The Question of President Obama’s Birth Certificate – Latest Lawsuit joined by Active Duty Lieutenant Colonel and Retired Army General – Analysis.

Barak Obama’s birth certificate has been questioned from the beginning of his candidacy – subsequently, a form of a birth certificate was placed on-line as proof of existence on the campaign website and further, an organization called FactCheck.org proffered proof of legitimacy with portions of the birth certificate shown, and assessed by the staff of this website as legitimate, (staff is associated with but not Connected to The University of Pennsylvania). As further proof of legitimacy, the staff claimed to have received the birth certificate from the campaign headquarters for Obama in Chicago. One would think that would be enough to dispel and debunk the growing interest in Obama’s beginnings, yet, the questions remained.

Lou Dobbs from CNN received a scolding from the leftist website Media Matters, for asking the campaign to produce the birth certificate and put an end to the rumors – several document experts have viewed the online versions and there are several questions regarding the document:

• Where is the embossed seal and the registrar's signature?
• Comparing it to other Hawaii birth certificates, the color shade is different.
• Isn't the date stamp bleeding through the back of the document "June 2007?" (Odd since it was supposedly released in June 2008.)
• There's no crease from being folded and mailed.
• It's clearly Photoshopped and a wholesale fraud.

A source also produced a Hawaiian birth certificate for comparison, the copy was similar to that viewed on line and further, that individual implied the State of Hawaii does not release birth certificates unless one is a family member, and that they are all produced in the same manner. (no seal, etc.) Those comparing documents (copies of) were certain that one proferred by the Hawaiin source contained a seal, while the President’s did not.

There were suits brought to produce the original documents, all dismissed by the courts, and the rumor, fact or fiction, aside, appeared to have lost complete steam once Barak Obama took office. It is now back, in the form of several law suits brought by an Army Reservist – the premise: the reservist did not feel he could go to war (Afghanistan), until it was proved that Obama was a natural born citizen and therefore, had rights to be the Commander in Chief. This suit was dropped, when the military revoked said reservists order – no more controversy – not so:

Fromthe Ledger-Enquirer, Ft. Benning Georgia, July 16, 2009

A controversial suit brought by a U.S. Army reservist has been joined by a retired Army two-star general and an active reserve Air Force lieutenant colonel.
Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook filed the suit July 8 in federal court here asking for conscientious objector status and a preliminary injunction based upon his belief that President Barack Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States and is therefore ineligible to serve as president of the United States and commander-in-chief of the U.S. Armed Forces.
However, before the issue got to court, Cook’s orders to deploy to Afghanistan were revoked. Lt. Col. Maria Quon, a public affairs officer with the U.S. Army Human Resources Command-St. Louis, said Tuesday that Cook was no longer expected to report Wednesday to MacDill Air Force Base in Florida for mobilization to active duty. Cook, who claims he is now the victim of retaliation due to his suit, received his mobilization orders to report for active duty at MacDill on Wednesday. From there, he was to go to Fort Benning on Saturday for deployment to Afghanistan.
Cook is an Individual Mobilization Augmentee. This means he’s a reserve soldier assigned to an active component unit consisting of active duty soldiers instead of a reserve unit, which is composed entirely of reserve soldiers. He is assigned to the U.S. Army Element of U.S. Southern Command.
Last week, Cook filed a request in federal court seeking a temporary restraining order and status as a conscientious objector represented by California attorney Orly Taitz.
The government, in its response to the suit, claims 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.
“The Commanding General of SOCCENT (U.S. Special Operations Central Command) has determined that he does not want the services of Major Cook, and has revoked his deployment orders,” the response states.
In a pleading revised after the revocation of Cook’s orders, Taitz argues that the application for preliminary injunction is not moot and that retired Maj. Gen. Carol Dean Childers and active U.S. Air Force reservist Lt. Col. David Earl Graeff have joined the suit “because it is a matter of unparalleled public interest and importance and because it is clearly a matter arising from issues of a recurring nature that will escape review unless the Court exercises its discretionary jurisdiction.”
Cook’s resubmitted Application for Preliminary Injunction is meant to encompass the possibility of Cook receiving future orders for deployment as well as to address and prevent “negative collateral consequences such as retaliation against Major Stefan Frederick Cook ...”
As to the retaliation issue, the revised suit states Cook lost his job at Simtech Inc., a corporation that does Department of Defense contracting in the field of information technology/systems integration, because of the suit. It also states that Cook has been subjected to “gossip” from people who believed Cook was “manipulating his deployment orders to create a platform for political purposes.”
Taitz, who has challenged the legitimacy of Obama’s presidency in other courts, filed the original suit with the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. Two similar suits have previously been thrown out of federal court.
In the filing, Cook states he “would be acting in violation of international law by engaging in military actions outside the United States under this President’s command. … simultaneously subjecting himself to possible prosecution as a war criminal by the faithful execution of these duties.”

