35 Responses to “Please keep calling Attorney General Holder and US attorney Jeffrey Taylor”

1. Benaiah
   April 29th, 2009 @ 11:54 am

   An open letter to US Attorney Elizabeth Pascal:

   Please don’t forget to disclose THE VENUS, 12 U.S. 253 (1814), and Vattel’s Law of Nations, to the Honorable James B. Simandle, and to the Honorable Joel Schneider, in your Answer to Mr. Kerchner…

   To fail to disclose THE VENUS and Vattel’s Law of Nations in your Answer would be a breach of the Model Code of Professional Conduct.

   Model Code of Professional Conduct Rule 3.3, states,
   (a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:
   (1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal…
   (2) fail to disclose to the tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel; or

   With regard to Vattel, the Supreme Court of the United States, in THE VENUS, specifically stated, “Vattel, …is more explicit and more satisfactory on it [CITIZENSHIP ISSUES] than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, [Vattel] says, ‘the citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or indigenes, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.’ ”

   Vattel’s Law of Nations, § 212, states “The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.”

   Hence, natural born citizens, “are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.”

   Unfortunatley, your client’s father, Barack Hussein Obama Sr., was not a citizen of the United States.

   Thus, even if Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii, he is NOT a “natural born citizen” of the United Ststes of America.

   Thus, your client is a usurper, and you are obligated to disclose this FACT to the Honorable James B. Simandle, and to the Honorable Joel Schneider, of the United States District Court, District Court of New Jersey.

2. WATCHER
   April 29th, 2009 @ 11:59 am

   Force an unfinished long-form Birth Certificate Forgery
   by DefendUSx April 28, 2009 22:40
   An eligibility case was filed in January by Attorney Mario Apuzzo of New Jersey on behalf of Charles F. Kerchner Jr., Lowell T. Patterson, Darrell James Lenormand and Donald H. Nelson Jr. It names as defendants Barack Hussein Obama II, the U.S., Congress, the Senate, House of Representatives and former Vice President Dick Cheney along with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

   By Law, the court only allows up to 60 days for extensions in order to respond. In this case, required response is already past and Obama is asking for another 60, while Congress is asking for another 57 days to respond to this lawsuit. Would us citizens get this kind of treatment/luxury?

   The lawsuit is demanding Congress explain by what authority Obama is acting as President, if his eligibility can not be proved (Quo Warranto).

   The lawsuit is also demanding Hawaii officials release the certificate they claim to have on file for Obama (though did not state he was born in Hawaii).

   A recent article on this site had an inside tip that the Obama administration was working on a long-form Birth Certificate forgery (see article right-side talking about the long-form forgery) that would be ready in no less than two months. It was already printed using a 1960 Heidelberg Printing Press, but was going through an accelerated “aging” process to dry the certificate – ink and chemical dye.

   Why shoud Obama break the court’s Law and be granted another 60 days? Why doesn’t everyone e-mail/call this court and pull an ACORN and put them into submission to honor an agenda for the Constitution in having Obama respond by or on May 05, 2009 (as it will be the end of the current extension)?

   By forcing an unfinished forgery, the chances of exploiting it to be such are much greater.

   If it were ACORN though, they’d actually chain themselves to the Judge’s garage, but no need to go that far as ACORN gets special treatment, usually.

   Clarkson S. Fisher Building & U.S. Courthouse
   402 East State Street Room 2020
   Trenton, NJ 08608
   Phone : 609-989-2065

3. WATCHER
   April 29th, 2009 @ 12:01 pm

   New Discovery: 5 Photoshopped images of Obama done by the same user calling her-himself Ducky – one of these 5 images is the Certificate of Live Birth!
   by DefendUSx April 29, 2009 01:34
   Thanks to Rhonda Parsons who has a BA in graphics and her finding some images across the Internet from Obama’s high school days in Hawaii.

   I was looking for evidence of image forgery, and to my surprise saw the name ‘Ducky’ appeared in each image reviewed. I remember seeing ‘Ducky’ on Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth image from his Fight the Smears website way back in August.

   This proves that ‘Ducky’ has forged or changed every one of these images, in one form or another, as an effort to present something likely false by using a Professional image editing software (Photoshop) to make changes.

   For those you not that computer-savvy, Photoshop is image-editing software (the most popular). You can virtually superimpose one image onto another etc. Photoshop is often used to put heads on other peoples’ bodies (as in the case of some Glam magazines) etc. Even an amateur with this software can make convincing, yet fake photos.
   A quick-and-dirty way to find out if an image has been altered in any way, is to open that image in a Hex (or even simple text) editor.

