Sunday, February 01, 2009

Letter From Concerned USAFR MC U.S. Citizen


The following letter is posted over at Orly Taitz' blog. It states everything that I would have wanted to say, if given the chance to present such an argument to the powers that be in Washington, D.C.

Here is the letter in it's entirety:

Quote:

From: Dr. David A. Earl- Graef LtCol. USAFR

Date: 1 Feb 2009,

Dear Senator Warner,

I am in receipt of your letter of 26 Jan 2009. While I thank you for taking the time to respond I can’t express in words my disappointment in your response. I have given much thought to this issue and take offense in so much as you would apparently dismiss my concerns without a thorough investigation into the validity of my questions. So it is that I am again compelled to write to you and ask your re-consideration. Please do not dismiss prima fasciae, as if this has already been addressed, but read what I have to say.

The requirement to be a “Natural Born” citizen is very specific as you point out in Article II, Section 1, and Clause 5 as it applies to the office of the POTUS. The Framers in their construct recognize there IS a difference between a Citizen and a Natural Born Citizen. The requirement was instituted to provide a safeguard that the POTUS would have undivided loyalty to the United States. I share the opinion of Attorneys Orly Taitz and Phil Berg who are among the Constitutional Attorneys bringing these cases to the State, Federal and Supreme Court that Natural Born status also requires that BOTH parents be citizens; a condition we know is NOT the instance in the case. This is not a trivial question left for Legal Academics to debate, it is about our Constitution and a matter for Congress and our Supreme Court.

To date, no case challenging the qualifications of President Obama to hold that Office has been heard on its merits. I have pleaded with Chief Justice Roberts to answer on the merits of the case and will continue barring action by the Congress to address my concerns. Most of the lawsuits are brought by concerned Citizens rightfully questioning if our Constitution is being followed and have been dismissed on lack of standing allowing questions to remain. The same lawsuits President Obama or those speaking for President Obama have referred to as Garbage!

I ask you now; is this the response you would also give the citizens addressing their concerns? Would you tell us our concerns are Garbage? I will trust in your integrity and believe it is not how you yourself would respond, if informed, as evidenced by your response to me to date. I believe you would simply give us what we need to reassure us. Given this could be put to rest by easily producing the supporting documents President Obama has sealed, do you think this is an appropriate response for a person in a position of public trust ?

There is much misinformation in the media. Even during the Inauguration, I heard it stated by Rick Warren that President Obama’s father was an “immigrant” from Kenya, yet it is known he was NOT an “immigrant “ and never had U.S. Citizenship at any time of his life. There are many other legitimate questions regarding the Constitutional qualifications of the POTUS. This is being aggravated by the President spending hundreds of thousands of dollars by reasonable estimates and using teams of attorneys to block the release of documents to support his qualifications. This includes the vault copy of the Official Birth Certificate held by the State of Hawaii you mentioned in your letter.

While I believe you answered my inquiry in good faith, I believe you misstate the facts in your letter. To my knowledge, at no point has the Hawaii Department of Health stated that he was actually BORN there. They stated they have his official Hawaii Birth Certificate on file and nothing more. Are you aware that Hawaii Statute allows one to obtain a Certificate of Live Birth ( i.e. the one Mr. Obama submitted as his ONLY “proof” to us on HIS web site ) on the unsubstantiated information provided by a single parent ? Are you aware that one may obtain this for a specified period of time even if born outside the US? Are you aware that if President Obama was born in Kenya, as some assert , his mother did not meet the legal requirements to even confer US citizenship on her son? Who was it that provided the information for the Hawaii certificate? Is there a Physicians signature on the original or not ? What was the Hospital where he was born? Not what his SISTER says but what is on the official document.

Does it not stand to reason President Obama should make it public so that competent authority can verify its authenticity? Does it not stand to reason that if everything is in order and there is nothing to hide this would have been done long before the election when this became a question rather than fight in the courts? Do you yourself not want to know the answers to these questions? Does the Constitution still matter ?

This situation by analogy would be like me giving a Hospital my Medical School Diploma and when they ask for my transcripts as a source document, I hire teams of attorneys to block the Hospital from getting it and start taking care of patients anyway. Then to make matters worse I tell them their efforts to require me to produce my transcripts are Garbage. How much more important is it that the person who has control of our military to produce supporting documents when asked ? This is absolutely absurd and an outrage to those of us who are informed, place our very lives at the feet of Liberty and are simply asking to have this issue settled. There are many other questions that remain unanswered which my attorney, Dr. Orly Taitz, would be happy to discuss with you.

I can’t imagine the demands currently placed upon your time and I am sympathetic to you. Nevertheless, you must also realize the potential catastrophic consequences to our Country if indeed we are already into a Constitutional crisis. This is a National disgrace if we allow our Constitution to be ignored simply because someone, perhaps in the DNC , did not do their job in properly vetting the candidates in this last election.

