It goes without saying that, where there is a story of constitutional or human rights abuse, Dick Cheney cannot be far behind. It is therefore little surprise to learn this week that, according to sources in the recent disclosure of a hidden counterterrorism program, the prior concealment from Congress was allegedly ordered by Cheney.
The Central Intelligence Agency reportedly withheld information about program for eight years on orders from Cheney, who continually fought any disclosures on a host of subjects to either Congress or the courts.
As I discussed on this segment of MSNBC Countdown, it is a crime to withhold such information from Congress — yet another crime that is not being investigated by the Obama Administration.
While covert operations can be limited to disclosures to the Gang of Eight, the National Security Act of 1947 requires such disclosure.
It was previously known that Cheney’s legal adviser, David S. Addington, (another dark character in these scandals) was involved in this matter as well.
Once again, it is astonishing that Attorney General Eric Holder continues to refuse to appoint a special prosecutor to deal with the mounting allegations of criminal acts by the Bush Administration. The blocking of such investigations by the Obama Administration reaffirms the view that our intelligence services live beyond the reach of the law and that our leaders are unaccountable under the criminal laws that they apply to average citizens. While Obama insists that no one is above the law, he has ensured that we have two separate systems of justice for the powerful and the plebes.
In another story, Gen. Michael Hayden who carried out many of the presumptively unlawful programs during the Bush Administration insists that Congress was informed of this particular program, here.
For the full story, click here
Apparently Holder is feeling heat to do . . . something.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/206300
“In another story, Gen. Michael Hayden who carried out many of the presumptively unlawful programs during the Bush Administration insists that Congress was informed of this particular program.”
***********
He likewise insisted that “probable cause” was nowhere to be found in the 4th Amendment. So much for his insisting!
Mr. Hayden says Congress was informed and there was nothing different about this spying program than what has already been disclosed. Since he is making these claims in a public forum I am mystified as to why he refuses to make the same claims under oath, at a Congressional Hearing or in a court of law. Further, I am unclear why he simply does not release all the details of the program to the public. What’s the issue here? If we already know what the program is, then why not release the full authorization and details of it.
As to the Dark Lord, no suprise there. I’m still trying to figure out where the VP fits into the chain of command over so many military operations (he doesn’t) and how the nefarious programs directed against civilians are all part of the work of the VP. With the incredible successes Mr. Cheney has given us in so many of his endeavors I’m certain he won’t mind telling the details of how he achieve these many sucesses in a court of law and to Congress as well.
The fact they we do have a seemless transition between Bush and Obama, with one key figure still directing things, speaks for itself. To not prosecute is itself a crime. Someone said charges should be brought by Monday, or if that isn’t a workable day for Holder, then by the end of today. I agree.
“But it will take a lot more clamor to move public opinion on this issue. One thing is particularly clear: any pro-Obama partisan who lectures others on the need to be patient with Obama, or to believe Obama knows best when it comes to whether and when to act on the issues of torture and detention – well, anyone who argues that position should now know that they own responsibility for Bush-era lawless cruelty, along with the Obama administration. Now more than ever, let’s not be sheeple.”
http://www.salon.com/opinion/walsh/?last_story=/opinion/walsh/politics/2009/07/11/eric_holder/
“Once again, it is astonishing that Attorney General Eric Holder continues to refuse to appoint a special prosecutor to deal with the mounting allegations of criminal acts by the Bush Administration”
That is the gist of it.
Domestic surveillance of American citizens continues to this day, but the program remains hidden from the public. It would appear that there is multi-agency involvement (in the program to which I’m referring), but I’m left to speculate based on what I’ve seen.
Someone must expose the secret and sadistic programs which are targeting good, patriotic, law-abiding people and doing irreparable harm. I’m a white, professional woman with absolutely no criminal history. I could be your next-door-neighbor or friend. If this could happen to me, it could happen to anyone.
It’s easy to dismiss those who speak out about programs such as the one to which I’m referring. It’s easy and convenient. Having said this, it’s nothing short of tragic for the victims/targets of these programs to let them continue. And in the long run, it’s tragic for the country as a whole.
It’s become pretty clear that our most secretive agencies have been involved in activities that are not consistent with the rule of law and the Constitution. We cannot allow them to hide behind the “state secrets privilege.” When the laws of this country have been violated, there must be prosecution. For now, we are simply a country with “liberty and justice” for some. It’s an outrage.
Many thanks to Jonathan Turley for consistently standing up for the rule of law and our Constitution.
Has Cheney had an assassination squad operating out of the White House since 2001?
Washington D.C. is a criminal organization masquerading as a democratic government.
Jill,
You say you do not understand the reason for Hayden’s actions, but I’m sure you actually do. We all know Mr Turley’s neighbor is absolutely devoid of any integrity and that any comment he makes in public is purely politically motivated. What he says may be completely logically inconsistent, but that makes no matter to him. What he is trying to do is ensure a mutually ensured destruction scenario for Democrats in congress. That is, if torture/surveillance/rendition/prisoner death/etc./etc. is investigated, Hayden wants the Democrats to know that they will be implicated in these acts just as Republicans will. By stating that the Congress (read: Democrats) knew about these programs all along, he is chipping away at the plausible deniability that Pelosi, et al may use as a defense if Holder actually decides to prosecute.
Thanks for your excellent posts on this matter, Prof. Turley. One question about the legality of concealment of the program by Cheney to Congress: The NYT and WP say the question of the illegality of this concealment is murky because the National Security Act of 1947 creates an exception: “to the extent consistent with due regard for the protection from unauthorized disclosure of classified information relating to sensitive intelligence sources and methods or other exceptionally sensitive matters.”
Doesn’t this loophole, especially the “other exceptionally sensitive matters” let Cheney and Addington off the hook? If not, why not? Has there ever been any litigation on this? Thanks for shedding any light you can on this.
Jill wrote:
“To not prosecute is itself a crime. Someone said charges should be brought by Monday, or if that isn’t a workable day for Holder, then by the end of today. I agree.” (end quote)
So do I, and I’m guessing that many other very busy Americans do, as well, in spite of the apparent lack of a public outcry. Many just don’t know all the facts and/or clearly understand the implications of failing to conduct a criminal investigation with subsequent prosecution/s.
I fear for the future of our country, if we fail to do what is so clearly the right thing. The Department of Justice must put politics aside and prosecute those who broke the law. If not, just open the doors of all of our prisons, for we have become a country which selectively prosecutes horrific crimes.
Buddha, thanks for the link to the Newsweek article..
It seems, according to these statements by Holder, he knows what to do….he just needs some balls!
“You have the responsibility of enforcing the nation’s laws, and you have to be seen as neutral, detached, and nonpartisan in that effort,”
“I hope that whatever decision I make would not have a negative impact on the president’s agenda,” he says. “But that can’t be a part of my decision.”
“the notion that you would take actions based on political considerations runs counter to everything in my DNA.”
*****
Jill, I’m in total agreement w/you on this!
Glenn Greenwald thinks Holder’s noise about prosecution is a scam. When I read the article this was also my conclusion:
“Sunday July 12, 2009 08:13 EDT
The Holder trial balloon: Abu Ghraib redux
(updated below)
Yesterday, I treated this new Newsweek report that Eric Holder is “leaning toward appointing a prosecutor to investigate the Bush administration’s brutal interrogation practices” as something to celebrate. But new facts about what that investigation would entail and, more importantly, would exclude — facts added by today’s Washington Post — strongly suggest it’s the opposite. At least if that article is to be believed — and it seems clear that Holder dispatched his allies to leak his plans in order to gauge reaction — the investigation will only target “rogue” CIA interrogators who exceeded the limits of what John Yoo authorized, and would not include high-level policy makers who authorized the torture tactics and implemented America’s torture regime:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/
If Holder doesn’t grow a set he needs to be shown the door right now. I think we will need to hang our hats with Congress because they are getting pissed with all of the information that is coming out that they were not only hoodwinked, but left in the dark on many intelligence issues.
Mespo hit the nail on the head about our old friend, Hayden. There is another guy who Holder needs to add to his list, if he really is starting a list!
Curious,
If Cheney and Addington relied on that language, Congress would not have been briefed on anything. Cheney’s first thought is secrecy so he would have used that language 100% of the time if he could have.
Let us not pretend that what is being done by the CIA and other more hidden intelligence groups is anything new, or has been limited to Republican Administrations. Check out the Church Committee Hearings of the late 70′s. I don’t say this as justification, nor do I think Cheney shouldn’t be prosecuted. He has, if this is true committed what is in essence treason, under the same old rubric of “National Security.”
The concept of the secrecy necessary to maintain National Security is in the main nonsense. It has always been a clever way to hide failures and missteps by those in power. What may have had some meager justification during the Cold War ended with the dissolution of the USSR and America’s emergence as the worlds most powerful nation militarily. While it is true that we need Intelligence Agency’s and the identity of Agents should be secret, though Valerie Plame gives lie to this past administration’s fidelity towards secrecy, there is nothing wrong with a clear understanding of what these Agencies are doing and indeed that is demanded in order to maintain our supposedly free society.
Too many people in congress have bought into the concept of National Security Secrecy, or are frightened at opposing it.
This is their Constitutional role and they are failing in it.
Unfortunately, the Beltway pundits and Aristocracy are full throated members of the National Secrets Chorus and so it is only the very brave political soul who will challenge these faulty premises.
Little Known Military Thug Squad Still Brutalizing Prisoners at Gitmo Under Obama
By Jeremy Scahill, AlterNet. Posted May 15, 2009.
This is a link to the aforementioned story that Jill posted to another thread. It’s a “must-read” and I may be quoting Jill.
http://www.alternet.org/rights/140022/little_known_military_thug_squad_still_brutalizing_prisoners_at_gitmo_under_obama/
An excerpt from the previous link (also provided by Jill):
The torture, according to the Spanish investigation, all occurred “under the authority of American military personnel” and was sometimes conducted in the presence of medical professionals.
More significantly, however, the investigation could for the first time place an intense focus on a notorious, but seldom discussed, thug squad deployed by the U.S. military to retaliate with excessive violence to the slightest resistance by prisoners at Guantánamo.
The force is officially known as the the Immediate Reaction Force or Emergency Reaction Force, but inside the walls of Guantánamo, it is known to the prisoners as the Extreme Repression Force. Despite President Barack Obama’s publicized pledge to close the prison camp and end torture — and analysis from human rights lawyers who call these forces’ actions illegal — IRFs remain very much active at Guantánamo.” (end of excerpt)
There is nothing that is all right about any of this. How could anyone read this story and not feel that we must move forward with a criminal investigation.
Furthermore (and I know this for a fact), groups of thugs are currently operating domestically in many, if not all, communities across this country. They appear to be state-sanctioned and they are commiting crimes without leaving tangible evidence. They are targeting, surveilling and discrediting individuals. Personal property is being vandalized and thefts are not uncommon. It’s psychological harassment, pure and simple.
Some in the law enforcement community are either complicit or turning a blind-eye to these domestic programs, it would appear.
I don’t want to misquote him, but I believe that John Dean has said that this will “be worse than Watergate” when all the facts are known. We don’t know all the facts, yet, and it already seems “worse than Watergate”.
To loosely paraphrase Mike Spindell (another thread), the challenge is to “reawaken” Americans.
We can’t let this one go. And we have to keep pushing until we know “the whole truth.”
Refer to Mike Spindell’s full comment via the following link:
http://jonathanturley.org/2009/07/11/bush-administration-accused-of-cover-up-of-massacre-of-taliban-prisoners/#comments
I’ve been contending since the inaugural that it is premature to believe that the Administration won’t go after Bush/Cheney on their illegal doings, but is working on it in a way that will seem less the political attack of a new administration upon its’ predecessor. Perhaps if one looks beyond the overt content in the attached two links, one can see the shape of prosecution to come and the political cover it affords. Part of any administration’s toolbox is of necessity political theater. I know I’m a pretty straightforward type of guy, but if I was in power, I’d be doing the same thing simply because some things can not be attacked overtly without unknowable blowback. Time will tell.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/11/holder-now-leaning-toward_n_230057.html
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/07/11/holder-v-rahm-the-torture-fight/
Thanks, as always, Jonathan Turley! Although Hélène Volat and I campaigned for the exceptionally qualified Barack Obama, we also predicted quite accurately that G.W. Bush’s successor – whoever she or he might be – would fail in the realm of openness and civil rights. We just didn’t realize how miserable that failure would be. Where we predicted this was in a book that we wrote in French and published in Paris, when we could find no publisher willing to touch it in 2006: De l’exception à la règle [From Exception to Rule]: USA PATRIOT Act.
Mike S.,
I wonder if part of the problem with prosecution has to do with Cheney not having the authority in the first place.
It would appear that the best place to avoid accountability is to hold the Office of Vice President.
I think Cheney was the puppet-master. I think that was the intention from the beginning.
A couple of links that tie in to all of this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
http://blog.aclu.org/2008/07/28/fbi-celebrates-100-years-of-absolutely-not-spying-on-americans/
(http://blog.aclu.org/2008/07/25/fbis-civil-liberties-history-palmer-raids-to-racial-profiling-guidelines/)
I remember clearly the ominous presence of the National Guard on college campuses in the early 70s. Where is the outrage that I saw then? Why are students (and others) not protesting en masse, as we once did? I’m not advocating violence, but I wish that we could move people to act, once again, in the best interest in this country.
Hmmmm… This is the first time that I’ve seen the statement “Your coment is awaiting moderation.” When is the “moderation” process triggered?
Mike S.,
Thanks for the links. I was especially interested in reading the Fire Dog Lake link. I do seem to agree with you that Holder is going to do the right thing here, but it will be done slowly. I hope I am not misreading your meaning. The Greenwald Salon link give earlier is also important because he updates it to show Scott Horton’s article suggesting Holder will not be limiting the scope of the special prosecutor’s reach. I do hope Horton is correct.
Jim Byrne,
Your question about Cheney’s authority is something I have been thinking about, but I keep coming down to the bottom line that if he didn’t have the authority, Bush would have granted it to him without hesitation so it still comes down to Bush and Cheney here.
anon, did you put in a lot of links? That will sometimes delay the posting, maybe to make sure they are all safe.
You know if Cheney was somehow taken to Gitmo, would we know? I rephrase this, would anyone care?
rafflaw said “the bottom line that if he didn’t have the authority, Bush would have granted it to him without hesitation so it still comes down to Bush and Cheney here.”
I don’t think the POTUS can delegate such authority. If I am correct, any authority exercised by Cheney would give Bush plausible deniability.
Anyone in the CIA or NSA that took orders from the Vice President would have done so as if it we on their own initiative. –You can’t place the blame on the guy that had no authority to issue the order.
I’m pretty sure that Cheney is evil and devious, but I also think he’s pretty smart. I think he learned a lot from Watergate. -How to avoid accountability being lesson #1.
JB,
I think you are correct.
To Jim Byrne:
Your theory of Cheney’s strategy for use of power without accountability is quite disturbing if true.
Do you have any federal legal precedent to illustrate your point, if I understand correctly, that a high ranking official exercising power not vested in himself cannot be found guilty of breaking laws even if said exercise were in violation of statute/constitution?