   Note: For those of you not so computer-savvy – images when opened in text editors (like Notepad) show the Hexidecimal code for the image. Computers only understand numbers, so it uses Hexidecimal to represent pairs of Binary numbers. Binary numbers are 1’s and 0’s. A pattern of these numbers together, represent the image to the computer, which converts it to what you see. Hexidecimal is a way of shortening up Binary sequences.
   When an altered (or newly created) image is saved in Photoshop, it (Photoshop) will record basic details about the image depending on how the image-saving preferences are set. You can record additional text into the image, such as copyright information, or even a comment. And no, Ducky did not save any copyright information for the images.

   Below are the images – shown normally and opened in a Hex editor. You will see ‘Ducky’ in each one:

   Obama Yearbook Mosaic

   Obama Birth Notice

   High School Steps

   Obama Basketball. Notice Coach’s right hand, the Belt, and the number changed from the other Basketball image. He went from number 23 to 25. Look at the shadow on the coach’s neck and the shadow on Obama’s. They are not going the same direction. Obama’s head is too big as well.

   Last but not least, Ducky’s real claim to fame (or lest we say forgery), the Certificate of Live Birth from Obama’s Fight the Smears website.

   You can save any one or all of these images to your hard drive. Open each image in a text editor and look near the top, you will see “Ducky” stamped in each one.

   “Ducky” ties the images to the same single source.

4. James
   April 29th, 2009 @ 12:25 pm

   It seems that the number posted 202-514-7566 leads to a front-end receptionist in the Attorney’s office. The lady I talked to sounded black and was no doubt an Obama supporter. I told her that I supported and that Jeffrey Taylor needs to enact Federal Statute 3501 Quo Warranto against Obama because he is ineligible to be the POTUS. The lady told that me my comment would be forwarded on and my voice is being heard. I doubt that my message will be forwarded but you never know. The lady would not release any other number of contact and said that all incoming calls lead to frond-end receptionists. If we really want to get to Jeffrey Taylor, I recommend the following suggestions:

   1. Find the internal numbers that leads to Jeffrey Taylor’s direct line or to his secretary or legal aid. That way you can bypass the receptionists and get someone in authority. This may require some research. You are a lawyer Dr. Orly. See if you find the internal numbers and post them on the internet.

   2. Research where and when Jeffrey Taylor will speaking to the press or will be otherwise available to the public for comment or question. Once, you find out that information, organize a front to attend and confront Jeffrey Taylor on this issue.

   3. You have a large number of supporters. You should organize some supporters to make a visit to Jeffrey Taylor’s office to get inside information and press this issue. Letters, emails and phone calls are too easily ignored. However, it is difficult to avoid persons who are on-site.

   4. You should think about making a trip to Washington DC each month. You were in Washington DC in March. A month has passed. It is time to make another trip to Washington DC to investigate and ask questions. When the month of June comes around, another trip should be made and so on and so on until we get a resolution to this matter.

   5. You should organize a group of supporters to get together to call the Sean Hannity Show, the Laura Ingram Show, and the Rush Limbaug Show to get on the air to get this issue out to the MSM. I recommend that your supporters don’t reveal to the phone screeners that they wish to ask about Obama’s ineligibility (You won’t get on the air) but give a valid comment or question worthy enough to get on the air. Once they are on the air, they can ask the ineligibility question.

5. live oak
   April 29th, 2009 @ 12:40 pm

   Dear Orly,
   So many of us have called the doj, and written with no results, so I came up with an idea, and I think it’s a good one. Would Mr. Farah at WND help us with this? I bet he would if you asked him! I think if he would start a drive on the internet to send millions of faxes, emails, whatever it takes to Holder, Taylor, and Kagan….like they did to the media that got Soros so pissed off…like the petition to unseat Napolitano. The hitch is this; if Mr. Farah would do this gratis, and not charge 10 bucks or whatever it is for every signature, more people would be willing to do it. I for one don’t have money like that to give to every good cause. I wish I did, but I don’t, and what money I have I’d rather give it to you. I know Mr. Farah has done this once or twice before. I know it would work, and it’s for a great cause….the survival of the country and the Constitution.
   I like to think that people in this country are waking up…..the ones that aren’t brain dead. Look at the mess we have, the fly over and the panic it caused, the economy, the unemployment. Good to hear Fox news isn’t going to broadcast the Usurper’s speech tonight, but I still will never again watch the news on tv no matter what. Maybe Mr. Farah would help with petitions to the Trenton,NJ courthouse too to help Mr. Apuzzo’s case. I also just quickly want to tell you that the staff that answers at the doj are very nasty on the phone and fed up with our phone calls. I know the emails and faxes would bury them and it WOULD work.
   I pray for you every day and I check your websites several times a day. You are an exceptional, brave, and wonderful woman. You are very dear to me. My husband and I love you and if you ever come to Florida, you can stay with us. I’ll take really good care of you. Good luck with everything Orly and know that you are blessed. We stand with you always.