Please understand, I do not intend to convey any disrespect to you in any way, but I can’t contain my sense of betrayal that to date elected officials seem willing to let this pass without reasonable due process. It is also disappointing to me that you do not seem to appreciate the tremendous difficulty that this issue places upon each and every American soldier. Although I have over 15 years of credible military service I am at this moment struggling to decide if I must resign my commission as I can’t reconcile my Oath to defend the Constitution while being in doubt that those above me have respected it in word and deed. I know that I am only one Officer but there must be more, as they learn of this and they will, they will be faced with the same impossible decision. This is a classic Hobson’s choice for which the only hope of redemption is to know the truth.

Our History is replete with the memoirs of American soldiers and Statesman who have, due to the failure of their leaders or at the hand of destiny itself faced similar difficult decisions. One such soldier was Robert E. Lee who found himself divided between family loyalties to the South and loyalty to his Oath of Office. He then under extreme duress resigned his commission so that he would not be conflicted. As you know he chose his FAMILY heritage for which to take a stand.

Make no mistake, while the particular situation facing Gen. Lee was different in circumstance, in essence it is the same as we now face in the military and the same as is at the heart of the Natural Born Citizen requirement . I do not believe abandoning our Constitution is our destiny to forward the interests of a partisan Government but instead the failed actions of our leaders to address a legitimate issue regarding our Constitution.

My loyalty to the Constitution of the United States as per my Oath is and has been un-wavering. I have to this point and will continue to act in good faith as a United States Air Force Officer. I am only asking that this Constitutional issue be resolved, so that I may be able to continue in my service to my country and my President freely, without doubt or reservation.

If there is no problem with the qualifications of the POTUS this can be discovered very quickly by a full investigation by the Congress and we can all go about the business of daily life. Furthermore, the decisions you must make regarding the problems we face will actually have meaning and will not have to be redressed. They are difficult enough, I should think you would not what to have do make them again.

I continue to trust and it is my hope, as is the case with most Americans, you have a trusting heart and nature and that you have simply been misled. I implore you to bring this before the Congress. You have the right and I believe the responsibility to do this as I watched the proceedings on 8 Jan 2009 and as a Point of Order the Constitution was not followed for the opportunity to voice objections to the Electoral College was not given. This is too important to ignore and hope it will go away because it will NOT. If for any reason our concerns have merit with each stroke of the pen we get deeper and deeper as none of the actions of POTUS will have the force of law. Have you read some of the foreign press who are aware of this and may question the validity of treaties that may be signed? I have seen it myself. The potential harmful implications are staggering.

I do not believe you want in any way to have not acted and to make absolutely certain beyond any doubt we are not in the very midst of a Constitutional crisis. I do not believe you would want this, if the worst is true, to be the legacy of YOUR service to our Country. As difficult as this may be for you to bring to the attention of the Congress, it also is nothing less than the opportunity for you to take a stand and be counted among the Great Leaders of our Nation who have come before and risked their fortunes and their lives for the sake of Liberty and our sacred Constitution.

I heard it said many times during the long Campaign to the Presidency that if ever in our History we needed leadership it is now ! I am convinced that this is true. We need our Leaders to possess not only the wisdom of our Founding Fathers but the strength of conviction to see the challenges through in the face of daunting opposition if we are to survive as a sovereign Nation . Please investigate this more. I am confident that when you do you will appreciate the gravity of the situation and be compelled to act in defense of our Constitution.

Very Respectfully,

Dr. David A. Earl-Graef USAFR MC /quote

*******


The Meaning of Our Symbol

The U.S. Air Force symbol honors the heritage of our past and represents the promise of our future. It retains the core elements of our Air Corps heritage -- the "Arnold" wings and star with circle -- and modernizes them to reflect our air and space force of today and tomorrow.

The symbol has two main parts. In the upper half, the stylized wings represent the stripes of our strength -- the enlisted men and women of our force. They are drawn with great angularity to emphasize our swiftness and power, and they are divided into six sections which represent our distinctive capabilities -- air and space superiority, global attack, rapid global mobility, precision engagement, information superiority, and agile combat support.

In the lower half are a sphere, a star and three diamonds. The sphere within the star represents the globe. It reminds us of our obligation to secure our nation's freedom with Global Vigilance, Reach and Power. The globe also reminds us of our challenge as an expeditionary force to respond rapidly to crises and to provide decisive aerospace power, worldwide.

The area surrounding the sphere takes the shape of a star. The star has many meanings. Its five points represent the components of our Total Force and family -- our active duty, civilians, Guard, Reserve and retirees. The star symbolizes space as the high ground of our nation's air and space force. The rallying symbol in all our wars, the star also represents our officer corps, central to our combat leadership.

The star is framed with three diamonds, which represent our core values -- integrity first, service before self and excellence in all we do. The elements come together to form one symbol that presents two powerful images -- at once it is an eagle, the emblem of our nation, and a medal, representing valor in service to our nation.

*******
Dad - this post is presented here in honor and remembrance of you and your service to our nation in the United States Air Force during World War II. If you were alive today, I'm certain that you would have written a similar letter of concern about the ineligibility (if Obama Jr.'s real father was, in fact, Obama Sr.) of Barack Hussein Obama for POTUS because of the fact that he cannot be a Natural Born Citizen of the United States of America because his father was Kenyan and never a citizen of our nation.
Love you dad...
Miss you...
Your loving daughter,
"Sweetie Pie"



*******

Related posts and articles.