Do we assume that the entire Bush presidential nomination was simply a cover for Cheney from the start, culminating in Cheney, as head of the VP search “committee” picking himself for Bush’s running mate?
JB and AY,
First of all, I think I remember some posts a long while back that stated that Bush had provided Cheney with the ability to declassify intelligence on his own.(via executive order, if I remember correctly) If he can declassify information, the order may have provided him additional authority. Secondly, even if Bush is the one that ok’d a request by Cheney, Bush is still violating the law and defying Congress. Finally, if the CIA has to answer to the Executive Branch, doesn’t the VP have some authority, subject to Bush’s final say to order them to take actions? I will try to find the authority that Bush granted to Cheney and provide it here, if and when I find it. It is tough getting old!
JB and AY,
Here is a link to the Executive Order that was and amendment to a previous Exec Order that included the VP in the Declassifying process. http://www.fas.org/sgp/bush/eoamend.html
I guess I wrote that last posting too quickly for my brain. The word “and” in the first line should read “an”. Lo Siento!
From the HP article:
“Holder is considering whether to appoint a prosecutor and will make a final decision within the next few weeks, a Justice Department official told The Associated Press. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on a pending matter.”
To me, all these articles point to the same thing–they are propaganda. I believe this because the law is not optional, there is nothing for Holder to consider–he must prosecute and should have done so immediately upon confirmation as AG. We’ve seen this before. When things heated up for a while back, all the presidents’ men came out hinting that he’d prosecute, It’s a common tactic. This is just a way to keep people’s hopes up while the administration continues to torture and block multiple investigations into both war and financial crimes. It’s a diversion after the poor reception Obama got for saying he’d like to imprison the innocent and for the information coming out on the CIA.
From emptywheel,
“Next, the story reveals that the invocation of State Secrets in the Jeppesen suit was done without Obama’s involvement–presumably by dead-enders.”
I’m suprised to here this idea bandied about again as it has already been disproven. The court has asked and the Obama administration has certified that they are making the claims they are making. Obama’s DOJ told this directly to the court. They have made affirmative statements in this case. It’s not dead enders.
Bush fired US attys. Are we to believe neither Obama nor Holder is able to fire people who work for them when Bush did it. Were they lying to the court on the several occasions they certified these claims as their own?
Holder is simply and miserably Obama’s Coward of Obstruction. We need mass arrests by the military in Washington D.C. Persecuting Obama and Holder would start us in the right direction.
rafflaw,
Thanks for the link to the executive order. I’ll need to do a little more research in order to determine if the president can delegate classification authority to the VP.
The Office of VP is not well defined. There has been much debate as to whether the VP is part of the Executive, or part of the Senate. -Some say both and some say neither. -Since the Constitution makes him President of the Senate, I would consider him part of the Senate. As such, I would imagine that the Separation of Powers Doctrine would prevent him from having executive authority (even delegated executive authority).
What isn’t in doubt is that Cheney has admitted to ordering waterboarding. As a citizen of the US, whether he received the O.K. from the president, was acting inside or outside his official duties, he committed a war crime as defined by law. High office or lack of high office is not a protection against Cheney, as US citizen, being responsible for obeying US law. As a citizen, he is liable to prosecution.
Could Dick Cheney have set up assassinations in Lebanon in 2004 and 2005?
“What isn’t in doubt is that Cheney has admitted to ordering waterboarding.”
Not exactly true, but for the sake of argument…let’s say he did.
“As a citizen of the US, whether he received the O.K. from the president, was acting inside or outside his official duties, he committed a war crime as defined by law.”
A citizen has no authority to order anything. If someone in the U.S. Military, or the CIA, or NSA, followed an order of a U.S. Citizen, they may have well have done so on their own initiative.
If I called a friend at GITMO, and ordered him to torture a detainee…and he did so; they would prosecute him..not me.
I know it’s frustrating, but…if I’m correct, this was all planned in advance in order to avoid prosecution. -Could Cheney have planned such. -I think so.
Jim,
I am glad you saw the link, but the Vice President is part of the Excutive Branch and not the Senate. He does have Senatorial duties, but he is a member of the Executive Branch. Even Cheney has argued that he is part of the Executive Branch, but he changed his tune to try to protect his backside. Here is a link to a CREW article which discussed a court ordering Cheney to preserve records and stating that he is part of the Executive Branch. http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/34213
Jill,
I agree that Cheney is still able to be prosecuted for any crimes that he has committed. And you are right that he has admitted to ordering waterboarding on more than one media appearance.
Source for saying..not exactly.
I asked before but got no response. Prof. Turley can you put up a video section of all your interviews. I think that this would be great for your followers and would cut down on search times. Thanks for the post Mr. Byrne
It’s all smoke and mirrors, Look at what happen the last time this came up in the court of public opinion. Look for Cheney to hit the air waves this week and call for all CIA documents to be released, then Obama saying he wants to look forward and not back.
Bdaman,
I don’t know if Prof. Turley would have control of those interviews. I would think that MSNBC and any other media outlet would have control of the interview video.
You know, I almost never go “off topic,” but I cannot contain myself here. Take a look at the smug, Dr. David Gratzer, psychologist and putative expert on the Canadian healthcare system, from the conservative Manhattan Institute (apparently a wholly owned subsidiary of the health care industry.) It’s unique only for the smarmy, over-the-top arrogance of a congressional witness who gets schooled in the art of cross-examination by Dennis Kucinich. It would be on my required watching list for a trial practice class on how to effectively and completely handle a complete ass, and he did it in two minutes:
rafflaw,
I looked over the court order (CREW v Cheney). It doesn’t appear to answer the question of the OVP being one of the Executive or Legislative. In addition, it was not presented as a judicial question, and would therefore, be considered dicta.
I think Cheney’s a slippery snake. Think of an evil genius, and take it one step further. -I think he planned this for the last 30+ years.
The duties of the VP are so ill defined…what better place for an evil genius to operate. -The VP does not take his orders from the President any more than you or I do.
“Vice Presidents have only a few statutory duties. Since 1949 they have served on the National Security Council, and they are on the Board of Regents of the Smithson-ian Institution (which operates various museums in the capital). They name five cadets to the U.S. Military Academy, U.S. Naval Academy, and Air Force Academy. They appoint senators to various independent commissions, including the Migratory Bird Conservation Commission, the Harry S. Truman Scholarship Foundation, and the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations.
Vice Presidents are usually assigned by the President to chair various commissions. They generally chair the Space Council; other commissions deal with nondiscriminatory practices in government contracts and efforts at deregulating the economy. They usually serve as the White House liaison with the National Governors Association and the U.S. Conference of Mayors. The Vice President participates in cabinet meetings, a custom established by Warren Harding. Since Eisenhower’s time, Vice Presidents have presided over cabinet meetings in the absence of the President; Richard Nixon chaired 20 such meetings during Elsenhower’s illnesses and trips.
Until the 1960s, Vice Presidents had their main offices on Capitol Hill near the Senate chamber. President John F. Kennedy asked Lyndon Johnson to take a suite of offices in the Old Executive Office Building, and today the Office of the Vice President is located on the second floor of that building. He has smaller offices in the Capitol and in the West Wing of the White House.
In 1970 the federal budget allocated funds for the first time to the Office of the Vice President under the line item “Special Assistance to the President.”
http://www.answers.com/topic/vice-president-u-s
I do not know if this is a spoof but it could be true.
Cheney Admits He’s Antichrist
says He and his father can’t hold a
black candle to the bush family
http://www.totalthinker.com/krank/archives/033103/antichrist.html
Thank-you Mespo; yes Dennis rocks!
They all do it. Doesn’t matter Repub=Dems=Repubs. Replace them all, They put thier pants on the same way.
Carol Browner, former Clinton administration EPA head and current Obama White House climate czar, instructed auto industry execs “to put nothing in writing, ever” regarding secret negotiations she orchestrated regarding a deal to increase federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards.
Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-WI, is demanding a congressional investigation of Browner’s conduct in the CAFE talks, saying in a letter to Rep. Henry Waxman, D-CA, that Browner “intended to leave little or no documentation of the deliberations that lead to stringent new CAFE standards.”
“The Department of Justice will follow the facts and the law with respect to any matter,” said Matthew Miller, a department spokesman. “We have made no decisions on investigations or prosecutions, including whether to appoint a prosecutor to conduct further inquiry.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124736381913627661.html
will follow the facts and the law
“We have made no decisions on investigations
However the facts and the law are clear. What or who is the problem?
Obama,Obama,Obama
Speaking of the government that is for the people by the people. I hate to be off topic here, but our family just went thru and has been confirmed the swine flu. Read and watch how our government has acted in the past. Original 1976 60 minutes interview. SHOCKING
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6636
The issue seems to me to be: “Is the Law off the table?”
http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2009/07/is-law-off-table.html
Jim Byrne,
How this plays out prosecution wise is a topic for legal scholars in the sense of whether Cheney had the power? Whether it was delegated to him? Whether it could legally be delegated to him? Whether he could be held accountable for his actions?
Finally, was this his plan from the first. Let me answer with my opinions with the caveat that I’m not a legal expert.
Back on the actual day of 9/11, while Bush was flying around the country in Air Force 1, it was clearly reported that Cheney was in command of the countermeasures and defensive measures being taken. This was in press releases issued by the Administration, with the caveat that President Bush “was being informed.” This to me was telling as to how this administration was set up. Communication was such that Bush, even flying around in his plane, could clearly have commanded the whole response via teleconference calls and yet he delegated that task to Cheney. A “real” President would have been in command and GW Bush wasn’t and seemed to want it that way. So we know that in fact it was Cheney, protege of Rumsfeld running that administration, with GW Bush as the willing figurehead.
Secondly, you surmise that this was plotted by Cheney (Rumsfeld?)after the Watergate experience was I think on target. The GW Bush administration obviously took the Watergate experience and tried to avoid the missteps that led to Nixon’s resignation. The fact to that Cheney, Rumsfeld, et.
al were the signatories and movers behind PNAC, which in 1998 actually published its’ plan to make the US into a global empire lends credence. As does the fact that Cheney having led the GW Bush VP search, chose himself.
Finally, let’s look at my speculation as to the GW Bush psychology. GW may have had his father’s first name, but due to his erratic behavior and distinct lack of sobriety (bot as a person and as a scholar)was not first in his Father’s affections. GW resented GHW and felt him a failure for not only being a one termer, but for not finishing the job with Saddam. GW a failure in life, who had failed despite every advantage, was also a known bully as boy and man. As a boy he killed small animals and on the athletic field was a dirty player. That type of man is drawn to the type of men who have a facade of being tough and macho. Cheney and Rumsfeld are just those kind of men and both were sly enough to play upon GW’s fragile ego and compensatory large vanity.
Cheney/Rumsfeld ran the GW Bush Presidency and had a perfect subject for manipulation. Are they legally culpable for the crimes that were committed by that administration, I would say yes. My caveat is though, with a media controlled by CPA’s
and crazily conservative (R. Murdoch anyone?)people, even if these guys were convicted, they would serve no jail time and be “rehabilitated” within their lifetimes. What makes my blood boil is not so much the need for justice to be done (only because for people of that class it seldom is), but the wasted lives of those American soldiers killed and maimed by their arrogance and stupidity. Also the perhaps one million dead civilians of two country’s murdered because of greed and the imperialist aspirations of fools who believe they are smart. As General Smedley-Butler said: “War is a racket.”
testing network issue
“Carol Browner, former Clinton administration EPA head and current Obama White House climate czar, instructed auto industry execs “to put nothing in writing, ever” regarding secret negotiations she orchestrated regarding a deal to increase federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards.”
Bdaman,
What is the source of this quote.
Mespo,
Off topic as it was thanks for the link to that video. What I found so interesting watching it was the “smug disdain” on Dr. Gratzer’s face, since he was unable to dissemble the facts to fit his own political perspective. This is not just a private health flack, he is a true believer. Having had much more experience with physicians than the average person, many are chafing under the rule of the private health insurance companies, but the AMA is supported by them. This is the main reason that AMA membership has been dropping in recent years.
AARP is also losing membership because they too have become financially linked to the insurance carriers they provide.
Mike S pick and choose: http://www.google.com/search?q=Carol+Browner%2C+former+Clinton+administration+EPA+head+and+current+Obama+White+House+climate+czar%2C+instructed+auto+industry+execs+%E2%80%9Cto+put+nothing+in+writing%2C+ever%E2%80%9D&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-US&ie=utf8&oe=utf8
Anyone have a chance to review this yet http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6636 Talk about government keeping secrets. Watch this 60 minute interview, come this fall you’ll be glad you did.
Read this: http://www.newsmax.com/health/vaccine_swine_flu/2009/07/07/232717.html
Mike, google it; it is all over the right wing web. The same sentence is repeated over and over. One source said originated with the New York Times.
But the Times‘s originally attributed the quote to a California official, Mary Nichols:
http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/05/20/20greenwire-vow-of-silence-key-to-white-house-calif-fuel-e-12208.html?scp=1&sq=browner%20White%20House%20%20put%20nothing%20writing&st=cse
“We put nothing in writing, ever,” [Mary] Nichols [California official] said. “That was one of the ways we made sure that everyone’s ability to talk freely was protected.”
This is how the DC Examiner reported it:
QUOTE Carol Browner, former Clinton administration EPA head and current Obama White House climate czar, instructed auto industry execs “to put nothing in writing, ever” regarding secret negotiations she orchestrated regarding a deal to increase federal Corporate Average Fuel
Browner’s informal directive was previously reported by The New York Times. UNQUOTE
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Put-nothing-in-writing-Browner-told-auto-execs-on-secret-White-House-CAFE-talks-50260677.html
Examiner should take out a subscription to the Times for its “reporters.”
This is how myths are perpetuated in the internet age.
Vince Treacy did you think it was gonna show up on the liberal websites.
You should look at who Mary Nichols is and read her articles. She may or not have an axe to grind but I doubt it seeing how she is a strong proponet for clean air.
http://www.forbes.com/2008/03/15/solutions-green-car-california-oped-cx_mdn_0319nichols.html
“Vince Treacy did you think it was gonna show up on the liberal websites.”
bdaman,
Yes it would. Do you read Glenn Greenwald, Hullabaloo, Eschaton, Kos, Five Thirty Eight, Alternet, Firedoglake, TPM or many of the others. They wouldn’t hesitate to print it, nor would they hesitate to criticize this Administration.
Did it show up, out of the list I visit the kos and firedoglake. GG I on occasion will read his stuff. I’ll add the rest to my favorites. Thanks
If it did Mike you wouldn’t of asked me to name the source. Vince seems to search in the same manner I do. In the text of a statement or a post be it e-mail or an article someone is typically quoted as saying something. Alot of times you can put whole paragraphs in a search engine to get the hit. Then look at the bottom line to see the source. If it’s a site you trust go and read.
Prof. Turley speaking of firedoglake he has his own youtube channel. This is the answer to my video section for all your interviews. http://www.youtube.com/user/firedoglake
bdaman,
Just go to youtube and search for “turley”. I think you be able to find what you desire.
Mike Spindell,
I stepped out a for few minutes and look what happened.
Let me spell out the one big problem with badaman posting that Browner said to never put it in writing. It turns out that she did not say it. Mary Nichols said it. The posting was wrong. It has been corrected.