6. James
   April 29th, 2009 @ 1:03 pm

   Orly, you should think about making another trip to Washington DC. Along with yourself, you should organize a front to accompany you to Eric Holder and Jeffrey Holder’s office. It would help if you had few lawyers with you as well. Maybe bring some World Net daily people with you too.

   Also, does anyone know the home address of Jeffrey Taylor or Eric Holder. They obviously have to live somewhere?

   If you can’t reach them at their office, maybe you get them at home.

   However, I don’t know how much security Holder and Taylor have at their homes.

   Perhaps inquiries to Directory Information and use of the FOIA can supply with inside phone numbers, emails and address. Worth a try.

7. James
   April 29th, 2009 @ 1:15 pm

   Dr. Orly,

   Phone Calls, emails, and letters are too easily ignored or otherwise discarded.

   If you want to reach Eric Holder and Jeffrey Taylor you are going to have expidite your efforts.

   Below are some good recommendations:

   1. Research where Holder and Taylor will be speaking to the press or will otherwise be available to the public and organize a front to confront them.
   2. Research are obtain inside information (Internal Phone Calls and Emails) that will allow to bypass front-end receptionists.
   3. Research and obtain Holder’s and Taylor’s home addresses.

   To get this information, you will have to network and find persons who will be willing to give you this inside information.

8. James
   April 29th, 2009 @ 1:21 pm

   From the website:

   Mr. Holder lives in Washington with his wife, Dr. Sharon Malone, a physician, and their three children.

   Find his Home Address.

   Mr. Taylor, and his wife, Marcia Taylor, are residents of the District of Columbia.

   Find his Home Address

9. ConcernedOne
   April 29th, 2009 @ 2:12 pm

   I’m wondering if they aren’t just sending you on a wild goose chase, so that nothing ever gets answered or accomplished?

   If they both said no to the Quo Warranto, then doesn’t that give you the power you need to now proceed as the attorney representing the People? And I’m sure many more citizens would want to be included in this legal proceeding.

   I also have two questions: 1. I cannot find anywhere, within the US Constitution, an explanation of what Natural Born Citizen means. Does that mean our forefathers never had an answer and if so, how do WE prove who is a Natural Born Citizen vs. citizen??

   My other question is: IF a Natural Born Citizen means both of your parents must be US Citizens at the time of your birth, then there is no need to see proof of BHO’s birth certificate, because it is already certain, that he is NOT a Natural Born Citizen.

10. Ann
    April 29th, 2009 @ 3:10 pm

    I have to point out one discouraging note of disagreement: it appears that, in fact, Eric Holder and Barry Soetero are above the law. I conclude that because no one currently in office is enforcing the laws that they are violating.

11. Mister Milquetoast
    April 29th, 2009 @ 3:13 pm

    Dear Orly,

    I am a big fan of yours, and post World Net Daily articles about your efforts on other blogs. Civil servants are indeed prejudicial. It is more typical than the exception, but most detrimental in this particular case.

    There is legal standing for them to ignore us, nevertheless. Ever since the illegitimate 14th Amendment to The Constitution for The United States of America was enacted without a proper quorum, a new government has been incorporated, know as The U.S. The country has been under martial rule ever since.

    The 14th Amendment speaks of “persons” and “privileges,” whereas elsewhere previous in the Constitution, references were made to “men” and “Rights”. Don’t you find it strange that the Republican Party isn’t supporting your cause? The oligarchy which actually runs this country, controls both parties. Barry O’bama is Dick the Prick Cheney’s cousin. Every president that the United States of America and the U.S. has ever had, all can trace their heritage directly to British Royalty. It’s no mere coincidence that the current, temporary, acting, president, just so happens to be a British citizen.

    A more specific legal reason why you are being denied the privilege of action, is because under Article I Section 10 of The U.S. Constitution, which has never been amended:

    “No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.”

    Such as “Esquire”.

    Please keep up the pressure, in any event. I get the impression that Barry is the ax man, and as soon as he has decimated the Republic, his work will be done, the poser will fall, and then VP Joe Biden will become president, but all of O’bama’s executive orders, bills, and policies will stand.

