over 234 years.  And it was amazing the positive response I received when people were grabbing at the flyers I was handing out when I said, ‘Obama, not a natural born citizen and Constitutionally ineligible to be President.’  I personally gave out 3,000 flyers in two [2] hours, while other volunteers also gave out flyers.”

The OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE / ELIGIBILITY/ OBAMACARE Rally in Washington, D.C. is for the purpose of exposing Soetoro/Obama and demanding that he proves that he is “Constitutionally eligible” to be President, or for the benefit of the 308 million citizens of the United States, to resign from office.

All individuals participating are requested to bring a copy of their Birth Certificate so all can hold them in the air while Obama/Soetoro who recently said he cannot keep wearing his Birth Certificate on his forehead when responding to a question by NBC Brian Williams, although Obama/Soetoro has spent over $1.6 million in fighting all lawsuits regarding his status and not producing his Birth Certificate.

The crucial issues regarding Obama, the “IMPOSTER”, continue to grow.  However, the most important issue is Obama not being Constitutionally eligible to be President: 1) not being “natural born” being born in Mombasa, Kenya; and 2) even more important the fact that Obama was “adopted” or legally “acknowledged” by his step-father, Lolo Soetoro, and his school record in Indonesia indicates the “Imposter’s” name is “Barry Soetoro”, his nationality being “Indonesia” and his religion being “Islam”.  Obama, the Imposter’s legal name is “Barry Soetoro”.  Obama must be stopped !  WE THE PEOPLE can, by way of the largest rally ever in Washington, DC, have a “Peaceful Revolution” and force Obama to prove he is “Constitutionally eligible” or resign from office.  YES WE CAN !  

The cost of the Rally in Washington is expensive.  We must raise Fifty Thousand [$50,000.00] Dollars to cover the cost of the Rally including advertising this important event.

Donate today to help cover the expenses of this Rally and defend our Constitution.

An updated flyer regarding our Rally is attached.  Please spread the word to as many people as you can and stay tuned to obamacrimes.com.
For copies of all Press Releases and Court Pleadings, go to:
http://obamacrimes.com

Judge Lind decision flawed, Defense of LTC Terrence Lakin, White paper, Citizen Wells open thread, September 4, 2010

Judge Lind decision flawed, Defense of LTC Terrence Lakin, White paper

Courts Martial Defense of LTC Terrence Lakin September 3, 2010 researched and Prepared by J.B. Williams and Timothy Harrington

“We find foundational flaws in Col. Lind’s decision, which Lakin’s defense team must seize upon in orderto alter the current course of this trial.

• Lind’s authority is derived from the same place as LTC Lakin’s and all other members of the United States Military – from the supreme command of the office of Commander-in-Chief, the President of the United States.
• Lind is attempting to use her authority under her Commander-in-Chief to break the military chain of command, isolating the Commander-in-Chief of the US Military specifically, exempting the President from his position of authority in the chain of command, without which, Lind herself has no authority to convene the Courts Martial.
• Lind then reaches outside of the US Military Justice system to the Civil Court, relying upon civil court precedent to deny Lakin any access to discovery and thereby, a proper defense guaranteed him by the US Constitution and UCMJ, Uniform Code of Military Justice. Civil Court precedent has no legal standing in a UCMJ criminal proceeding. In fact, the UCMJ is based upon the Articles of War (aka War Articles) and is a “penal system” unlike the US Justice System – as explained by Col. William Winthrop in Military Law and Precedents. As a result, precedents set in courts outside of the UCMJ are without legal standing in any UCMJ proceeding.
• Not even in the UCMJ can the United States government deny the accused his/her right to a trial, complete with discovery of related evidence. Yet Lind attempts to do so, under the authority derived from her Commander-in-Chief. If the chain of command is broken, then Lind herself has no authority.
• Lind’s statement that the legality of the Commander-in-Chief is “not relevant” in matters ofmilitary command is false on its face. As stated in a sworn affidavit filed by LTG Thomas G. McInerney executed on August 20, 2010 – “In refusing to obey orders because of his doubts as totheir legality, LTC Lakin has acted exactly as proper training dictates. – By thus stepping up to the bar, LTC Lakin is demonstrating the courage of his convictions and his bravery. – That said, it is equally essential that he be allowed access to the evidence that will prove whether he made the correct decision.”
• Lind attempts to break the chain of command at The Pentagon level, which she claims has no issue with the current Commander-in-Chief and that this should be good enough for Lakin. Yet she cannot break this chain of command without eliminating her own authority, and Lakin’s oath requires that he decide for himself whether or not his orders are legal, as affirmed in LTG McInerney’s sworn affidavit.

At issue is not whether or not LTC Lakin refused orders, but rather whether or not he “unlawfully” refused orders. If his orders were not “lawful,” including but not limited to, emanating from a “lawful”chain of command which begins with a lawful Commander-in-Chief, then Lakin must be found NOTGUILTY of “unlawfully” refusing orders.

Read more:
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=gmail&attid=0.1&thid=12ad99e56f2bb6c8&mt=application/pdf&url=https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui%3D2%26ik%3D2485918dad%26view%3Datt%26th%3D12ad99e56f2bb6c8%26attid%3D0.1%26disp%3Dattd%26zw&sig=AHIEtbQq8K2LEI7Jyn8E46_77A76s6qtiA&pli=1