“Vince Treacy did you think it was gonna show up on the liberal websites.” I do not know what the question means. All I said was that it was on the rightwing sites. Maybe the liberal sites did not print it because they checked out the New York Times source and found that it was bogus.
bdaaman has said just about everything about this, except to say that it does not look like Browner said that.
bdaman,
That was my point. All I saw was an allegation by John Sensenbrunner, who I do not equate with either truth or good government. The quote might be true but the source is highly doubtful. I’m not saying this in defense of Browner, but because
the way things are these days arguments flourish over rumors that have no basis.
Vince,
It seems we were writing at the same time. This is the problem with our new information age, allegations become matters for debate, whether they are real or not. Your battle on the “birther” front clearly illustrated it. While I’ve no doubt that all parties in the political spectrum at times resort to disinformation, the Republican Party in recent years has raised the art form to mastery.
Vince Treacy:
“This is how myths are perpetuated in the internet age.”
The left does a lot of that, a small quote by some irelevant profeesor or government official gets picked up and all the newspapers quote it and then the major networks and pretty soon everyone believes it and takes it as gospel.
I guess the right is taking a page from the lefts playbook.
Mike, don’t expect Sensenbrenner to correct his letter.
Don’t expect bdaman to correct the quotation.
Keep up the good work.
As an aside, remember that George Smiley used Moscow Rules for his spies. NBA players used Jordan Rules to play the Bulls. At this site, we use Turley Rules.
And Turley geta his quotations right:
QUOTE Palin has long had trouble with quotations, particularly with regard to the Framers. Her departure speech is no exception. The most notable line was a quote attributed to Gen. Douglas MacArthur: “We are not retreating. We are advancing in another direction.” For those of us who are military history nuts, the line is well-known and not the words of MacArthur. UNQUOTE
http://jonathanturley.org/2009/07/03/sarah-palin-resigns-as-alaskan-governor-effective-july-26th/
IS, did I say this is how myths are perpetuated BY THE RIGHT in the internet age?
Nope.
I said “This is how myths are perpetuated in the internet age.”
I did note that this particular myth was on all the right wing sites.
But I made no generalizations about left OR right.
So please do not use the type of argument that criticizes something I did not say.
That is called attacking a straw man.
Straw person.
“I guess the right is taking a page from the lefts playbook.”
IS,
Please get your facts right. The man who made this a trademark was the Republican operative Lee Atwater in the 80′s, who admitted regretting it before his early death. Karl Rove was a Lee Atwater disciple. You’re not a bad guy IS for all your political baggage, but discussion would be so much easier if you concentrated more on real facts, rather than home team speculation. In truth it also can be traced back to Nixon and much infor came out during the time of Watergate. Do some Democrats lie? Yes they do. However, in Republican circles the lie and rumor have become art forms, when you figure they have to convince a majority of people to vote against their own best interests and vote for them. You know: Family Values, Fiscal Conservatism, Low Taxes for the Rich and high Taxes for everyone else and most importantly of all Corporate Welfare over Public Welfare. With all the shilling you do for them I hope at least you’re wealthy enough to reap the benefit of their policies.
Mike S.,
Unfortunately, the art of deception is well-known on both sides of the political spectrum. I could present names and the lies they have told -if needed, but I think we have all learned that politicians lie. One side is no less guilty of lying than the other.
We have a tendency to remember the lies of our opponents, but forget the lies told by those we support. (Selective memory?)
Vince Treacy lets examine what you say:
Let me spell out the one big problem with badaman posting that Browner said to never put it in writing. It turns out that she did not say it. Mary Nichols said it. The posting was wrong. It has been corrected.
bdaaman has said just about everything about this, except to say that it does not look like Browner said that.
Where and who made the correction. First you say it was corrected then you say it doesn’t look like she said it. Either she did or she didn’t
Miks S.,
I was not around for Boss aka Tweed William M. Tweed who was a
Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from New York’s 5th district. He was an American politician most famous for his leadership of Tammany Hall, the Democratic Party political machine that played a major role in the politics of 19th century New York.
In 1858, Tweed became the “Grand Sachem” of Tammany Hall. Maybe mespo should take heed.
Tweed was convicted for stealing between $40 million and $200 million from New York City taxpayers through political corruption. He died in the Ludlow Street Jail.
Ah yes Democrat.
Vince when you said to Mike google it it’s all over the right wing web, you in fact have brought right and left into the debate. Myths are nothing new. Some of the greatest myths/hoax are
Pilt Down man (greatest ever)
Gay Gene
Columbus proved the Earth was round
Bell invented the Telephone
Megellan was first to circle the world
bda asks “Where and who made the correction. First you say it was corrected then you say it doesn’t look like she said it. Either she did or she didn’t.”
Please re-read. I said that she did not say it. I made the correction. In that order.
bda should leave this alone: when in a hole, stop digging.
Nichols said Browner quietly orchestrated private discussions from the White House with auto industry officials. Browner started the talks soon after becoming Obama’s special assistant on energy and climate, a position that gives her wide-ranging authority to coordinate top officials at the Council on Environmental Quality, U.S. EPA, and the departments of Energy and Transportation.
bdaman wrote “Nichols said Browner quietly orchestrated private discussions from the White House with auto industry officials. Browner started the talks soon after becoming Obama’s special assistant on energy and climate, a position that gives her wide-ranging authority to coordinate top officials at the Council on Environmental Quality, U.S. EPA, and the departments of Energy and Transportation.”
Fact:
Bd did not write that himself or herself, even though it is posted under the name bdaman without any quotation, attribution or link. It was copied verbatim from an article by reporterColin Sujllivan in the New York Times, published: May 20, 2009:
“Nichols said Browner quietly orchestrated private discussions from the White House with auto industry officials. Browner started the talks soon after becoming Obama’s special assistant on energy and climate, a position that gives her wide-ranging authority to coordinate top officials at the Council on Environmental Quality, U.S. EPA, and the departments of Energy and Transportation.”
http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/05/20/20greenwire-vow-of-silence-key-to-white-house-calif-fuel-e-12208.html
Compare them for yourself.
I want to post a correction to one of my own posts. I wrote “don’t expect Sensenbrenner to correct his letter.”
Sensenbrenner, however, did NOT repeat the misstatement that Browner herself had said to put nothing in writing, ever.
His release and letter at his House site make this clear:
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/gw31_republican/06_11_09prB.html
I need to make an erection for one of my post above
The Department of Justice will follow the facts and the law with respect to any matter,” said Matthew Miller, a department spokesman. “We have made no decisions on investigations or prosecutions, including whether to appoint a prosecutor to conduct further inquiry.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124736381913627661.html
The Wall Street Journal Said, unquote
Vince is this you: http://www.client.teagasc.ie/areaunits/meathlouthdublin/staff/vincent_treacy.asp
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/07/13/doctors-demand-inquest-into-death-of-kelly/
Lotta’ suicides and plane crashes over the last 8 years here and abroad. I’d like to know more about the death squad run out of the VP’s office.
Mike and Vince:
the point I was trying to make is what Jim Byrne said “We have a tendency to remember the lies of our opponents, but forget the lies told by those we support. (Selective memory?)”
I will not deny the right is guilty of lying. It is also interesting that what I think about the left you think about the right. We cant both be wrong can we? Or is it that both right and left politicians are full of bravo sierra? Or is our government full of bravo sierra and people on both sides of aisle are just pawns in Washington’s bi-partisan attempt to ruin our lives and our country?
I hope in 2010 we throw both parties out and vote for people whom are of and for the people.
Indentured Servant Quote, I hope in 2010 we throw both parties out and vote for people whom are of and for the people.
Unquote
I agree
How my doin Vince? that better?
Mike speaking of Kos have you heard about this one yet.
A Vancouver reporter accused Free Republic of allowing racist comments this weekend.
But, oddly enough, this same Vancouver Sun reporter, Chris Parry, has a very controversial background. He has advocated on Daily Kos for liberals to post hate speech on conservative blogs and blame it on conservatives.
What a strange coincidence?
Gawker reported:
But the real story here is that this same reporter and Daily Kos contributer has advocated on his Daily Kos blog any number of egregious offenses, among them: posting hate speech on sites like Free Republic and blaming it on conservatives.
It gets worse, though. Chris Parry, it appears, has advocated on his Daily Kos blog any number of egregious offenses, among them: posting hate speech on sites like Free Republic and blaming it on conservatives. Parry posted under the name “hollywoodoz” on Daily Kos, where his signature was “Fool me once, I’ll punch you in the f*cking head.” Parry outed himself as hollywoodoz here, where he discloses the company he helped start. In essence: Parry, the journalist, found his story right where he’d been circling it for a very long time, and reported it as news. Sigh.
Bottom line: Parry’s noble intentions are paving him a road to hell…
Hey Vince Looks like Judge Carter gave Taitz a yellow caution light yesterday and will proceed with caution. No date set but this paticular case will proceed. With Judge Carter being a marine he is Quoted as saying, ” he recognizes the importance of having a constitutionally qualified president” Unquote. This after two more soldiers set to deploy have filed suit, one in Georgia and one in Miami. The one in Georgia is scheduled for the 17th and I believe he is a Officer(major).
And Judge Carter is quoted as saying, “that if Obama isn’t Constitutionally qualified he needs to leave the White House.”
Moving can be such a hassle but since Obama probably moved in with matching plastic garbage bags maybe won’t be so bad. I think Many Marines will help him. Oh, count the silverware … if any left from Bush years.
BVM I would not put any stock in that quote until the official trancripts are released. I read that and I highly doubt he said that. I know where you stand on this issue and I know you take a beating here like I do but I don’t think he said it. I think thats Orly saying what she thought she heard.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/opponents-of-barack-obamas-presidency-claim-small-court-victory.html
Taitz said, referring to the judge. “He stated, the country needs to know if Mr. Obama is legitimate, if he can legitimately stay in the White House.”
Thats Taitz making stuff up. As I said before I appreciate what she is doing but she has a tendency to say stuff that wasn’t said.
Vince you are very good at what you do and I was wondering if by chance, if you have the time could you analyze this for me. It’s not the first time I’ve read something along these lines but you do an excellent job of debunking anyone elses opposing view.
http://216.221.102.26/blogger/post/Can-you-hear-me-now.aspx
Everyone, just about everything in the above posts by bda and bvm is wrong. Rather than reinvent the wheel, I commend to everyone Dr. Conspiracy’s description of the proceeding, and the comments of informed posters, at the thread for “Orly filed something,” July 13, 2009, at:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/07/orly-filed-something/
In brief, lawyer Orly Taitz had yet to serve the defendant in the case, months after filing it. The judge simply declined to dismiss for failure to serve, and allowed Orly to serve the Assistant U.S. Attorney, who was in the courtroom. The Government now has the usual 60 days to file its answer, Rule 12 Motion to Dismiss, or Motion for Summary Judgment. If the judge had entered a default, she would just have refiled, delaying things even more. Now the case is ripe for dismissal and appeal.
The lawyers as this site are all saying, What the flub, she has not even served the defendant after all these months? Um, Orly went to an unaccredited law school, and she could only take the bar exam in California, not in any other state. If this is intriguing, go to Dr. Conspiracy. It only gets better. You will be ROTLFLYAO.
Also, here is a link to Dr. Conspiracy’s Comment Page for “Orly filed something”:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/07/orly-filed-something/comment-page-1/#comment-13601
Always Pointing back to Dr. Conspiracy. I would much rather read the L.A. Times article.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/opponents-of-barack-obamas-presidency-claim-small-court-victory.html
Qoute: That’s not quite the way Asst. U.S. Atty. David DeJute heard the judge’s comments. Thom Mrozek, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, said that “the judge did make a bunch of comments about having the matter correctly and thoroughly aired, once and if they got to the merits of the actual lawsuit, which was not the subject of today’s discussion.”
UnQoute
Is this how I’m suppose to do it Vince
The Government now has the usual 60 days to file its answer.
She has to correct her paper work and refile then they have sixty days but as we’ve seen in Appuzzo’s case the government has taken 4 months to respond.
Quote At a previous hearing, Carter had ruled that Taitz had not properly served the case on Obama. In Monday’s hearing, both Taitz and DeJute tried to prematurely argue the merits of the case. Unquote
It doesn’t say she never served him, it says in a PREVIOUS HEARING had not PROPERLY served the case on Obama.
She has all of her certified mail reciepts and documented that she tried to serve him on Jan 20th before he was given the oath. In which she claims he was served at the DOJ.
I can’t believe there are people who still take Orly Taitz seriously. She is a complete fruitcake. Based upon the filings I have read, she is also incompetent. The court is simply indulging her due to her inexperience; it can’t rule unless there is valid service. The case will go nowhere and birthers will conclude that the conspiracy has now reached the lowest branches of the judiciary.
She never served him, at the White House or at the Department of Justioe. She was ignorant of the requirement for serving Obama. Instructed by the court, she has now served him through the U.S. Attorney, and the case can proceed.
To “not properly serve” a party is the same thing as to not serve a party.
Mike Appleton, you are absolutely right.
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/story/776335.html
What did the U.S. Attorney say,
Quote: That’s not quite the way Asst. U.S. Atty. David DeJute heard the judge’s comments. Thom Mrozek, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, said that “the judge did make a bunch of comments about having the matter correctly and thoroughly aired, once and if they got to the merits of the actual lawsuit, which was not the subject of today’s discussion.” Unquote
So we know the Judge said that, apparently the Judge also said IF they got to the merits of the actual lawsuit. As I told BVM I would like to see the official transcripts to the hearing before anymore quotes are quoted.
Correction spokesman for the U.S. Attorney
So it appears that Atty Dejute heard the Judges comments, relayed them to Thom Mrozek, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office and he commented on the hearing on how it was given to him by Dejute.
Vince other than Dr. Conspiracy where can I verify this statemnet
She never served him, at the White House or at the Department of Justioe. She was ignorant of the requirement for serving Obama. Instructed by the court, she has now served him through the U.S. Attorney, and the case can proceed.
The link above is to an article in Ledger Enquirer about a Reserve Major who is refusing deployment and relying on the lawsuit by Orly Taitz. Leo Donofrio has a take on this:
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/02/25/military-potus-eligibility-madness/
QUOTE A few weeks ago, I suggested hypothetically that active military might have standing to bring a class action to question Obama’s POTUS eligibility. After reviewing various sections of the Uniform Code of Military Justice pointed out to me by various readers, I came to the conclusion that such a law suit would probably not only fail, but would also subject soldiers to potential court martial.
I decided to have nothing to do with any such law suit involving military plaintiffs. Their burden is already so large. This is our burden.
Then, after seeing a consent form issued by Orly Taitz within which active military were being asked to state that they might disobey orders from President Obama, I realized that these men were truly being put in serious jeopardy. I responded with a blog which suggested that any soldiers who had a problem with Obama’s eligibility should consult a JAG lawyer or their personal attorney rather than going to the internet for advice.UNQUOTE
Leo goes on to describe his opposition to the online recruitment of military personnel.
Good for Leo.
I like how in your view Donofrio was wrong wrong wrong but now all of a sudden in your view he’s right.
These service men are probably seen as troublemakers. This nation was built by troublemakers. If we had kept on following people above or beyond the law we wouldn’t have Obama anyway, we’d have stuck with George III and have Queen Elizabeth II today.