    Best regards,

    Mister Milquetoast

12. Ginger
    April 29th, 2009 @ 4:58 pm

    My Dearest Orly……. and others! I have been praying to our Lord to take this evilness away. A thought just came to me when I was hearing on Fox how Spector the traitor left the republican party to be a democrat. So, so sad! Anyway, What if a bunch of democrats crossed over and became republicans to save our country??? Please, democrat leaders you be our hero’s. Save our country. So far not a bit of blood has been shed, (although I wonder about the man that hung himself) and the democrats could be our hero’s. I can not say that anough. If they are scared I would hide some of their family members. They would not believe the amount of Bible toteing, gun carrying natural born citizens would be there ready to be sworn in and DEFEND this wonderful USA.

    It would stop Barry, Pelosi, Soros, chicago thugs, paid off, black mailed people who are supposed to be there for us US citizens. Maybe then the MSM will be forced to tell all of the people the truth. Yes, I strongly feel that a lot of our so called leaders are being bought off, black mailed, and threatened.

    God Bless America
    Where is our HERO’S???

13. Mister Milquetoast
    April 29th, 2009 @ 5:49 pm

    https://ecclesia.org/forum/uploads/bondservant/personP.pdf

    What manner of PERSON are You?

    Just exactly what is a person by legal definition? What is the legal authority of a person? Is a Christian a PERSON? The answers to these questions have eluded Americans ever since the end of Lincoln’s Civil War and the general acceptance of the Fourteenth Amendment. Since all State statutes and every court in the United States, right down to the local municipal courts, define every American as a person, then we should find out just what this means so that we can understand what we are according to the civil governments and judges.

    —————————————————————–

    https://ecclesia.org/forum/uploads/bondservant/bcertP.pdf

    Birth CERTIFICATES = Fictional Entities

    Firstly, there is a vast legal difference between a State issued “BIRTH CERTIFICATE – CERTIFICATE OF BIRTH” and a “Certified copy of a live birth”. A CERTIFICATE, as used today, is not lawfully the same as a certified copy. A BIRTH CERTIFICATE is issued by the State to conform with federal requirements under the purported necessity of ‘vital statistics’. In Florida State, the Florida Department of Health (a/k/a HRS), Office of Vital Statistics, issues these statutory CERTIFICATES. The names are spelled in all capital letters and conform to federal ‘law’ regulations.

    Prior to the 1860’s, the only certification of a birth came from the church, not the State or government. The church required two Christian witnesses to attest to, by their signatures and seals, the birth, be it a live birth or a stillborn birth. The church viewed that living or dead, the birth was to be attested to under affirmation before God.

    ————————————————

    https://ecclesia.org/forum/uploads/bondservant/weekly16P.pdf

    Why Attorneys are not Lawyers

    In the U.S., they’re collectively called everything from “attorney” to “lawyer” to “counselor.” Are these terms truly equivalent, or has the identity of one been mistaken for another?

    What exactly is a “Licensed BAR Attorney”? This credential accompanies every legal paper produced by attorneys – along with a State Bar License number. As we are about to show you, an �attorney� is not a �lawyer�, yet the average American improperly interchanges these words as if they represent the same occupation, and the average American attorney unduly accepts the honor to be called “lawyer” when he is not.

    In order to discern the difference, and where we stand within the current court system, it�s necessary to examine the British origins of our U.S. courts and the terminology that has been established from the beginning. It’s important to understand the proper lawful definitions for the various titles we now give these court related occupations.

    The legal profession in the U.S. is directly derived from the British system. Even the word bar is of British origin:

    BAR. A particular portion of a court room. Named from the space inclosed by two bars or rails: one of which separated the judge’s bench from the rest of the room; the other shut off both the bench and the area for lawyers engaged in trials from the space allotted to suitors, witnesses, and others. Such persons as appeared as speakers (advocates, or counsel) before the court, were said to be “called to the bar”, that is, privileged so to appear, speak and otherwise serve in the presence of the judges as “barristers”. The corresponding phrase in the United States is “admitted to the bar”. – A Dictionary of Law (1893).

    ————————————————–

    https://www.ecclesia.org/lawgiver/supp2.asp

    The Horrors of the BAR: Judicial Treason

    There exists a very public international conspiracy to destroy the united States of America from within. Ruled by ungodly lawyers and lawyer/judges of the numerous national and international Bar Associations, their judicial system has created unconstitutional aristocratic courts ruled by “esquires” wearing black robes of Nobility. This has created Ruling Class courts of nobility in direct violation of our Constitution.

    “No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.” -Article I, Section 9 of The Constitution for the United States of America.

