OrlyTaitzEsq.com

TaitzReport.com

Defend Our Freedoms Foundation (DOFF)
29839 Santa Margarita Pkwy, Ste 100
Rancho Santa Margarita CA, 92688
Copyright 2014

Review of Politics, Economics, Constitution, Law and World Affairs by Attorney and Doctor Orly Taitz


If you love your country, please help me fight this creeping tyranny and corruption.
Donations no matter how small will help pay for airline and travel expenses.





The articles posted represent only the opinion of the writers and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Dr. Taitz, Esq., who has no means of checking the veracity of all the claims and allegations in the articles.
Mail donations to:
Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, c/o Dr. Orly Taitz
29839 Santa Margarita Pkwy, Ste 100
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688.
Contact Dr. Taitz at
orly.taitz@gmail.com.
In case of emergency, call 949-683-5411.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny.
When the government fears the people, there is liberty.
-- Thomas Jefferson

During times of universal deceit, telling the truth
becomes a revolutionary act.  -- George Orwell

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they
fight you, then you win.  -- Mahatma Gandhi

If the Chairman of joint chiefs of staff calls Obama, a third party official, then the members of the military are not obligated to take orders of this “third party official”

Posted on | July 4, 2009 | 3 Comments

J Radin

The Commander in Chief is not one of the “third party senior government officials.”

Is Crawford saying in his letter to you that the relationship between a civilian Commander in Chief (Obama) and military personnel is not governed by Article 138 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice? Where in that code does it exclude military orders issued by the President from its jurisdiction. A military order is a military order.

Come on patriots. Dig into Article 138 or any other applicable body of law and find how to enforce the law.

 Very Important- All of my Dossiers and pleadings were forwarded by the office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to the office of General Counsel, Litigation Counsel of the Department of Defense. Happy 4th of July !
Category: Uncategorized

Comments

3 Responses to “If the Chairman of joint chiefs of staff calls Obama, a third party official, then the members of the military are not obligated to take orders of this “third party official””

  1. 8mechanic, bfedorka
    July 5th, 2009 @ 1:53 am

    …members of the military are not obligated to take orders of this “third party official” -J Radin

    You might hold jumping the gun on this one. Drawing on my six years of non-commissioned enlistment in the USAF in the 90s I have simplified (hopefully correct) points regarding UCMJ, charges filed and obeying Presidential orders:

    Eligibility aside, the UCMJ was hardly written with the concept of an ‘imposter’ acting as Commander in Chief. Probably no one could have dreamt the reality and possibility of this hierarchical nightmare in a country of spacious skies, amber waves of grain, purple mountain’s majesty and fruited plains.

    UCMJ, the Uniformed Code of Military Justice, is a legal system, if you will, for the U.S. Military and it was meant to deal with issues that a civilian court would not readily comprehend, i.e., disobeying a command requiring clean up detail as a punitive measure, to keep the example simple.

    While the Military’s “boss”, the President of the United States, is a civilian–meaning he is not uniformed and not a member of the Military Corps–under the Separation of Powers in the United States Constitution part of his duty is sworn to protect and lead his country, to protect its liberty and sovereignty. His nature is assumed benign.

    I’ve never heard the “third party” reference to the President in the military context (maybe it is correct) but leave that aside either way. Probably the only assumption heretofore to question a president’s authority might be due to mental, intellectual, or medical anomaly that would render him incapable to lead in a competent manner.

    If the Military Chiefs of Staff were the first to pick up on this dilemma of an impaired president they would not run solely to the UCMJ for remedy. Instead they might convene a Congressional Committee, say the House Armed Services, to name one. This would fit the definition of a “third party” but forget about slicing words to keep the point.

    Now enter the “obligation to take orders”. The President, a CIVILIAN, is the highest officer of the United States Military. That is why he is titled, “Commander in Chief”. A crisis as discussed above, would be handled through several, or combination of, in some order: Congressional Committee, Joint Chiefs of the Military Branches, U.S.Congress, a Military War Room—whatever it would take. Probably there is clear contingency directive in this area. Yet the problem that arises before the Litigation Counsel of the Department of Defense is unique. A civilian as stated does not fall under UCMJ but I’m not sure the UCMJ can be completely ruled out either. In the meantime, there is obligation and duty by oath to take orders of the president and those orders must be obeyed without recourse to dissent. There is also the reality of the seriousness of the charges filed and whether there is a will and populace to face that reality and the broader long-term implication and danger of ignoring it.

    Bottom line, it’s a military order issued by a civilian, established to keep the military from running away with itself. This nation was founded on the assumption of moral leadership that would check and balance each other and not be subversive while doing so.

  2. Bacsi
    July 5th, 2009 @ 4:18 am

    8mechanic, bfedorka: “In the meantime, there is obligation and duty by oath to take orders of the president and those orders must be obeyed without recourse to dissent.”

    Absolutely incorrect, members of the armed forces have a sworn duty and obligation to DISOBEY unlawful orders regardless of who gives them. What do you think the Nuremberg Trials were about?

  3. J Radin
    July 5th, 2009 @ 1:29 pm

    John Crawford says in his letter to Orly, Article 138 “is not suited for receiving or resolving complaints of misconduct by third party senior government officials.” There perhaps he’s not taking about the Commander in Chief. Not being familiar with the details of Orly’s complaints she may have included “third party senior government officials” along with Obama. In this case he is perhaps being silent on Obama, either wishing to take further consideration of the matter as things ripen or attempting to dismiss the matter all together. I’m not clear on his words. Bottom line, no comment by the Joint Chiefs of Staff does not mean they are passing the buck or are not deeply disturbed by the facts and allegation. Orly is operating and as an individual citizen must (for at least safety reasons) operate openly in public. Those in the military and in law enforcement often and wisely do not reveal their tactics and strategies to their adversaries.

    Regarding the ripening of this piece of bad fruit, Obama’s obvious treachery is still concealed from the masses by a rotten news media. Many and Orly especially have been making the rounds, getting the facts and allegations out. The facts are explosive (which also serves the Left’s agenda) and could rip this nation apart if not accepted and taken to heart by overwhelming numbers of people. There is a justifiable fear about large scale civil unrest. Anarchy is the nesting ground for Communist, NAZI and al Queda power grabs.

    Americans as a nation are famous for eventually doing the right thing. We will survive this and the national self doubt it will inflict. Eventually doing the right thing will instill a renewed national confidence and vigilance. The right results will not come instantaneously. The scale of this endeavor requires an ever broadening support before the tide turns completely. Orly Taitz is broadening and strengthening our movement to keep the USA a free republic.