Vince,
Regarding bdaman and bvm: In the words of one of the 20th Century’s greatest philosophers, Yogi Berra:”It’s deja vue all over again.” One of the lasting tendencies of ignorance is its’
persistence. You’ve done a spectacular job thus far, but in my opinion these clowns aren’t worth your great talents and noble efforts.
Vince,
Quoting Leo “I suggested hypothetically that active military might have standing to bring a class action to question Obama’s POTUS eligibility.”
I concur with Leo’s decision to not recruit active duty military personnel. –Active duty personnel take their orders from their direct superior. While it would be reasonable to question the fitness of your direct superior, it would be up to that superior officer to question the fitness of his or her superior.
Major Cook, though still doing so at his own peril, is in a unique position. As a reservist, he can only be activated by order of the POTUS. This should give him standing to challenge the fitness of the President directly.
bdaman, I don’t think you quite get the procedure here. Valid service is a condition of the court’s acquisition of jurisdiction to rule in an action. Service of process is not difficult if one follows the statutes. The court did Taitz a favor so that it can get on with it. A motion to dismiss will be filed, at which point the court will undoubtedly enter a final order of dismissal. Ms. Taitz may then proceed with an appeal if she chooses to. That will be a useless effort, but she will undoubtedly proceed anyway. If this woman was actually being paid by a client to pursue this, she would be risking a malpractice action.
Donofrio was wrong before because he didn’t have standing. He is right now because he recognizes that Taitz is placing people at risk in order to pursue her own nutty agenda.
Yes Vince I honestly agree with Mike you have done a great job as I pointed out in one of my earlier post, it was not a joke. However I am entitled like so many on both sides of the issue to my opinion. The fact is we have no real records on Prof. Obama who taught constitutional law for ten years. I have yet to read an article from students at the law school and student is plural in case you were to direct me to one person. When Gibbs told Helen Thomas she was incorect in thinking he taught constitutional law it created more doubt on that issue. I’d like to see some cases or clients he represented but we have no stories about them. The list goes on and on. This matter won’t ever be settled until the day there is a trial and an outcome to that trial. During that trial I’m sure the COLB will be able to be introduced as evidence where it can be properly examined instead of pointed out on the internet. You your self in earlier post want to talk about myths in the day of the internet, but when someone else wants to point to a possible myth you want to dismiss it because it’s not how you view it. See Flat earther, Piltdown Man Gay Gene as great myths that were perpetrated and the fact that myths can be created. You and many others are satisfied that your right and myself and others would like to see more proof. So you can point to Dr. Conspiracy over and over again and I can point to the moon, the issue will stay divided until a court of law settles it.
Don’t be faked out by Appleton. He isn’t the sharpest tool in the shed. I read his earlier blogs and he was worked over by a zealous catholic who was posting on the church. The guy was solid and was spot on. Appleton is pretty weak and got punked hard…..
It is fun to watch him droning on, Applecrisp that is….
Mike Appleton has posted with Turley from the very first month, under his own name, and is a practicing lawyer who has linked to his law practice, the Appleton Law Firm, in Florida.
He speaks with authority.
Sure he does Vince, are you his press man or his girlfriend…
Patriot,
If you want to refute something stated by Mike Appleton, you are welcome to do so. However, attacking the man, and not his opinion, is uncalled for.
Please add something of value, or go away.
JT:
What do you have to say on the merits of the Obama eligibility cases? Have you spoken on the merits with Countdown or Rachel Maddow?
Jim, pull your head out of the toilet. I can post what I plaese, comprende?
“The fact is we have no real records on Prof. Obama who taught constitutional law for ten years. I have yet to read an article from students at the law school and student is plural in case you were to direct me to one person.” -daman
What is this stuff?
Everyone, read about his teaching in the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/us/politics/30law.html
“Jim, pull your head out of the toilet. I can post what I plaese, comprende?”
patriot,
You certainly can post what you please and I encourage you to do so because all you’re doing is calling attention to the fact
that you have nothing to say. I’ve always believed in the individuals right to make a fool of oneself. You show consummate skill in that department.
Patriot thanks for the defense but I’m a big boy now. If you want to get in the discussion get in, if not but out.
Vince I just re read my post and let me clarify, that no student from Columbia has been mentioned in an interview and that even though he was the president of Harvard Law Review he never published any work. Why would his press secretary correct Helen Thomas and tell her she was wrong when asking that she thought he taught constitutional law. I know you can’t answer for Gibbs, but if anybody knows, Gibbs should. Whats worse is nobody followed up his statement. He did not correct his statement to the best of my knowledge and it is noted on the daily press briefing on the whitehous.gov website. I’m sure they review it and could issue a correction.
The press suck at follow up. Thats like Jake Trapper asked for copies of the waivers that the president had to issue because of his appointments of lobbiest and to this date they refuse to release them. Sen. Charles Grassley is demanding they release them but they have refused. Everything just goes against the openness and transparency slogan.
As far as Cheneys illegal program goes it was reported in some papers including the Washington Post sometime directly after 9/11 and was never implemented. This is a political effort to make Nancy Pelosi credible in light of her recent protestations about never having been briefed.
I cannot wait for 2010 and freedom. Hopefully Obama and his crew will not have had enough time to add to the damage the idiot Bush has done to America. A 1/2 punch of stupidity and malfesence from the right and left.
Mespo72^3:
I think Dennis is manipulating the statistics somewhat, Canadians who have some money typically buy an additional premium for private insurance. So some of the statistics that the congressman is quoting are probably not accurate.
The main point of National Healthcare is that it will be rationed and that the elderly and disabled will have to be given less resources so that younger and healthy people are taken care of. You cannot as a country provide healthcare for everyone, it is not a constitutional guarantee. There has got to be a private sector solution to this problem.
I do not owe my neighbor healthcare, my time is my own and I have a right to the sweat of my brow. I am not my neighbors slave, producing for his sake. This country was not founded on equality of outcome but on equality of opportunity. My neighbors need for healthcare is not my responsibility, I owe him nothing and he owes me nothing.
IS:
“You cannot as a country provide healthcare for everyone, it is not a constitutional guarantee. There has got to be a private sector solution to this problem.’
***************
Unfortunately for your argument, every other industrialized nation takes the opposite view and provides healthcare to its citizens. BTW the proposal calls only for a public option not single payer which makes more sense. i wonder if you feel the same way about Medicare which is universal care for the elderly. More relevant, I wonder how you will feel about “socialized” medicine when you are 65??
—-
“I am not my neighbors slave, producing for his sake. This country was not founded on equality of outcome but on equality of opportunity. My neighbors need for healthcare is not my responsibility, I owe him nothing and he owes me nothing.”
**************
I think the actual quote is “I am not my brother’s keeper,” but why quibble, since we all know how that little saga worked out. The point is merely that by forcing the uninsured to use emergency departments at hospitals for free, who in turn pass the cost on to you, you are already paying for your uninsured neighbor and at premium rates. I would think you’d want a reduction or do you favor letting the uninsured “eat cake,” as they die in the streets due to lack of care?
mespo727272 every other industrialized nation takes the opposite view and provides healthcare to its citizens.
And what is the quality of those systems and just cause the Johnsons have it why do I. Secondly if it’s going to be such a great system why is congress, the senate and the president exempt from participation.
you are already paying for your uninsured neighbor and at premium rates
No, we are paying for illegals and poor minorities at a premium rate.
Bdaman,
If you are interested in where the US stands in health care in the world, here is a link to a WHO ranking that has us at 37th best health care system. You might be surprised who is in front of the US. http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html. The US needs health care for everyone, not just the ones who can afford it.
After Drudge linked to it the last couple of days and Fox News doing an on air segment with Brett Bair, the military has canceled reservist Major Cooks deployment orders without comment. No reason has been given to Major Cook however his case was set for Friday. Very interesting
I wonder if members of the military who are now given deployment orders will start forming a single file in front of Taitz. Dangerous
Rafflaw, Thanks for the link but I don’t trust anything the WHO or the IPCC says. Nothing. If you haven’t looked at this you’ll understand why.
http://loveforlife.com.au/node/6636 Talk about government keeping secrets. Watch this 60 minute interview, come this fall you’ll be glad you did.
Read this: http://www.newsmax.com/health/vaccine_swine_flu/2009/07/07/232717.html
IPCC says we are gonna burn to death and drown. This is just one story of thousands. Anybody that lives in the Northeast will tell you they are still waiting for summer to start. Record low temps again overnight. I think Deluth Minn was in the low to mid 30′s this morning, in the middle of July
Almost 250 children under the age of five have died in a wave of intensely cold weather in Peru.
Children die from pneumonia and other respiratory infections every year during the winter months particularly in Peru’s southern Andes.
But this year freezing temperatures arrived almost three months earlier than usual.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8146995.stm
“I do not owe my neighbor healthcare, my time is my own and I have a right to the sweat of my brow. I am not my neighbors slave, producing for his sake. … My neighbors need for healthcare is not my responsibility, I owe him nothing and he owes me nothing.”
Indentured Servant
“No man is an Iland, intire of it selfe; every man is a peece of the Continent, a part of the maine; if a Clod bee washed away by the Sea, Europe is the lesse, as well as if a Promontorie were, as well as if a Mannor of thy friends or of thine own were; any mans death diminishes me, because I am involved in Mankinde; And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee.”
bdman:
“No, we are paying for illegals and poor minorities at a premium rate.”
***********
They are your neighbors too. Your other comment about the quality of other industrialized nations healthcare is just foolish. We’re 37th for a reason, your distrust of the WHO notwithstanding. Jingoism and dislike of minorities makes for poor argument strategy, but, take heart, it apparently does qualify you to be a US Senator form Alabama.
Major Cook and Orly Taitz, Worst Persons in the World:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#31914146
This guy Cook VOLUNTEEEEERED for active duty.
This case is a total fraud. He volunteered to be a plaintiff. He volunteered!
QUOTE Earlier today, Quon said Cook submitted a formal written request to Human Resources Command-St. Louis on May 8, 2009 volunteering to serve one year in Afghanistan with Special Operations Command, U.S. Army Central Command, beginning July 15, 2009. The soldier’s orders were issued on June 9, Quon said.
“A reserve soldier who volunteers for an active duty tour may ask for a revocation of orders up until the day he is scheduled to report for active duty,” Quon said.
She added that there is an administrative process to request revocation of orders. As of this afternoon, Cook had not asked for his orders to be revoked, Quon said. She could not say why the soldier’s orders were pulled today by 3 p.m. CDT. UNQUOTE
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/breaking_news/story/777472.html
Jesus answeree “A certain man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who both stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half dead. By chance a certain priest was going down that way. When he saw him, he passed by on the other side.
In the same way a Levite also, when he came to the place, and saw him, passed by on the other side.
But a certain Samaritan, as he traveled, came where he was. When he saw him, he was moved with compassion, came to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. He set him on his own animal, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. On the next day, when he departed, he took out two denarii, and gave them to the host, and said to him, ‘Take care of him. Whatever you spend beyond that, I will repay you when I return.’
Now which of these three do you think seemed to be a neighbor to him who fell among the robbers?” He said, “He who showed mercy on him.” Then Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.”
[Luke 10:30-37]
Mespo, think about who and what is driving up the cost. The mere statistics on unisured births, gun shot and stabbing victims and people injured by DUI offenders alone is a MAJOR factor.
Can these be eliminated, no, will they get worse, yes
Why, Because we already see a major increase in gun sales over the last year and more will make it onto the streets. Violence increases with bad economic times. When unemployment goes up people take drastic measures. Drug addicts have to get money to support thier habit. These are the issues that need to be addressed. Health care for all is a great idea, but until you fix the problems I’ve stated above it will never make a difference, never.
bdaman 1, July 15, 2009 at 8:25 am
Mespo, think about who and what is driving up the cost. The mere statistics on unisured births, gun shot and stabbing victims and people injured by DUI offenders alone is a MAJOR factor.
Can these be eliminated, no, will they get worse, yes
**********************
If you are referring to “Illegals” then maybe we ought to just start deportation proceedings at once, against everyone that came here Illegally. Just remember that the casino operators will have to shut down because no one will be around except for the Native Americans to run them, they will not have any customers.
How health care came into this thread is a mystery to me, that I’m not going to bother to discern. I would like to comment though on the attitude of both bdaman and IS which if I may paraphrase is I have no responsibility except to me and mine.
Now of course it is possible that one or both of you come from inherited money and so from that perspective of course it would be an obvious belief. However, since “sweat of my brow” was used I’ll take it to denote that you both either work, or you own business, or even perhaps you are in the professions.
Ton convince either of you about the proposition that we all are our neighbor’s keepers is fruitless from either a religious or moral sense. It is clear that neither of you are religious in that this is a core belief of almost all religions, and that your own concept of morality is very limited in the scope of who you feel you are obligated to assist in a societal context. You have every right to feel as you do, nor do I believe that anyone should force you to redirect your moral compasses. To my sense of morality, as you might expect, I see it as callous, but I’ve no wish to impose my moral/ethical perspective on you.
The idea that our health care costs are driven up by either illegal aliens, or by the wages of crime is one that I think you will have a hard time proving and in fact I think that while you no doubt are sincere in your belief, it is merely a “red herring” in the argument against universal health coverage.
American Health Care is in a sorry state compared to the rest of the world and while you distrust WHO, that is merely your skepticism in service to your pre-judgments. When our infant mortality, for instance, ranks lower then that in some African Nations, something is very wrong. The height of this wrongness is how medicine in the US is set up in our “market”
society.
Drug Company’s are master lobbyists and also master marketers.
Since due to my own health problems I spend a lot of time in various doctor’s offices on varied days of the week. Being a rather observant sort I am always quite aware of what goes on around me. Every time I’m there a Drug Company detail person or two arrives bringing “goodies” for all the office staff and the Doctors. Free lunch is most usual, but other times it is pretty trinkets of moderately expensive value. Doctor’s are on bonus plans based on their prescription rates for various drugs, statins are a big one because they are costly and downplayed are the crippling muscular side effects these drugs deliver. I know this because I was literally impaired walking/bending for two years by a particular statin because I was being dosed a 4x the normal dosage. As you know doubt notice these (not just statins) are advertised extensively on TV with expensive commercials, shot in glorious colors, with believable actors and small print and low voiceovers giving you the noxious, sometime deadly, side effects of the latest wonder drug to cure a syndrome, RLS anyone, that is of minor concern.
The Health Insurance Companies also are very large campaign contributors and lobbyists, who use these funds to ensure their profit margins. That their Administrative expense runs between 20 & 30% (extraordinarily high if you know anything about business)ensures the high cost of their product and large co-pays. Medicare and Medicaid, those inefficient government programs you both decry runs an admin expense of 2 to 3% and are thus able to provide more for less and they don’t have advertising budgets. Worse though about these Health Insurance Companies is that they have people, many of them social workers, who daily make arbitrary decisions about what is and isn’t coverable. These decisions are made with an eye to the bottom line, rather than the patient’s health needs. They often override a Doctor’s judgment. Sometimes the company will fight payment for a covered procedure until it becomes too late to save the patient’s life. It is a system of unmitigated greed, which “free marketeers” appear to have no problem with because of their political pre-judgments and beliefs that each person must protect themselves, right you guys?