    The existence of these unconstitutional Ruling Class Courts is not new to our nation. We the People have accepted them and allowed them to flourish just as blindly as sheep merrily going to slaughter… and the slaughter of Rights, Liberty and Freedom is exactly what has come about. The lawyers have taken over not just our Judicial Branch, but the Legislative as well. For example, try to name just one member of Congress who has neither attended law school nor is a Bar lawyer. Good luck on your search because a non-lawyer Congressman is a rare species. As for the Executive Branch, lawyers abound in the office of the Presidency.

    If all three Branches of our government are controlled by lawyers, who is representing We the People? The truth is, these are the terrorists who are in control of our government and have eliminated our original Constitution. The threat is real and the takeover is complete. Right now, this minute, we are ruled not by a republican form of government but by a Ruling Class of self-proclaimed Nobility.

    “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government…” -Article IV, Section 4 of The Constitution for the United States of America.

    Neither the word LAWYER nor the word ATTORNEY appear anywhere within our Constitution. This was no accident on the part of our Founding Fathers. They had been cruelly subjected to ungodly Courts of Nobility from a Ruling Class of Aristocrats, and they deliberately framed our Constitution to prohibit such a thing from ever surfacing within this land again by creating three distinct and separate Branches of Government. Today, ALL lawyers are automatically members of the Judicial Branch due to their unconstitutional Title of Nobility.

    “No State shall… grant any Title of Nobility.” -Article I, Section 10 of The Constitution for the United States of America.

    We the People must be elected or hired to be in any government branch, but all Bar lawyers are automatically “Officers of the Court” of the Judicial Branch of government. Then, whenever a lawyer is hired or elected to the Executive or Legislative Branches, he holds an office in two Branches of our government at the same time. This is blatantly UNconstitutional and in violation of the separation of powers, checks and balances, and conflict of interest laws. Perhaps now We the People can see how we’ve allowed these lawyers of treason to rule our nation.

    In our Constitutional Republic, nothing is to be above We the People other than God Himself. Then why have we allowed a Ruling Class of Nobility Title to have power over us? We the People are guilty of allowing our Constitutional Republic to fade away into non-existence. WE are the reason the ungodly lawyers rule our governments. WE allowed it. WE are responsible. WE are the only Constitutional power that can change it. How could we have forgotten that ALL people in a Constitutional Republic are sovereign?

    If you enter into an ungodly and unconstitutional private Bar lawyer and lawyer/judge court (such as county, circuit, and state courts), you can be held in Contempt of Court for absolutely any reason what-so-ever. The robed lawyer/judge does not have to follow any rules or guidelines to throw you into prison for alleged contempt against his wishes. In such a case, there is no arrest made, no due process of law (in violation of the 14th Amendment), no bail, no Habeas Corpus, there is no prosecutor, no jury, no trial (much like a lynching), and you have no Rights. The lawyer/judge is your accuser, your prosecutor, and he alone convicts and sentences you without a trial. Such an act of imprisonment is called a BILL OF ATTAINDER (see Article I, Sections 9 & 10) and is absolutely unconstitutional, yet it happens every single day hundreds of times.

    Then the lawyer/judge orders a law enforcement officer to imprison you, even though that law officer has sworn under oath to support the Constitution. This is no less than a lawyer lynching, and every law officer should refuse to obey such an illegal order. No law officer is obligated to obey any illegal law or order, such as a Contempt of Court Order.

    It’s very odd how most forms of organized crime in America never thrived at great lengths until the bar lawyers took over our courts and our governments. The “courts” have protected their activities, if the price was right. Crime syndicates are organized internationally in the same way as the Bar Associations.

    Just what is the purpose behind the World Assembly of Judges, the World Peace through Law Center, the International Trial Lawyers Association, and the International Judicial Association? Their purpose is the New World Order. All nations must now comply with international standards these organizations have set up. The entire world is under no less than lawyer mandated justice administered through the United Nations. The original Constitution for the united States is no longer in effect. You and I have no Constitutional Rights. Instead, we have privileges granted by those who dare to call themselves “esquire”.

    Reprinted from the September 1995 issue of the North Bridge News

14. Mister Milquetoast
    April 29th, 2009 @ 5:57 pm

    https://ecclesia.org/forum/uploads/bondservant/nbn6P.pdf

    The UNlawful 14th & 16th Amendments

    The purported Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States was never ratified by a majority of the sovereign States. According to legal research undertaken by attorney William D. Graves, as written in The Journal of Christian Reconstruction, Volume 13, Number 2, 1994, the required 28 state three-fourths majority ratification was never completed.