Now, the question of the legitimacy of the Obama Presidency (vis a vis natural born citizen), should be put to rest once and for all, and the method for doing so is quite simple – produce the document – front and back – for the White House Press Corp with document analysts in attendance, to verify its authenticity. One understands that this may sound extreme, from Obama’s point of view, or unnecessary, as he may feel that this has already been done, despite the continued rumors. However, that said, as this “rumor” is now picking up steam within the ranks of those who serve in the Military, and the President has decided to escalate troop levels in Afghanistan to “stabilize” the country (a military move that has been historically proven, even to the most stalwart warriors, impossible) (see Viet Nam revisited), it would behoove the White House to produce those documents, humor those who are inclined to believe documents shown to date are forged and proove the man sitting in the Oval Office has legitimate claim to the Presidency. By doing so, although most likely inconvenient, it would put the matter to rest. Additionally, it goes without saying that any president of any country needs to have the complete and utter trust of the military. It would, therefore, settle the minds of those in the military who are questioning Obama’s legitimacy, as well as to those who feel it is more fact that fiction.

That said, there are two scenarios which could occur, and those who are pushing these suits, and theories, must understand the concept of Pandora’s Box. Should the President take the time to dispel the rumor once and for all by producing his original certificate (as described above), then all would be well with the nation. However, supposing that a certificate of birth could not be produced that proved, beyond a doubt, that Barack Obama was a natural citizen, what then would occur? The President would have to step down, (Federal Crime) and the Vice President – if not implicated as an accessory – would take the reins of the government. We are talking about Joe Biden here. If Biden was found to be implicit in this crime, and he had to step down, then the next two in line to the presidency are: Nancy Pelosi followed by Harry Reid. Should Reid and Pelosi be found to be involved in this crime – the next in line would be Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State. (One must understand that it would be extremely hard to believe Secretary Clinton would have, at any time, aided President Obama in any crime what-so-ever, specifically during the camping.) (One might also say the same of Biden, not due to any political rivalry, but certainly one would think that if Joe Biden knew of any secrets, they would have been out of the box in under a minute). Clinton, as President, would be fine; her senate record was rather accomplished and she has moderate tendencies when it comes to governing, that said, consider Biden would, in all likelihood, be where the proverbial buck stopped. (See note on can’t keep a secret, which is well documented.

From the perspective of this particular moderate conservative feminist, the theory that the President does not hold a U.S. birth certificate is most likely just that, a theory. The President is most likely not rushing to produce a certificate as he either feels that the case has been put to rest by his “fact checking” websites, or he may also be a tad arrogant, or lacking the intelligence (grades have also not been produced) to see where this may lead (doubtful). That said, should these lawsuits begin to pile up, first 1 then 3 then 30, it may be time to put the rumors to rest; at that point, there would be those who now consider this to be of little consequence, that would seriously question the President’s authority, the authority of the Vice-President and every single individual in the line of secession, with one exception – and that would be Hillary Clinton.