Hospitals in the US, especially the private ones, are also part of the faulty healthcare systems so prized by advocates for the “free market.” I know hospitals well because in my seven decades of life between career, my parents, my brother, my family and myself I have spent a lot of time in and around them. The first rule one should adhere to in any Hospital, no matter what its’ reputation, is to always be alert. This is because hospitals can inadvertently kill someone not yet ready to die, by sloppiness of methodology, shortage of qualified staff and sheer incompetence. I’ve seen it happen to my clients and my wife and I have literally saved relatives through our own interventions and refusal to be cowed. My wife has saved my life on at least two occasions by questioning procedures to be done to me, where I was too ill to comprehend what was going on. As I have said elsewhere I am one of those people blessed with excellent medical coverage and access to the best the system supposedly offers.
Finally, we come to Physicians themselves. Some of the smartest, most dedicated people in the world become Physicians
because they truly feel a calling to it. I have them in my family and am awed by both their commitment to good medical care and by the breadth of intelligence they have which led them to become good Doctor’s. I have also had to fire Doctor’s, who were surprisingly and demonstrably incompetent.
In recent years far to many people have come into this profession where the bottom line is the money. I have had Doctor’s personally want to perform procedures on me, that while they were lucrative for the Doctor and fully covered by my insurance, were so unnecessary that the Doctor was unable to come up with a rational explanation for doing it.
This is a snapshot of our current health care system and everything I say could be back up by non-anecdotal material.
Our system is broken and it must be fixed for all of our sakes. If it is allowed to continue in this “free market” vein
we will have different levels of health care, based on what you can afford. You two may see that as good and if so I hope for your sake that you are wealthy enough and that you and your loved ones are healthy enough never to have to see the distinction. As rational people though you know the odds are against you.
We have lived under a system of “Free Market” Capitalism that is a misnomer. The truth is, quite provable, is that we live under a system of socialism for the wealthy and capitalism for everyone else. Our domestic policy, our foreign policy and our taxation policy has always benefited the wealthy in this country. Health Care is but one aspect of that. Leave things alone and in ten years people will be forced to sell organs to pay for food. The rich will control the organ donor distribution and perhaps even clone healthy specimens of themselves, made into idiots from birth, to serve as future organ repositories. This isn’t science fiction it is possible today.
Finally though I come to the best reason for a universal health care system and that is that a major reason we have lost our manufacturing base is due to either the virtual “slave labor” of Asia, or to the fact that most country’s of the industrial nations provide universal health care and thus remove the burden from their businesses. It is health care that is cheaper, better, more innovative and less susceptible to the ministrations of the Health Care Industry, which contrary to what one would think should be their ostensible goals, are only about profits. You guys think this laudable, I think it is disgusting and currently 73% of the American Public agrees with me, perhaps because almost everyone has encountered the sheer waste and destructiveness of the current system.
Mike S., very well said. Thanks.
Vince,
FYI -We have an all volunteer military.
Breaking: Major has orders revoked, by questioning Obama’s legitimacy
“We won! We won before we even arrived,” Taitz said. “It means that the military has nothing to show for Obama. It means that the military has directly responded by saying Obama is illegitimate – and they cannot fight it. Therefore, they are revoking the order!”
Per Dianna Cotter, the author of the story -“At first glance this may seem to have ended the case. However, it must be noted, that if Obama cannot legitimately give an order to deploy, then he cannot rescind the order either.
Things just got real interesting folks.”
“We have an all volunteer military.”
Wrong.
Please re-read my post above.
He was a reservist. He volunteered to serve in Afghanistan. He could have revoked his voluntary decision at any time before reporting. He boasted in advance that he would volunteer so that he could sue.
The Army apparently decided correctly that he was unfit to wear the uniform of a US Army Officer, and unfit to serve in the military. They refused to accept his “volunteering” for service.
This does not make a voluntary military BECAUSE HE WAS NEVER ON ACTIVE DUTY IN THE MILITARY. He was never even ordered by the President or anyone else to report for duty. He was a civilian at all times. He was free to decline to serve at all times.
Byrne said above that Cook might have standing. Well, the Army shot that horse out from under him. He no longer has standing to challenge anything about the birth issue, because, one, he is not in the military subject to orders from the Commander in Chief, and, two, he is not under any orders to report for duty.
Civilian Cook has no standing.
Neither does the horse he rode in on.
Byrne wrote “Major Cook, though still doing so at his own peril, is in a unique position. As a reservist, he can only be activated by order of the POTUS. This should give him standing to challenge the fitness of the President directly.
It seems hat it is not entirely correct that a reservist can “only be activated by order of” the President. I appears that they can be activated at their own request. “A reserve soldier who volunteers for an active duty tour may ask for a revocation of orders up until the day he is scheduled to report for active duty,” Quon [Army spokesperson] said.. [posted above, 8:18 AM].
Hey Vince, you are right, but guess what, it don’t matter man. They planned this in a back room and Orly is getting help from some powerful people who want to see Obama removed from office. You want to talk conspiracy, she has already refilled on behalf of Capt. Hook and Obama will need Peter Pan to save him now from all the publicity. Everyday Obama becomes less credible. Today Chavez says I hope nobody will assinate him. Someone is in the think tank for Orly and has planned for all possible outcomes in reference to this case. There is no way after you, I and everybody else have watched everything she has done. Read what she filed now, that didn’t come from her. She has supposedly been ah solo o me-o in doing everything stating and posting she’s so busy flying here and driving there that she just doesn’t have the time to keep up with her blog and she is o so tired. This has become a well thought out hand of cards and regardless, the Judge Carter hearing and now this just turned the heat up. I told you a couple of days ago things were heating up. You wern’t listenning, Can you hear me now.
Can someone explain what bdaman just said?
Vince, I hate to say this to you, cuz I really like you, but your dad must of called you boy growing up, he d@#$ sure didn’t call you sunny cuz you aint real bright.
Vince,
A Reservist is still a component of our volunteer military.
Major Cook, was, and still is, a member of the U.S. Army Reserves. He holds the rank of Major (O-4).
Contrary to your claim that “the Army apparently decided correctly that he was unfit to wear the uniform of a US Army Officer, and unfit to serve in the military.” No one has determined him to be unfit for duty, to wear the uniform, or to be afforded all customs and courtesies afforded those of his rank.
Volunteering for active duty may be initiated by the reserve member, but can only be accepted by order of the POTUS. Once ordered, only the POTUS can rescind that order. –I think this attempt to revoke standing will be futile.
–Are you really trying to make a case out of “He volunteered to be a plaintiff.”? –Come on! Police Officers volunteer to buy drugs from a dealer so that the dealer can be prosecuted, every day. Didn’t they volunteer to buy the drugs?
I (insert name), having been appointed a (insert rank) in the U.S. Army under the conditions indicated in this document, do accept such appointment and do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter, so help me God.
Doesn’t Major Cook have a duty to investigate and pursue what he believes to be a fraud upon the country? (I’m not saying that his claim has merit…only that he has a duty, in defense of his country, to challenge the qualifications of the POTUS, if he feels that such is warranted)
Go read this and tell me if you think the online attorney could of done this herself. Two things to keep in mind she flew from California on a red eye, had this thought out and filed before 2′o clock. Also keep in mind the list of retired high ranking officers who have been in her corner.
The following transaction was entered by Taitz, Orly on 7/15/2009 at 1:41 PM EDT and filed on 7/15/2009
Case Name: Cook v. Good et al
Case Number: 4:09-cv-82
Filer: Stefan Frederick Cook
Document Number: 6
Docket Text:
MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by Stefan Frederick Cook filed by Orly Taitz.(Taitz, Orly)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
COLUMBUS DIVISION
MAJ. GEN. CAROL DEAN CHILDERS, §
LT. COL. DAVID EARL GRAEF, §
MAJOR STEFAN FREDERICK COOK, §
Plaintiffs, §
§
v. §
§
COLONEL LOUIS B. WINGATE, § Civil Action:
COLONEL WANDA L. GOOD, § 4:09-cv-00082-CDL
COLONEL THOMAS D. MACDONALD, §
DR. ROBERT M. GATES, UNITED §
STATES SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, § Rule 65 Application for
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, de facto § Preliminary Injunction
PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES, §
Defendants. §
bdaman, you, of all the posters here, should not be saying that anyone is not bright.
For the other posters, my policy has been never to impugn anyone’s intelligence, make fun of their grammar or spelling, or call them idiot, moron, imbecile or retard, and I am not about to start a flame thread now.
Vince I sincerley apologize but if you cant read between the lines(Can someone explain what bdaman just said?) then move closer to the wall.
bdaman asked: “Go read this and tell me if you think the online attorney could of done this herself.”
The rumor, and I am not vouching for this, is that she is getting help from Charles Lincoln, who is identified in court with her as a law clerk, but is reported to be a disbarred lawyer and former convict. Look him up. I do not have the time.
And you expect me, Mr I don’t believe anything that Charles Lincoln is her ghost writer, surley you say this in jest.
It appears that she filed her admendment this morning at 9:57 am Pacific in the Keyes case, No wonder they call her Super Woman. How can one attorney with the help of a disbarred lawyer and convict be able to think all of this. It surely must be all of her trial expierence that she can do all of this.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Notice of Electronic Filing
The following transaction was entered by Taitz, Orly on 7/15/2009 at 9:57 AM PDT and filed on 7/15/2009
Case Name: Keyes et al v. Obama et al
Case Number: 8:09-cv-82
Filer: Alan Keyes PhD
Document Number: 22
Docket Text:
AMENDED DOCUMENT filed by Plaintiff Alan Keyes PhD. (Taitz, Orly)
8:09-cv-82 Notice has been electronically mailed to:
It just hit me that 9:57 pacific is 12:57 eastern man that is one busy woman.
I think your standing horse has been shot out from under you, just like Cook’s.
“Volunteering for active duty may be initiated by the reserve member, but can only be accepted by order of the POTUS. Once ordered, only the POTUS can rescind that order. –I think this attempt to revoke standing will be futile.”
His offer to go on active duty was never accepted. He was never sworn in.
We will see if civilian Cook has standing. I predict he will not. Watching the reports.
Where does this “only be accepted by order of the POTUS. Once ordered, only the POTUS can rescind that order” come from?
Offer and acceptance. Cook offered. The Army accepts by swearing him in on active duty. His offer was never accepted. There is nothing to rescind.
Byrne: “No one has determined him to be unfit for duty, to wear the uniform, or to be afforded all customs and courtesies afforded those of his rank.”
Well, I will say it.
In my opinion, he is unfit for duty in the military of the United States, unfit to wear the uniform of a US Army Officer, and unfit to be accorded the customs and courtesies afforded to those of his rank.
Signed, Vince Treacy
Vince,
“His offer to go on active duty was never accepted. He was never sworn in.”
You’re way out of your area of expertise. I don’t say that to demean you…as that is not my intent. If you don’t believe me, I’m sure there are plenty of other officers you can contact.
A reserve military officer is already sworn in. The oath is administered when he accepted his commission.
As for your determination of fitness; there’s a reason we don’t let civilians fill out our fitness reports. :>)
Vince take a break from the computer for a bit, grab a beer man and relax. The sun will come out tomorrow, the only question is will there be sunspots on it.
As I said, bdaman I do not engage in flames.
Consider how it reflects on you, in the eyes of the other posters here.
Byrne, he is not on active duty. I used “sworn in” to signify the change to active duty status. He is a civilian in the reserves. He could be ordered to active duty, or volunteer for active duty, but neither has happened and he is not on active duty. He is not an active duty soldier.
Now, you started this line with “FYI -We have an all volunteer military.”
Are you still defending that? That all active duty military personnel are now volunteers?
Active duty military personnel are not the same as civilian reservist Cook.
The fact that Cook was not accepted for active duty does not mean that active duty military personnel are now volunteers.
Come back and gloat if the court grants him standing. I wll be here to take my medicine.
Vince,
“Now, you started this line with “FYI -We have an all volunteer military.”
Are you still defending that? That all active duty military personnel are now volunteers?”
Yes. I am. –Do you know what NAVY stands for?
Never Again Volunteer Yourself.
Just Kidding….but that’s what we called it.
How do think people enter into military service? Do we have a draft? Are people ordered to serve? -No. We have an “all volunteer military”.
Don’t get too excited about saluting the good “Major” any time soon. Word is that he has been barred from the base.
Once you are in, you are no longer a volunteer.
Vince I love you man, always see the silver linning. He also has to worry about a job, He’s been fired. Which I’m sure if you took the time to read the latest pleading you would understand that this is going to get blown wide open. This is partly why she refiled today.
Rafflaw sorry i haven’t gotten back with you either been tied up with Vincent. According to the WHO Canada ranks 30th while the UK ranks 18th well above our rank at 37th. But if you talk to the people of those two countries they will tell you different.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1199714/A-9-month-wait-arthritis-treatment-Delay-mean-lifetime-agony-victims.html
I have read Ms. Taitz’ pleadings. Frankly, they are a mess, an incoherent and occasionally random series of delusional allegations that neither state a cognizable claim nor admit of proof. The “victory” she claimed at the recent hearing was basically a gift from the court to get the case moving toward a resolution. She apparently is clueless about the concepts of service of process and personal and subject matter jurisdiction. There will be a motion to dismss. The motion will be granted. She will be fortunate if she is not hit with sanctions. And the conspiracy theorists will continue to assert that the presidency has been hijacked. Should she continue the charade, the court could eventually enter an order directing the clerk not to accept any further pleadings from her unless they are co-signed by another member of the bar. She is, in short, the last person in the world I would want to hire to represent me. Unfortunately, she may be leading Maj. Cook down the road to a court martial.
Hey I just wanted to say that I have really enjoyed the back and forth and I mean no ill will towards anyone. I know we’ve been all over the place in this thread but here is something thats back on topic.
Published: Sunday, December 15, 2002
Bush Has Widened Authority of C.I.A. to Kill Terrorists
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/15/international/15INTE.html?pagewanted=1
The song Stir it up by Bob Marley comes to mind
And the AP just released this about an hour ago
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D99F5ANO0&show_article=1
Vince,
I’ll take the bait.
Why do you think Major Cook is “unfit for duty in the military of the United States, unfit to wear the uniform of a US Army Officer, and unfit to be accorded the customs and courtesies afforded to those of his rank”?
Vince said; “Don’t get too excited about saluting the good “Major” any time soon. Word is that he has been barred from the base.”
Now why would you start rumors? What legitimate reason would they have to bar Major Cook from the base?
“Once you are in, you are no longer a volunteer.”
I think you are confused. Entering into a contract voluntarily, and being bound by the terms of such contract, does not change the fact that such contract was entered into vuluntarily.
Mike A.,
“I have read Ms. Taitz’ pleadings. Frankly, they are a mess, an incoherent and occasionally random series of delusional allegations that neither state a cognizable claim nor admit of proof.”
Would you do us the courtesy of quoting what you find to be “a mess”, “incoherent” or “delusional”?
“Unfortunately, she may be leading Maj. Cook down the road to a court martial.”
What has Major Cook done that is a court martial offense?