    As proof, Graves states “By March 1867, only 17 of 37 States, or 11 short of the required three-fourths (28), had ratified the 14th Amendment. Congress then passed the Reconstruction Act providing for military occupation of all Southern States (excepting Tennessee which had ratified), which Act disenfranchised most white voters and which occupation would cease only upon a Southern State’s ratification of the Amendment.” The Civil War had just ended, and the defeated southern States were being forced into ratifying the 14th Amendment under the threat of continued marshal law until they did so.

    Graves goes on to say “Under duress, at least 6 Southern States attempted ratification and their number was added to the 22 Northern States and Tennessee, presumably making the number of ratifying States 29, or 1 more than required”. Since those six southern sovereign and independent State nations were under the control of Military Provisional Governors, any alleged “ratification” could not possibly be considered “voluntary”.

    (By presumption, the three-fourths majority was present, but according to official State archives and records, two States had already changed their positions and had legally revoked their previous ratifications). “However, both Ohio and New Jersey had rescinded previous ratification, but were nevertheless counted among the 29 by the Secretary of State”.

    Only 27 States had legally ratified the 14th Amendment, one State short of the required majority required by the Constitution. The Secretary of State of the United States Government ignored the facts and erroneously certified that 29 States had approved after having been given written notice from Ohio and New Jersey that they had recalled their ratifications. He then submitted his false certification to Congress who declared the 14th Amendment ratified on July 9, 1868.

    ——————————————————————–

    https://ecclesia.org/forum/uploads/bondservant/nbn17P.pdf

    Through his war of blood, the alleged Civil War, Lincoln became the Commander over an occupied territory, the former united States of America. With the initiation of The Lieber Code on April 24, 1863, A. Lincoln began to assemble his atheistic bible which became the unconstitutional Reconstruction Acts of Christian slavery and Military (Martial) Rule. The Reconstruction Acts began to be formulated in 1865 and continued to be instituted piece by piece until 1867.

    After Lincoln’s war, some southern Christian states began to ask why there were still occupying Union Commanders in the Field. They soon learned that the Christian civil government had been abolished and military government (Martial Rule and Law) was the only jurisdiction and authority over civil Rights and Christian Law in this new time of alleged peace. This was the result of the many Reconstruction Acts. At the turn of the Twenty-first century, these Acts are still in full force and effect.

    https://ecclesia.org/forum/uploads/bondservant/nbn18P.pdf

15. Mister Milquetoast
    April 29th, 2009 @ 5:59 pm

    https://www.civilwarhome.com/liebercode.htm

    The Lieber Code of 1863

    CORRESPONDENCE, ORDERS, REPORTS, AND RETURNS OF THE UNION AUTHORITIES
    FROM JANUARY 1 TO DECEMBER 31, 1863.–#7
    O.R.–SERIES III–VOLUME III [S# 124]

    GENERAL ORDERS No. 100.

    WAR DEPT., ADJT. GENERAL’S OFFICE,
    Washington, April 24, 1863.

    The following “Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field,” prepared by Francis Lieber, LL.D., and revised by a board of officers, of which Maj. Gen. E. A. Hitchcock is president, having been approved by the President of the United States, he commands that they be published for the information of all concerned.

    By order of the Secretary of War:
    E. D. TOWNSEND,
    Assistant Adjutant-General.

    INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF ARMIES OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE FIELD.

    SECTION I.–Martial law–Military jurisdiction–Military necessity–Retaliation.