Update 2/2/09 at 8:49 a.m. PT:

Over at The Betrayal I found a great letter of request written and sent to Senator Patty Murray that I think, ultimately, will be difficult to ignore!

Quote:

Posted on February 2nd, 2009 by David-Crockett

Natural Born Citizen…Orly? published:

Download Copy Here

1 February 2009 Sunday

U.S. Senator Patty Murray, (D - WA)Washington, D.C. Office173 Russell Senate Office BuildingWashington, D.C. 20510Phone: (202) 224-2621Fax: (202) 224-0238via Fax: (202) 224-0238

Re: U.S. Constitution; FIRST CONGRESS; THIRD CONGRESS

Dear Senator Murray:
Your representation as a U.S. Senator is formally requested within this letter. Due to a rapidly growing concern among voters in the State of Washington there appears to be a developing crisis requiring your membership in the U.S. Congress to fully cooperate with the voters and address four questions below.

In the official copies of the THIRD U.S. Congress (1795) are margin notes that state “Former act repealed. 1790. ch. 3.” referencing the FIRST U.S. Congress (1790).

The actual text of the THIRD CONGRESS in 1795 states,“…children of citizens [plural, i.e. two parents] of the United States…shall be considered citizens of the United States; Provided That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons, whose fathers have never been resident in the United States…” [THIRD CONGRESS Sess. II. Ch.21. 1795, Approved January 29, 1795, pp. 414-415] [Document margin note: “How children shall obtain citizenship through their parents” Document margin note: Former Act repealed 1790 ch.3] (Attachment A)

The actual text of the FIRST CONGRESS in 1790 states,“…children of citizens [plural, i.e. two parents] of the United States…shall be considered as natural born citizens of the United States; Provided That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons, whose fathers have never been resident in the United States…” [[FIRST CONGRESS Sess. II Ch.4 1790, Approved March 26, 1790, pp. 103-104] [Document margin note: Their children residing here, deemed citizens. Document margin note: Also, children of citizens born beyond sea, & c. Exceptions.] (Attachment B)
The actual text of the Constitution from the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention, 1774-1789, and subsequent official printings, of the Constitution of the United States of American: Article II Section 1 Clause 5 states,“No person, except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United Statesat the time of the adoption of this Constitution,shall be eligible to the office of President…” (Attachment C)

The actual text in a January 26, 2009 letter issued by United States Senator, Mark R. Warner cites

“…the Immigration and Nationality Act (P.L. 82-414) …states that‘…A person born…after April 30, 1900 is a CITIZEN (emphasis added) of the United States at birth….’” (Attachment D)

U.S. Senator Patty Murray, (D - WA)
1 February 2009 Sunday
Page Two

WE, voters in the State of Washington, witness to these four documents cited, i.e.:
The actual text of the THIRD CONGRESS in 1795
The actual text of the FIRST CONGRESS in 1790
The actual text of the Constitution from the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention, 1774-1789

The actual text in a January 26, 2009 letter issued by United States Senator, Mark R. Warnerand we also witness the apparent denial in the current United States Congress to address the phrase “natural born citizen.”

THEREFORE, WE formally request a comprehensive answer from your position as Senator to the following four questions:

ONE
As a U.S. Senator, how did you define the term “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN” versus “CITIZENS” in regard to the 2008 U.S. Presidential election; as so stated in the U.S. Constitution, the FIRST and the THIRD Congress of the United States?

TWO
Are children of citizens (plural) of the United States granted citizenship if one parent is not a citizen of the United States; as the phrase “…children of citizens of the United States…” is so stated in FIRST and THIRD Congress of the United States?

THREE
To be a “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN” of the United States is a person required to be a child of “citizens (plural) of the United States” as the phrase “natural born citizen” is so stated in the U.S. Constitution, and the FIRST Congress of the United States?

FOUR
On behalf of voters in the State of Washington, will you provide us with comprehensive clarification from United States Senator Mark R. Warner regarding the legal difference between the legal term/phrases “CITIZEN of the United States” and “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN of the United States?”

In advance, I thank you for your prompt and comprehensive response to these four questions.

Very truly yours,
Michael Angelus

Attachments:
A: Image of original document THIRD CONGRESS Sess. II. Ch.21, 1795, p. 415

B: Image of original document FIRST CONGRESS Sess. II. Ch.3, 1790, p. 104

C: Image of original document Constitution from the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention, 1774-1789:

D: United States Senator Mark Warner (Virginia) January 26, 2009 letter to Dr. David Earl-Graef

1 comment:

Ted said...

The Joint Chiefs of Staff HAVE AN ABSOLUTE CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY to stand behind Guantanamo Military Judge James Pohl UNTIL OBAMA OVERCOMES “RES IPSA LOQUITUR” BY SUPPLYING HIS LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE AND PROVING HIS ELIGIBILITY TO BE PRESIDENT UNDER ARTICLE 2 OF THE US CONSTITUTION.