Cook barred from base? Just a messenger reporting some scuttlebutt: Q kimba says: July 15, 2009 at 2:59 pm: It looks like she’s added plaintiff’s to Cook’s case and wants to give him Whistleblower status. It looks like Cook works(ed) for an IT company that did contract work for the DOD and Cook worked at SOCOM right on McDill AFB, where he was supposed to report to be deployed. When he called to say he didn’t need that leave for active duty, the CEO told him he’d been terminated because DOD said it was too nutty and crazy for him to be on the base anymore. I am eager to hear what really happened. UQ
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/07/orly-filed-something/comment-page-4/#comment-13747
Not vouching for it.
“Entering into a contract voluntarily, and being bound by the terms of such contract, does not change the fact that such contract was entered into vuluntarily.”
You can enter, or not enter, voluntarily. Once in, you cannot exit voluntarily. The contract was entered into voluntarily, but service is involuntary during the term of the contract. Once in, follow orders.
“What has Major Cook done that is a court martial offense?”
I read Mike’s post.
Mike did not say he a done anything yet that was a court martial offense.
He actually said “Unfortunately, she may be leading Maj. Cook down the road to a court martial.”
Jim Byrne asked Why?
Cook is attacking the legitimacy of a duly elected, qualified President of the United States, with no legal or factual basis for his attack. His views are free for a civilian, but active duty soldier are under military discipline, and his views would undermine and disrupt military discipline.
He has prosecuted a frivolous lawsuit against the Commander in Chief, working with attorney Taitz, who is wrongfully inducing active duty soldiers to risk their careers and freedoms by taking ill-advised legal steps on the basis of internet solicitations, as detailed by Leo Donofrio.
His “volunteering” for active duty was in bad faith, because he did not volunteer to serve his country but to create the basis for a lawsuit.
Vince,
You’re talking in circles. -This jury isn’t buying it.
Vince you said, hold on I don’t want to get this wrong
QUOTE Once in, follow orders. UNQUOTE
Son I order you to shoot every man woman and child in that village, thats an order, soldier.
Now what
Vince,
Questioning the legitimacy of an order is not a court martial offense. In fact, if he believes the qualifications to be in question, he has a sworn duty to question them.
By rescinding his order to active duty, the only military avenue of discipline was removed.
Why are people getting all upset over Cheney’s illegal death squads, illegal torture techniques, illegal NSA spying program, lets face it, nothing will happen to him, they might investigate, the justification will be 9/11, 9/11, 9/11 or you are only giving ammunition to our enemies and in the end nothing will happen, he is part of the ruling class. The chickens are coming home to roost from the operatives that stole the election for Bush/Cheney 2000 in Florida and 2004 in Ohio. I love listening to Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, and Glenn Beck, these chicken hawks on the War of Terror have become chicken little’s that the sky is falling when it comes to the economy, too funny.
To everyone.
Cook applied to go on active duty. He could have revoked his application at any time up until the day he was due to report.
So he has volunteered for duty, but could step back at any time prior to reporting for duty.
THEN he files a lawsuit asking for a temporary restraining order (TRA) and later a preliminary injunction (PI) to stop his deployment.
Lets rewind and play that back. He wanted a TRO or PI to stop the deployment that he had requested. He wanted the court to order an action that he could have freely taken at any time by withdrawing his request.
That is the essence of bad faith. It was and is a waste of the court’s time.
It was publicized in the press and broadcast to the nation. It was the use of his offer of military service to launch a high profile legal showcase for his pet theories of birther nonsense. As a sideshow, active duty military were encouraged to join in.
Anyone out there still think that he volunteered for active duty in good faith?
Anyone still think his lawsuit was in good faith?
Yes, I see Jim Byrne’s hand raised. Anyone else?
Byrne asked: Would you do us the courtesy of quoting what you find to be “a mess”, “incoherent” or “delusional”?
Fair enough. Take a look here:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/Keyes-Obama-07-15-09.pdf
Note the small print that says that is was filed July 14, 2009, Bastille Day. Bastille day is relevant to this court pleading how? This is the start of the delusional parts.
Page 18, paragraph 46, repeats the canard that travel to Pakistan was barred to Americans in 1981, although the official State Department notice in 1981 said that visas were available. That document has been linked at this site.
Proof of service is by Charles Edward Lincoln. Seen his name before.
Lawyers and law students, consider FRCP pleading requirements in Rule 8(a):
Rule 8. General Rules of Pleading
(a) Claims for Relief.
A pleading that states a claim for relief must contain:
(1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction, unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim needs no new jurisdictional support;
(2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; and
(3) a demand for the relief sought, which may include relief in the alternative or different types of relief.
Then read as much of the 38-page complaint as you can and see if it contains any, repeat any, short and plain statements. Any short and plain statements at all.
Remember the old adage: Nothing is totally worthless: it can always be a bad example of how not to do something.
Health Care Post
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=332548165656854
bdaman posted Health Care Post:
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=332548165656854
Response is posted at the new health care thread:
http://jonathanturley.org/2009/07/16/democrats-unleash-huge-tax-proposals-with-some-rates-threatened-to-go-as-high-as-57-percent/
Jim Byrne, I apologize, but I logged off after my last post on this thread and have only now seen your reply. With regard to the petition itself, it would honestly require more time than I have to detail the numerous deficiencies. Have you read it yourself? If not, you should. But to summarize, I note the following: 1. The petition does not set forth facts in support of each of the elements necessary to establish the grounds for an injunction. 2. The petition does not show that the plaintiff has standing to bring suit. 3. The petition is rambling and disjointed, mixing various legal arguments with speculation and wholly conclusory statements. 4. The petition cites cases which do not support the assertions for which they are cited. (Taitz even cites Roe v. Wade, for Pete’s sake).
I could go on, but if you read it, you will see for yourself that the petition is not something a competent lawyer would put his or her signature on. Vince Treacy has also pointed out some glaring problems with the pleading. A complaint was recently filed against Taitz with the State Bar of California. I will be surprised if this lady is not ultimately disbarred.
With respect to Major Cook, I believe that he is a dupe. Taitz has been actively soliciting members of the military from all over the country to become parties to her suits. She has publicly asserted that to be a natural born citizen requires that both of one’s parents be citizens, a blatant falsehood. She has publicly called for armed insurrection if her demands are not met. She has convened a wholly illegal “citizen’s grand jury” to indict the president and others. She has been practicing law in states in which she is not admitted to practice. She has demanded the resignation of authorities, including judges, who disagree with her views. How does this affect Cook? First, he has an obligation to proceed in good faith, particularly if he is challenging a facially lawful command. Good faith means more than simply relying on what some crackpot lawyer feeds him. Second, he signed the petition under oath, affirmatively stating that he had investigated all of the allegations and that they were all true. I’m confident that he hasn’t investigated anything.
Do military obey Obama? Ask General Odierno:
http://www.thedailytube.com/video/18379/president-obama-calls-on-the-military-to-shave-colberts-head
Seen Colbert’s haircut lately?
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/229768/june-08-2009/obama-orders-stephen-s-haircut—ray-odierno
Just briefly, the two citizen parent requirement is not supported by Donofrio’s argument. Leo wants Obama out because at his birth he was a dual citizen of Kenya and the U.S. That does not translate into a requirement of two US parents. Put donofrio into Search at this site for full treatment.
Also, the citizen grand jury petitions were kicked out of court summarily by the high respected Chief Judge Royce Lambert of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
Mike A.,
While I do agree that some of the language contained in the petition is not in the style of which we have become accustomed, we must remember that English is not the first language of Dr. Taitz. The meat of the petition is sufficient to permit the court to comprehend the claim.
For those that would like to read the petition; HERE IS A LINK.
Dr. Taitz has filed Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice. A California complaint is inflammatory and irrelevant. -Instead of attacking the attorney and her client(s), I would suggest attacking the merits of the claim.
You stated “She has publicly asserted that to be a natural born citizen requires that both of one’s parents be citizens, a blatant falsehood.”
To the best of my knowledge, determination of natural-born status has never been determined in a U.S. Court. As such, her claim may have as much merit as the next.
Two things bother me:
1. Every effort is being made to remove the plaintiff from having “standing”. Why? Who would have standing to challenge the constitutionally mandated qualifications of President Obama?
2. The authenticity of President Obama’s reported “Certification of Live Birth” has been challenged. The remedy to such challenge is easily obtainable. The “Certificate of Live Birth” is reportedly on file with the Hawaii Department of Health. It is reported to be on microfiche. -If validated, the questions become moot…now, and forever.
The questions regarding the background of President Obama are not unfounded. We know the person reported to be his father was not a U.S. Citizen. We know that he lived in Indonesia under the name Barry Soetoro. We have not seen his kindergarten records, his Punahou school records, his Occidental College records, his Columbia University records, his Columbia thesis, his Harvard Law School records, his Harvard Law Review articles, his scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, his Illinois State Bar Association records, or his adoption records (living as Barry Soetoro in Indonesia).
In addition, President Obama has stated that he met his wife in school. -Only problem is…they never attended school together.
“I don’t know if anybody else will meet their future wife or husband in class like I did, but I’m sure that you’re all going to have wonderful careers,” he said as he warmed up the audience before delivering a commencement speech at an economics school in Moscow Tuesday.
But the truth is that the couple met not “in class” but at a law firm in Chicago, Sidley Austin, in 1989. Obama was a summer associate (essentially a legal intern) there and Robinson was an attorney completing her first year at the firm. Both attended Harvard Law School, but Michelle graduated in the spring of 1988, while Barack Obama did not arrive at the Cambridge, Mass., campus until that fall.
—I’m not a religious man. I don’t believe anything based solely on faith. To me, enough darkness, and enough inconsistencies exist to make me question the honesty of the man. I know some may not like that, but I would be dishonest if I didn’t admit such.
I’m coming in late to this thread because when Vince Treacy is on the case, I’m unable to surpass his logic, dogged determination and thoroughness. He has made mincemeat out of all those he’s argued with and what could I add. However, there is an aspect to this that I must comment on.
It seems to me that when Democrats, liberals, or centrists win office, there is always a concerted effort to de-legitimize them. In the case of Bill Clinton for instance, Richard Mellon Scaife gave tens of million$ to support these efforts and make spurious claims, none of which materialized. Al Franken, who clearly won a close race was prevented from taking his seat for months. Eliot Spitzer was forced to resign for using call girls, while David Vitter who dressed in diapers for his prostitutes stays on as Senator, not to mention John Ensign and Mark Sanford.
Then we have John Kerry, a legitimate war hero, disparaged by a well financed “truth” squad and Republican who mostly never served wearing purple band aids on the fingers to mock his purple heart at their convention. The fact that he was running against two men who had dodged the draft in Viet Nam, while supporting the war, was little mentioned.
Now we have a new President, elected overwhelmingly and out of the woodwork comes the same well financed efforts at under
mining him with totally spurious charges. There simply is no there, there, no matter how many words are parsed. The election is over and your side lost fair and square. If you
birther types really are the patriots you profess to be, then you will put this nonsense aside. If you don’t then despite your protestations to the contrary, you are not patriots who support the American system, but akin to a bunch of disgruntled football fans, view every call against their team a bad one and glory when the referees call it wrongly for your team. That’s not patriotism.
Please don’t come back with the specious argument that Democrats did it in 2,000 with GW Bush, because the effort put in is nothing compared to the underground million$ being
used to finance the de-legitimization of our President.
‘In addition, President Obama has stated that he met his wife in school.Only problem is…they never attended school together.”
Jim,
Seriously, this is an issue, or is the result of grasping at straws and sour grapes? The President met his wife while he was interning at a Chicago Law Office in the summer and still in School(a common practice which my son-in-law and his friends did while attending law school)and wanted to make some tuition money. they discussed this on 60 Minutes during the campaign. Michelle was the lawyer he was interned to. This practice is used by top law firms, since it costs them relatively little and helps them review the possibility of prospective new lawyers.
I’m sorry to say this Jim, but using these kind of tactics, especially when you are in ignorance of the situation, are really quite tacky. You have tried to maintain an air of being merely an interested citizen above the fray in this and looking for truth and it seems you are having a hard time maintaining that pose.
Mike S.,
You are as vulnerable to “cached thought” as the next person. Instead of making excuses, why not address the merits of the claim?
President Obama did not state that he met his wife while he was still in school, or while interning. He stated that he met her “in class”. -That is not the truth. Is it?
This is a yes or no question. Please answer the question.
Jim,
Gee I guess he “lied” about that. You are so right when do we start the impeachment? Seriously though, do you really think I’m stupid, because playing this game implies so? The President oversimplified a statement to make a point, something we all may do on a daily basis. What is your intention in including this is the more important point? The answer to that, of course, is to impugn his integrity. The upshot of you using a tactic like that is propagandistic, rather than argumentative. Now let’s look further at your being a propagandist, rather than an arguer for your beliefs.
“1. Every effort is being made to remove the plaintiff from having “standing”. Why?”
The Major has admitted that he requested an Afghanistan post, just so he would gain what in his mind was standing to sue.
He was playing games with the military and never sincere in his original request. You, more than most, should know that you don’t try to manipulate the military without reaping the consequences. Why is the fact that he falsely volunteered so hard for you to grasp, unless it fits in with your pre-conceived notions and anger at who clearly won the Presidency.
“2. The authenticity of President Obama’s reported “Certification of Live Birth” has been challenged.”
Vince Treacy has been providing copious evidence of the fact that this “challenge” is spurious, yet you and the other birther proponents on this thread have continually ignored it.
This isn’t debate Jim, it is the childishness of ten year old’s going Nyanh! Nyanh! Nyanh! on the schoolyard. You are unhappy about the outcome of the election and your unhappiness overcomes any sense of loyalty to the American Electoral System. It’s not a football game Jim, it’s our country and you and the other birthers don’t care because you’re angry your side lost. That is sad for the state that political discourse has fallen to and said because of an inability to understand that the people have spoken, no matter how much you don’t like their opinions.
Jim Byrne, let me say first that I have no idea where Pres. Obama met his wife, nor do I care. But with regard to the issue of citizenship, it is my position that the statutory definition of “natural born” citizen is clear. As you know, the first rule of statutory construction is to give words their ordinary meaning. Despite the fact that English may not be her first language, Ms. Taitz has the same obligations that you and I do when it comes to filing good faith pleadings. Second, suspicions are not grounds for injunctive relief, but the petition alleges nothing more than speculation. I have handled numerous injunction cases over the years and would be embarrassed to have my name associated with her filing. Third, there is a common pattern to all of the birther arguments, the false assertion that their expressions of doubt require the president to submit proof which meets their own standards of sufficiency.
Now let’s consider some fundamental evidence law. Among the numerous exceptions to the hearsay rule is the provision that makes admissible certain types of public records, including records of vital statistics, and even church records relating to births, deaths, marriages, etc. A copy of a birth certificate, properly certified by the custodial agency, is prima facie evidence of the truth of its contents. Accordingly, once a certified copy has been produced, as it was in the case of Pres. Obama, the burden of disproving the truth of that record shifts to the opposing party. I have yet to see a single instance in which a birther has produced an authenticated document or other credible evidence even suggesting that the president’s birth certificate is invalid, or a forgery. A mere assertion that the president’s background includes the use of “39 different social security numbers,” without more, does not even merit a response, let alone contrary proof.