    1. A place, district, or country occupied by an enemy stands, in consequence of the occupation, under the martial law of the invading or occupying army, whether any proclamation declaring martial law, or any public warning to the inhabitants, has been issued or not. Martial law is the immediate and direct effect and consequence of occupation or conquest.
    The presence of a hostile army proclaims its martial law.
    2. Martial law does not cease during the hostile occupation, except by special proclamation, ordered by the commander-in-chief, or by special mention in the treaty of peace concluding the war, when the occupation of a place or territory continues beyond the conclusion of peace as one of the conditions of the same.
    3. Martial law in a hostile country consists in the suspension by the occupying military authority of the criminal and civil law, and of the domestic administration and government in the occupied place or territory, and in the substitution of military rule and force for the same, as well as in the dictation of general laws, as far as military necessity requires this suspension, substitution, or dictation.
    The commander of the forces may proclaim that the administration of all civil and penal law shall continue either wholly or in part, as in times of peace, unless otherwise ordered by the military authority.
    4. Martial law is simply military authority exercised in accordance with the laws and usages of war. Military oppression is not martial law; it is the abuse of the power which that law confers. As martial law is executed by military force, it is incumbent upon those who administer it to be strictly guided by the principles of justice, honor, and humanity–virtues adorning a soldier even more than other men, for the very reason that he possesses the power of his arms against the unarmed.
    5. Martial law should be less stringent in places and countries fully occupied and fairly conquered. Much greater severity may be exercised in places or regions where actual hostilities exist or are expected and must be prepared for. Its most complete sway is allowed–even in the commander’s own country–when face to face with the enemy, because of the absolute necessities of the case, and of the paramount duty to defend the country against invasion.
    To save the country is paramount to all other considerations.
    6. All civil and penal law shall continue to take its usual course in the enemy’s places and territories under martial law, unless interrupted or stopped by order of the occupying military power; but all the functions of the hostile government–legislative, executive, or administrative–whether of a general, provincial, or local character, cease under martial law, or continue only with the sanction, or, if deemed necessary, the participation of the occupier or invader.
    7. Martial law extends to property, and to persons, whether they are subjects of the enemy or aliens to that government.
    8. Consuls, among American and European nations, are not diplomatic agents. Nevertheless, their offices and persons will be subjected to martial law in cases of urgent necessity only; their property and business are not exempted. Any delinquency they commit against the established military rule may be punished as in the case of any other inhabitant, and such punishment furnishes no reasonable ground for international complaint.
    9. The functions of ambassadors, ministers, or other diplomatic agents, accredited by neutral powers to the hostile government, cease, so far as regards the displaced government; but the conquering or occupying power usually recognizes them as temporarily accredited to itself.
    10. Martial law affects chiefly the police and collection of public revenue and taxes, whether imposed by the expelled government or by the invader, and refers mainly to the support and efficiency of the Army, its safety, and the safety of its operations.
    11. The law of war does not only disclaim all cruelty and bad faith concerning engagements concluded with the enemy during the war, but also the breaking of stipulations solemnly contracted by the belligerents in time of peace, and avowedly intended to remain in force in case of war between the contracting powers.
    It disclaims all extortions and other transactions for individual gain; all acts of private revenge, or connivance at such acts.
    Offenses to the contrary shall be severely punished, and especially so if committed by officers.
    12. Whenever feasible, martial law is carried out in cases of individual offenders by military courts; but sentences of death shall be executed only with the approval of the chief executive, provided the urgency of the case does not require a speedier execution, and then only with the approval of the chief commander.
    13. Military jurisdiction is of two kinds: First, that which is conferred and defined by statute; second, that which is derived from the common law of war. Military offenses under the statute law must be tried in the manner therein directed; but military offenses which do not come within the statute must be tried and punished under the common law of war. The character of the courts which exercise these jurisdictions depends upon the local laws of each particular country.
    In the armies of the United States the first is exercised by courts-martial; while cases which do not come within the Rules and Articles of War, or the jurisdiction conferred by statute on courts-martial, are tried by military commissions.
    14. Military necessity, as understood by modern civilized nations, consists in the necessity of those measures which are indispensable for securing the ends of the war, and which are lawful according to the modern law and usages of war.
    15. Military necessity admits of all direct destruction of life or limb of armed enemies, and of other persons whose destruction is incidentally unavoidable in the armed contests of the war; it allows of the capturing of every armed enemy, and every enemy of importance to the hostile government, or of peculiar danger to the captor; it allows of all destruction of property, and obstruction of the ways and channels of traffic, travel, or communication, and of all withholding of sustenance or means of life from the enemy; of the appropriation of whatever an enemy’s country affords necessary for the subsistence and safety of the Army, and of such deception as does not involve the breaking of good faith either positively pledged, regarding agreements entered into during the war, or supposed by the modern law of war to exist. Men who take up arms against one another in public war do not cease on this account to be moral beings, responsible to one another and to God.
    16. Military necessity does not admit of cruelty–that is, the infliction of suffering for the sake of suffering or for revenge, nor of maiming or wounding except in fight, nor of torture to extort confessions. It does not admit of the use of poison in any way, nor of the wanton devastation of a district. It admits of deception, but disclaims acts of perfidy; and, in general, military necessity does not include any act of hostility which makes the return to peace unnecessarily difficult.
    17. War is not carried on by arms alone. It is lawful to starve the hostile belligerent, armed or unarmed, so that it leads to the speedier subjection of the enemy.
    18. When a commander of a besieged place expels the non-combatants, in order to lessen the number of those who consume his stock of provisions, it is lawful, though an extreme measure, to drive them back, so as to hasten on the surrender.
    19. Commanders, whenever admissible, inform the enemy of their intention to bombard a place, so that the non-combatants, and especially the women and children, may be removed before the bombardment commences. But it is no infraction of the common law of war to omit thus to inform the enemy. Surprise may be a necessity.
    20. Public war is a state of armed hostility between sovereign nations or governments. It is a law and requisite of civilized existence that men live in political, continuous societies, forming organized units, called states or nations, whose constituents bear, enjoy, and suffer, advance and retrograde together, in peace and in war.
    21. The citizen or native of a hostile country is thus an enemy, as one of the constituents of the hostile state or nation, and as such is subjected to the hardships of the war.
    22. Nevertheless, as civilization has advanced during the last centuries, so has likewise steadily advanced, especially in war on land, the distinction between the private individual belonging to a hostile country and the hostile country itself, with its men in arms. The principle has been more and more acknowledged that the unarmed citizen is to be spared in person, property, and honor as much as the exigencies of war will admit.
    23. Private citizens are no longer murdered, enslaved, or carried off to distant parts, and the inoffensive individual is as little disturbed in his private relations as the commander of the hostile troops can afford to grant in the overruling demands of a vigorous war.
    24. The almost universal rule in remote times was, and continues to be with barbarous armies, that the private individual of the hostile country is destined to suffer every privation of liberty and protection and every disruption of family ties. Protection was, and still is with uncivilized people, the exception.
    25. In modern regular wars of the Europeans and their descendants in other portions of the globe, protection of the inoffensive citizen of the hostile country is the rule; privation and disturbance of private relations are the exceptions.
    26. Commanding generals may cause the magistrates and civil officers of the hostile country to take the oath of temporary allegiance or an oath of fidelity to their own victorious government or rulers, and they may expel every one who declines to do so. But whether they do so or not, the people and their civil officers owe strict obedience to them as long as they hold sway over the district or country, at the peril of their lives.
    27. The law of war can no more wholly dispense with retaliation than can the law of nations, of which it is a branch. Yet civilized nations acknowledge retaliation as the sternest feature of war. A reckless enemy often leaves to his opponent no other means of securing himself against the repetition of barbarous outrage.
    28. Retaliation will therefore never be resorted to as a measure of mere revenge, but only as a means of protective retribution, and moreover cautiously and unavoidably–that is to say, retaliation shall only be resorted to after careful inquiry into the real occurrence and the character of the misdeeds that may demand retribution.
    Unjust or inconsiderate retaliation removes the belligerents farther and farther from the mitigating rules of regular war, and by rapid steps leads them nearer to the internecine wars of savages.
    29. Modern times are distinguished from earlier ages by the existence at one and the same time of many nations and great governments related to one another in close intercourse.
    Peace is their normal condition; war is the exception. The ultimate object of all modern war is a renewed state of peace.
    The more vigorously wars are pursued the better it is for humanity. Sharp wars are brief.
    30. Ever since the formation and coexistence of modern nations, and ever since wars have become great national wars, war has come to be acknowledged not to be its own end, but the means to obtain great ends of state, or to consist in defense against wrong; and no conventional restriction of the modes adopted to injure the enemy is any longer admitted; but the law of war imposes many limitations and restrictions on principles of justice, faith, and honor.