Finally, let me address your comment regarding standing. You and others have repeatedly suggested that there is something vaguely conspiratorial about efforts to challenge a person’s standing to sue. Indeed, the insinuation is that the government withdrew Maj. Cook’s orders solely to eliminate standing and moot the case, thereby precluding the possibility of a determination on the merits. That in fact is what Ms. Taitz is claiming at present, that somehow this is a “victory” for her position. (Forget the fact that this guy just lost his employment and his career for the benefit of Taitz’ self-promotion.) The response to this is obvious to anyone who has a litigation practice. A lawyer’s duty in defending a claim is to seek its dismissal if there are legitimate grounds to do so. That’s all. There’s nothing more to it than that.
Mike S.,
I asked a simple question, and expected a simple answer. I did not ask for an excuse. (Making excuses for someone else is the job of a protector, not an unbiased observer.)
I’m not trying to insult you or your intelligence. I just wanted you to recognize and acknowledge a truth from a falsehood. I’m not ready to impeach anybody, so don’t jump off the deep end.
“The Major has admitted that he requested an Afghanistan post, just so he would gain what in his mind was standing to sue.”
I’m not aware of Major Cook making that statement, but let’s say he did. As I have pointed out in a previuous post, undercover officers regularly by drugs in order to make an arrest, and prosecute the drug dealer. -It’s called “making a case”.
“Vince Treacy has been providing copious evidence of the fact that this “challenge” is spurious, yet you and the other birther proponents on this thread have continually ignored it.”
You have chosen to accept the information presented by Vince. I have not. I don’t find it to be conclusive. I am just another member of the jury.
“You are unhappy about the outcome of the election and your unhappiness overcomes any sense of loyalty to the American Electoral System.”
I’m not unhappy with the results of the election, and I can surely find more evidence of your complaints against our electoral system than any that I have posted. -Especially when I have never posted a complaint about our electoral system.
I didn’t vote for John McCain. As such, do you really think I have grounds to complain about Barack Obama winning the election?
Your accusations are unfounded.
–I treat you with respect. I expect the same in return.
Have you seen the microfiche containing Barack Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth? -I haven’t either. -Instead of attacking me, or Major Cook, or Dr. Taitz; why don’t you try addressing the merits of the claim? That’s what court filings are all about.
Mike A.,
To the best of my knowlwdge (I may be wrong), the only place President Obama’s Certification of Live Birth has been filed is with a few media outlets. -Am I correct?
Has it ever been filed with the U.S. House of Representatives, or with a U.S. Court of Law?
I’ll stop there so that we can stay on the same page.
Jim Byrne, I don’t know where it has been filed. I do know, however, that the whole issue was vetted by FactCheck.org and Politifact.org. FactCheck even took photographs of the original. I also know that both the Hawaii Registrar of Vital Statistics and the director of the Hawaii Department of Health have verified the authenticity of his birth certificate. His birth was also reported in the Honolulu newspaper contemporaneously with the event. That is certainly sufficient for any evidentiary purposes. If Orly Taitz has any contrary evidence, she has yet to reveal it.
I might also add, and this is solely my opinion, that if Ms. Taitz actually viewed the original, she would nevertheless claim that it was a forgery and that Honolulu newspaper archives for 1961 were altered by the addition of the birth announcement. When we talk about “evidence,” we are not talking about satisfying or “convincing” those who cannot be satisfied or convinced. Our entire legal system revolves around the concept of the “reasonable man.” This is a notion which is either unfamiliar to Ms. Taitz or which she is unwilling to accept. My gut instinct, however, supported somewhat by the nature of the groups backing her efforts, is that the challenges are primarily race based.
Awful lot of questions from Jim Byrne. How about some questions back.
Does he still think Americans could not travel to Pakistan in 1961? He hasn’t gotten back on that one.
Does he still think the COLB is a forgery, even though World Nut Daily refuted this position late last year? Does he credit “Polarik-XXXXXXXXXXXX” and “Truthdude,” who arae both anonymous and have both been discredited.
Since he voted for McCain (who was, in fact born outside the 48 United States), did he ever see McCain’ birth certificate? Note that the birth certificate posted on the web showing him born in Colon City IS a forgery. Note also that I have maintained on this site that McCain was a natural born citizen.
What is the relevance of his meeting his wife to his natural born citizen status? If he did mispeak, or if the speechwrited mispoke, or he fibbed or lied, then it is certainly a fact to consider if he runs for reelection. But how does it affect his birth 20 odd years earlier?
How does he know about that microfiche? Does he think it shows that Obama was not born in Hawaii, yes or no?
Sorry, he did not vote for McCain. Reporter will strike the question. The jury will disregard the question.
But by saying Cook has never “admitted” his aim in filing suit, he has used a classic debating tack. Deny something irrelevant to divert attention from your own failure to respond to a relevant question.
The question is, why did Cook seek a TRO or PI for a deployment that HE HIMSELF voluteered for, and which HE HIMSELF could have cancelled at any time? Why?
The reasonable inference is that he wanted to set up a court case.
A student applies for Harvard and is admitted. Then he goes to state court for an injunction barring him from being admitted. Why?
Well, he wanted to challenge the legality of the appointment of the President of Harvard by the university’s governing board.
Huh?
Spock: Perfectly logical.
Mike A.,
Let’s keep Ms. Taitz out of this. Determining what she would or wouldn’t due is pure speculation. I prefer to deal with what we do and do not know.
Information provided by politifact.org and factcheck.org are hearsay, and therefore not admissable.
So; we don’t know of any legal entity with which President Obama has filed his Certification of Live Birth as a document to support his claim of meeting the standard of qualification set forth in Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution.
Since he won the election, and took the Oath of Office, it would be reasonable to assume that he has claimed to meet the qualifications for such office. Is not the burden on the claimant to provide supporting evidence? It is impossible to challenge evidence that has not been submitted, let alone the authenticity of such evidence. -Don’t you agree?
Our Constitution sets forth standards of qualification, but when the qualification is challenged, and no evidence is submitted to support that qualification, do we not have a Constitution that is merely a piece of paper?
Vince he said he didn’t vote for McCain
As for the travel ban, who cares, we wont know where he actually traveled, can’t access his passport records and even if we could they have since been compromised. His selective service card shows forgery even though he didn’t need to file one and that has been authenicated by a retired federal agent with a real name. Where did those records come from? Chicago.
Do I think the COLB is a forgery? yes I do, just like his selective service. You continue to say that World Nut Daily says the COLB is not a forgery, then why do they continue to be the BIGGEST proponet for him to produce the original.
Hawaii has seen and verified that they hold Obamas ORIGINAL birth certificate according to state policy and procedures. He has spent(FACT) over a million dollars when all he has to do as the most powerful person in the United States is tell Hawaii to let forensic examiners examine it, Let them in the vault so they can say we’ve seen his certificate and we verify Hawaii holds it acccording to state policy and procedure. Similar to how they did the Shroud of Turin seeing how Obama is suppose to be the new Messiah. Recent (last six months) investigations have overturned the notion that the Shroud of Turin is from the 14th century.
So there, the most powerful person in the United States, the guy who taught constitutional law and graduated with the highest honors, was president of the Law Review aint smart enough to tell the good ol folks from Hawaii, hey let these independent guys into the vault just like Janice Okubu so they can have a look.
Vince I’ve already agreed with you on your analysis of Cook. He was a plant.
Jim Byrne:
very good last point. I think at this point in time the constitution has pretty much been used for the last 70 years as a document to effect change instead of an unbiased umpire.
Vince,
“Does he still think Americans could not travel to Pakistan in 1961? He hasn’t gotten back on that one.”
I don’t know. I don’t have the dates trveled, nor any information from Pakistan. -To simplify the argument, I’ll say no, as it is irrelevant.
“Does he still think the COLB is a forgery?”
I think it is suspect.
“Note also that I have maintained on this site that McCain was a natural born citizen.”
Our Constitution permits Congress to “establish a uniform rule of naturalization”. The non-binding Senate Resolution establishing such is beyond the power granted to Congress. The Panama Canal Zone was not a territory of the United States. As such, I don’t believe John McCain met the natural-born citizen qualification. -I think we need to amend the Constitution in order to address children of military personnel born overseas.
“What is the relevance of his meeting his wife to his natural born citizen status? If he did mispeak, or if the speechwrited mispoke, or he fibbed or lied, then it is certainly a fact to consider if he runs for reelection. But how does it affect his birth 20 odd years earlier?”
One lie means nothing by itself. When combined with evidence of being less than forthright, it begins to establish a need for increased scrutiny.
“How does he know about that microfiche? Does he think it shows that Obama was not born in Hawaii, yes or no?”
On Oct. 31, after being inundated by requests for more details about Obama’s birth records, Department of Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino said she and registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, had personally verified that the Health Department possesses Obama’s original birth certificate.
“Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures,” Fukino said.
The cryptic and carefully-worded statement offered no true details of the “birth certificate,” and leads to more questions than answers among critics. In July, when Barack Obama’s Certification of Live Birth” was first distributed publically on the internet, Hawaiian Department of Health spokeswoman Janice Okubo simply asserted to the St. Petersburg Times, “it’s a valid Hawaii state birth certificate.”
Although officials are on record that there is an original “birth certificate” held by the state, and that it is correctly filed according to Hawaii state directives. However, the specifics of the type of “birth certificate” records on file, with modifications, as well as the details and accounts of witnesses, is still unknown at this time.
“why did Cook seek a TRO or PI for a deployment that HE HIMSELF voluteered for, and which HE HIMSELF could have cancelled at any time? Why?”
The petition was filed in order to ask the court to provide relief from an order that was suspected to be illegitimate. An officer has a duty to ensure that any order is lawful. A rescinded order does not negate the fact that such an order was issued. Much like a drug dealer can’t buy back the drugs he sold to the undercover officer, and make the whole thing go away.
“The reasonable inference is that he wanted to set up a court case.”
I concur. Much like making a case against a drug dealer. One who does not meet the constitutional qualifications would not have the authority to issue that order. At minimum, it would be fraud to issue such an order. -Could it happen again? Yes.
“A student applies for Harvard and is admitted. Then he goes to state court for an injunction barring him from being admitted. Why?”
Irrelevant. Does a student at Harvard act on behalf of the United States Government?
Jim Byrne, your questions assume that the issues that have been raised are reasonable. I contend that they are not. A certified copy of a birth record is all that is required to establish the date and location of one’s birth. I note also that you choose to ignore the contemporaneous announcement of the president’s birth in his hometown newspaper, as well as the statements by the appropriate Hawaiian officials. Do you truly believe that it is reasonable to postulate a conspiracy involving state and federal officials and old newspaper archives? Finally, what documentation does the law require a candidate to submit as part of the process of qualifying to run for the presidency? Does it require anything? Were the requirements met by Mr. Obama, by Mr. McCain? Did Sen. McCain file his original long-form birth certificate with the House of Representatives or with the clerk of some federal district court?
I would also reiterate what Vince Treacy stated about Sen. McCain’s qualifications. It’s not something that I would ever lose sleep over, but there has been legitimate debate concerning whether he actually became a U.S. citizen until a statutory revision in 1937, a year after his birth. See, e.g., Spiro, Peter J., McCain’s Citizenship and Constitutional Method, 107 Mich. L. Rev. First Impressions 42 (2008). I’ve never seen any debate over this issue in any conservative journals or web sites. My only reason for mentioning this is that I do not think that all of the fuss is related to preserving the purity of the Constitution as much as it is to preventing a black man from serving in the office. (BTW, I’m not suggesting that that is your motive, or even that you have any motive.)
Mike A.,
“A certified copy of a birth record is all that is required to establish the date and location of one’s birth.
what was originally reported to be President Obama’s Certification of Live Birth did not display the embossed state seal. The date (seen in reverse) was long before the date that the document was said to have been requested.
If I print up a $100 dollar bill, and it states that this document is legal tender…does that make it so? We don’t just accept money on face value. I don’t think the highest office should accept “because I claim such”. -Remember…to the best of both of our knowledge, the Presidents qualifications have never been filed with any legally recognized entity.
I’m not saying he is or is not qualified. All I’m saying is that, I think there is enough reason to question such, and the ability to validate the same is so easy that it makes no sense to avoid it.
I think President Obama is a gazillion times smarter than President G.W. Bush…I also know that smart people think they can pull the wool over the eyes of the average citizen. I also know that people don’t question those that they voted for…an inherent fault of being human.
–I did address the statements made by the Hawaiian officials. I don’t have enough info about the newspaper headlines to determine their validity.
“Finally, what documentation does the law require a candidate to submit as part of the process of qualifying to run for the presidency? Does it require anything?”
Unfortunately, and to the best of my knowledge…None. The requirements to be on the ballot are not the same as the qualifications to hold the office. -The Twentieth Amendment, Section 3, seems to acknowledge that a president who lacks the qualifications can still be elected.
“Did Sen. McCain file his original long-form birth certificate with the House of Representatives or with the clerk of some federal district court?”
Irrelevant….but I doubt it.
As far as McCain’s qualifications go; people don’t discuss things that are not currently relevant. If he had won, I would have been challenging his qualifications too….And I think McCain is as patriotic a man who has ever ran for president. (political beliefs have nothing to do with patriotism)
When I request certified copies of documents, they frequently do not contain raised seals. Indeed, with the growth of efiling we will see fewer and fewer raised seals on anything. There is nothing magical about embossing. However, we cannot function effectively as a society if we are unable to rely upon certifications from the official custodians of records. That is precisely why such documents are considered self-authenticating. There is a substantive difference between what I am talking about and the printing of a $100.00 bill. If the bill were accompanied by a certificate from the U.S. Treasurer attesting to its validity, however, that would be acceptable everywhere.
The bottom line is that the birther controversy exists because the skeptics are requiring proof beyond what is necessary in a courtroom. It is not an answer to say, “If only the president would furnish this or that, it would resolve the issue.” The first inquiry is to whom is it an issue and why? If we were in trial, I would feel confident resting my case based upon the certified copy, affidavits from the Hawaiian officials and an authenticated copy of the newspaper birth announcement. If there were no competent rebuttal, I would win. Despite my repeated requests, I have yet to see any rebuttal, competent or otherwise. And I have certainly not seen anything substantive in any of Orly Taitz’ pleadings. In fact, I have not even seen a proffer from her as to what evidence she proposes to use to support any of her claims.
I am also bothered by your statement that we should keep Orly Taitz out of this. I strongly disagree. My experience has taught me that credibility is everything for a lawyer. When I make a representation to a court, the court is entitled to rely on that representation. If I have a habit of tossing out wild allegations, I am doing a disservice to the law and to my own reputation. I do not believe that her filings reflect well on the profession.
It is all over for Cook. Case dismissed as moot. It was predicted here that the court would not find standing. It did not.
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/292/story/779031.html
QUOTE Posted on Thu, Jul. 16, 2009
Federal judge dismisses reservist’s suit questioning Obama’s presidency
BY LILY GORDON
A federal judge this morning dismissed the suit filed here by a U.S. Army reservist who says he shouldn’t have to go to Afghanistan because he believes Barack Obama was never eligible to be president.
Judge Clay Land sided with the defense, which claimed in its response to Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook’s suit, filed July 8 with the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, that Cook’s suit is “moot” in that he already has been told he doesn’t have to go to Afghanistan, so the relief he is seeking has been granted.
“Federal court only has authority of actual cases and controversies,” Land said. “The entire action is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”
Cook arrived at the federal courthouse in uniform this morning for his hearing.
Outside the courthouse, before the hearing, Cook defended his controversial position and declared his devotion to the military.
“I love the Army and I want to continue to serve in the Army,” Cook said. “If we can establish that he is in fact president of the United States legally, I’m on the airplane the next day over to Afghanistan… if they cut my deployment orders, so I can do the job that I want to do.”
Cook said following orders made by an illegitimate superior could ultimately lead to his prosecution, or worse.
“If one cannot establish the validity and legality of the order … we would be following illegal orders and subject to prosecution,” he said. “I could be prosecuted by the Uniform Code of Military Justice and if captured I would not be privy to protections under the Geneva Convention.”
Other soldiers have been supportive of his position, Cook said.
“I’ve received quite a bit of popular support from officers in my grade and some officers a grade above and some officers a grade below,” he said. “Thus far, I’d say about 90 percent positive.”
Cook was accompanied by his attorney, Orly Taitz, who has challenged the legitimacy of Obama’s presidency in other courts. Two similar suits have previously been thrown out of federal court.
Ledger-enquirer.com will have more on this breaking story later this afternoon. UNQUOTE
You can get an injunction against your neighbor to stop him from chopping down your tree.
You just can’t get an injunction against yourself to stop yourself from chopping down your own tree.
Orly is in this thing. Look at her complaint. She asked for a writ of quo warranto to be issued by the Distict Court in D.C.
In a California federal court!
Why?
Judge Robinson would not admit her pro hac vice, and she could not find ANY DC Bar member to join with her. DC has tens of thousands of members because it is so easy to waive in. As an unaccredited law school grad, she cannot waive in or even take the DC bar.
And that is just one paragraph of the complaint.
It is truly the gift of laughter that keeps on giving.
On Orly, the kid stays in the case:
Jim Byrne linked above to Orly’s APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION [it is not a "petition"]:
QUOTE (38) Plaintiff points out that there was another time in United States history when officers of the military were forced to make a choice whether to follow the central government or their consciences. That time in United States history was in 1861 when some of the finest officers of the United States Army felt that they and their constitution had been betrayed by the central government, and that is how Mexican War heroes Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee, among so many others, became the leaders of the Confederate States of America.
(39) There were no lawsuits filed at that time—5 U.S.C. §702 and 42 U.S.C. §§1983-1988 had not yet been enacted. But the public interest is served by permitting Army officers to seek judicial protection and assistance when they question the legitimacy and authority of the commander-in-chief with regard to moral and constitutional issues.
(40) There are no “competing” governments now—no seceding states, however over 30 states have either passed or considered the bills of Sovereignty lately, which can be a step towards secession and a sign of vast dissatisfaction with the Federal government and the President.
(41) In historical hindsight it is easy to say the Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee hurt their own states of Mississippi and Virginia by supporting secession.
(42) In historical hindsight it is easy to say that even the pro-slavery cause might have been better served by acquiescence under Abraham Lincoln, who (absent secession and civil war) lacked any realistic legal power, as President in 1861, to interfere with slavery in any state or territory where it already existed. UNQUOTE
Huh? WTF?
Thanks for the update, Vince. One would think that if the birthers had a rational position to litigate, they would be able to locate a competent, rational attorney to handle the case. After all, think of the publicity a win would generate.
“After all, think of the publicity a win would generate.”
That is just the problem. There is NO chance of a win.
BTW, posters, tangle with Mike Appleton on matters of epistemology and logic at your own risk.
Mike Appleton:
Vince makes a valid point, what was your undergraduate degree?
Mike A.,
“When I request certified copies of documents, they frequently do not contain raised seals.”
You didn’t request the reported Certification. President Obama did. He apparently did so in 2008. However, the reported Certification has a 2007 stamp on it.
“However, we cannot function effectively as a society if we are unable to rely upon certifications from the official custodians of records.”
We don’t know if that document came from the custodian of records. No custodian has ever stated that the document presented is the document sent by the custodian of records.
“If the bill were accompanied by a certificate from the U.S. Treasurer attesting to its validity, however, that would be acceptable everywhere.”
Fine. I’ll print out a certificate from the Treasury to accompany the bill. Does that make it valid, and not subject to fraud?
–We believe what we want to believe…as long as we believe the source. If you didn’t put your hands on it, you’re relying on others.
“The first inquiry is to whom is it an issue and why?”
It is an issue because it is a qualification laid out in the Constitution. It is the only office that requires such qualification. Unfortunately, the Framers considered that an honorable man would present proof. —Hell, I’ll even print up the request, and pay an fees….all the President would need to do is sign it.
I’m sorry, but President Obama has been far less than transparent.
With all the claims against Major Cook, we must recognize that President Obama has spent over a million dollars to hide the vault copy of his birth certificate. –Why? What doesn’t he want people to know? –If that isn’t a reasonable question, I don’t know what is.
“I would feel confident resting my case based upon the certified copy, affidavits from the Hawaiian officials and an authenticated copy of the newspaper birth announcement.”
Make that certified copy available to forensic experts. -You submit the evidence, and then we’ll get a chance to challenge its validity. -The officials from Hawaii have never stated that the information presented to the public is the same information contained in the vault copy. -Never.
This may all be moot today, but someone with standing will come forward.
IS, I don’t think it makes any difference, but my undergraduate degree was in philosophy. Therefore, I had no choice but to go to law school if I wished to secure gainful employment.
Vince and Mike A.,
You two have done your usual yeoman work, proved the case over and over and yet make no headway in this. Why is that. I believe it stems from the fact that some here like to play with people rather than discuss, or debate. When nailed down they simply go onto another point. Jim proclaims all he was doing was innocently asking a question about how the Obama’s met and when called on it backs off to go onto another point. He even analogizes Cook’s gameplaying to the work of an undercover Narc. IS and bdaman are playing his wingmen in this thread, threading in and out with little jabs, ducking and weaving.
The original article initiating this thread gets hijacked because none of the three would want to continue to discuss the possibility of Cheney breaking the law and possible hit squads reporting to him, because it is so much more important that we figure out the existence of a seal on the President’s birth certificate.
The fact is that if there was a movie shot of the President’s Mother giving birth to him, under a sign saying Honolulu Hospital with a wall calendar giving the date, the birther movement would discredit it saying that it either wasn’t him, or it was a phony sign for a birth taking place in Kenya. Our three amigos would then chime in with supposedly serious objections as to how the movie had been faked.
They are hardly serious, but merely enjoy playing rhetorical games, with people like us who take these things far too seriously. I’m damned if I know why this is such fun to them, but the existential evidence is that they’re having a ball. I find it sad that the ability to discuss issues has deteriorated so much in the last fifty years, but it has. The curse of Ruppert Murdoch, that began with the purchase of the NY Post has taken control of the media and of the minds of many, who take governance with so little seriousness that they prefer to be governed by the propaganda of disharmony and
rhetorical phoniness.
Jim Byrne, I have never seen my original birth certificate. I doubt that you have ever seen your original birth certificate. That is not because we try to “hide” them from public view, but because the original documents are maintained by those agencies of government charged with maintaining them. Forensics experts are typically retained by people when they have reasonable grounds to question the authenticity of a document. The phrase “reasonable grounds” means a well-founded belief, which in turn means a belief grounded in fact. Let me repeat what I’ve said in earlier posts on this subject. Aside from the understandable opposition to an illegitimate president serving as commander in chief of an “army of slaves,” as the current situation has been described in legal filings, what FACTS support the allegation that Pres. Obama’s birth records are false and fraudulent?
If I decide for whatever reason that you were stealing money from me, I could file an action against you for civil theft. But I can assure you that no court could enter an order sustainable on appeal requiring you to produce all of your financial and banking records based solely on a statement in a complaint that you stole money from me.
Mike Spindell,
Do you have any other conspiracy theories?
bdaman posted the first info about Taitz at 7:02 AM on July 14th
followed by BVM at 7:46 AM.
I didn’t join the discussion until 11:22 AM.
I think your the one playing games.
Mike S., I think you’re right. The following is an absolutely true story. Many years ago a man came into my office to discuss the filing of an action under the Federal Tort Claims Act. He sat with me for an hour and argued strenuously that the CIA had implanted devices in his teeth which permitted the agency to monitor his movements and his communications. He offered various explanations for why this had occurred, none of which made any particular sense.
When I began to press the gentleman for certain details, he became agitated, as though I were questioning his truthfulness. This made me a bit nervous to be honest, because I had no idea what he might be contemplating should he not be taken seriously. I eventually convinced him that I had no reason to doubt what he told me, but that in order to really blow the case open, we would need a set of dental X-rays. I requested that he schedule an immediate dental appointment to have that done, arrange to have the results sent to my office and then have a follow-up meeting with me to discuss litigation strategy. He was very agreeable to that suggestion and left my office as a man on a mission. I never heard from him again.
Mike S again you are wrong in your assumption about me. I’m not bob n and weaving. There are other things I HAVE TO DO in my day. I come back to the computer as often as I can. If you notice the majority of my post are early morning and back again late afternoon. Your previuos assumption of me is 100% wrong. I have stated my beliefs from everything from Bush let 9-11 happen to have a reason to start a war to being a birther as you like to call people who take up my position. You guys can get as detailed as you want about facts, evidence and the rule of law, but I can smell a rat a mile away. I am a man of color so don’t tell me about not wanting a black man in office. Been called nigger more Fn times than you thought it. Do you know what it’s like to be called nigger and then spit on. F you. I could care a less whether the man that sits there is a republican or democrat. I’m about what that man stands for and what he does.
“President Obama has spent over a million dollars to hide the vault copy of his birth certificate.”
That is a persistent birther rumor, but no proof has been offered. Some people believe this implicitly, yet doubt Obama’s birth certificate.
And the birth certificate is irrelevant, since the birthers insist against all law and precedent that a natural born citizen have two US citizen parents, so Obama can never be natural born. This particular discussion has exhausted almost all aspects of the topic, and the Cook case is moot and over.
Mike S., about the hijacking, it happened before at “Obama adopts Cheney” and at another thread that I have forgotten. I just tried to respond to birthere posters who chose the thread. Note that I redirected a health policy post away from here to the new health bill topic.
If we all agree, we can continue all these born discussions at the most recent natural born citizen thread, and direct any birther posters to our replies there, or to any other thread mutually agreed upon:
Eligibility Questions: Can Clinton Serve Obama and Can Obama Serve the Country?
Published 1, December 4, 2008:
http://jonathanturley.org/2008/12/04/eligibility-questions-can-clinton-serve-obama-and-can-obama-serve-the-country/
Mike A.,
I have a photocopy of my Certicate of Live Birth -the long form, and I also have a Certification of Live Birth.
People hire forensic investigators all the time without any “reasonable grounds”. The validity of evidence is regularly challenged. -Just because your side says it’s valid, my side is not required to accept the determination of your expert.
“what FACTS support the allegation that Pres. Obama’s birth records are false and fraudulent?”
The reported certification is stamped with a 2007 date. However, the request was not submitted until 2008. -reason enough?
Check out We the People
As Vince suggested, I have moved my portion of this discussion to
http://jonathanturley.org/2008/12/04/eligibility-questions-can-clinton-serve-obama-and-can-obama-serve-the-country/
bdaman said “I could care a less whether the man that sits there is a republican or democrat. I’m about what that man stands for and what he does.”
ditto (If that word can still be non-partisan)
The heart of the matter:
No Geographical Limitations on the Scope of Assassination Program
http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/07/16/report-no-geographical-limitations-on-cia-assassination-program/
lottakatz,
Check out Jeremy Scahill for both Thursday and Wednesday. The story we’re being fed is BS. I’m sure the no geograhpical limitations is correct, along with many other unsavory directives. And I don’t believe it wasn’t operational either. I’m hoping for leaks, leaks and more leaks. It’s the only way this story will actually break open.
http://rebelreports.com/
I agree that we’re not getting the full story and I, too, would like to see “leaks, leaks, and more leaks.”
Thanks for the “rebelreports.com” link, Jill.
Illegal, covert operations are in full swing right here in America. I’m 100% certain. 100%.
Believe it or not. Dismiss it if you like. Someone knows. And hopefully someone will blow the whistle and/or leak the nature of the program or programs.
I’m just going to keep repeating it and hope that “the truth will out”.
Jill and anon, you understand of course that you two are prime examples of why Cheney never wanted to reveal anything to anyone, the fear of “leaks, leaks and more leaks.” I guess that means it’s really your fault that Congress wasn’t properly briefed. And I bet that Liz Cheney would agree.
“I am a man of color so don’t tell me about not wanting a black man in office.”
bdaman,
When did I say that you didn’t want a black man in office, or that even this argument about the Presidents citizenship is about his being black? I didn’t and you can go back and look at what I’ve written to discover that. To then bring in “nigger” as if I’ve ever used the word and then add “F You,” is really way out of line. You don’t know me, my work, my long life and the causes I’ve put myself on the line for. All you know of me is what I’ve written here and nothing that I’ve written could be construed as anti-Black.
My point is that the birther movement is being financed by people who would try to make any Democratic President or Candidate illegitimate and I stand by it. I also didn’t accuse either of you three of conspiring to work together, but commented on how you have provided support for each other. Now I did at one point lump Jim in with the people who voted Republican in the last election and he replied that he
didn’t vote for McCain, which I’ll accept on his word and because it is irrelevant to my point. Later, on Jim castigates me for implying a conspiracy theory on you three, when that wasn’t what I did. I find it funny though because to me the entire birther movement is a real conspiracy.
To me there has been presented no credible evidence that President Obama is illegally in office and much credible evidence that supports it. The issue for the birther movement will not go away no matter what evidence is presented, because it is not about fact, but about de-legitimizing a Democratic President. A tissue of barely plausible theories and in Cook’s case duplicity to create an issue. To the extent that people support it I think you and the others are wrong and allowing yourselves to be used. I also think that when Jim throws in a supposed President Obama lie about how he met Michelle, he is merely clouding the waters purposely. Having read a lot of Jim by now I really do think that this is play for him and as such he can be quite disingenuous at times in presenting his viewpoints.
IS, on the other hand is quite specific as to what he represents and I agree, or disagree with him when our views meld or clash. I have done the same with you bdaman and with Jim for that matter.
To me there has been presented no credible evidence that President Obama is illegally in office and much credible evidence that supports it (his being in office).
bdaman,
Mike S. is correct. It was Mike A. that suggested the motivation may be to prevent/remove a black man from holding office. -Mike A. added a disclaimer noting that he was not suggesting that was my intent.
Mike S.,
You are far too fast at judging others. I enjoy debating issues. I don’t enjoy debate for the sake of argument.
As I have stated in previous posts; I would be questioning John McCain’s natural-born status -if he would have prevailed. In fact, as I stated in a previous thread, I had dinner with one of McCain’s lawyers and discussed the same.
Perhaps this quote from Jefferson will provide you with some direction.
“It has been a source of great pain to me to have met with so many among [my] opponents who had not the liberality to distinguish between political and social opposition; who transferred at once to the person, the hatred they bore to his political opinions.”
thanks for sharing… i also think that u r correct….