    SECTION II.–Public and private property of the enemy–Protection of persons, and especially of women; of religion, the arts and sciences–Punishment of crimes against the inhabitants of hostile countries.

    31. A victorious army appropriates all public money, seizes all public movable property until further direction by its government, and sequesters for its own benefit or of that of its government all the revenues of real property belonging to the hostile government or nation. The title to such real property remains in abeyance during military occupation, and until the conquest is made complete.
    32. A victorious army, by the martial power inherent in the same, may suspend, change, or abolish, as far as the martial power extends, the relations which arise from the services due, according to the existing laws of the invaded country, from one citizen, subject, or native of the same to another.
    The commander of the army must leave it to the ultimate treaty of peace to settle the permanency of this change.
    33. It is no longer considered lawful– on the contrary, it is held to be a serious breach of the law of war–to force the subjects of the enemy into the service of the victorious government, except the latter should proclaim, after a fair and complete conquest of the hostile country or district, that it is resolved to keep the country, district, or place permanently as its own and make it a portion of its own country.
    34. As a general rule, the property belonging to churches, to hospitals, or other establishments of an exclusively charitable character, to establishments of education, or foundations for the promotion of knowledge, whether public schools, universities, academies of learning or observatories, museums of the fine arts, or of a scientific character-such property is not to be considered public property in the sense of paragraph 31; but it may be taxed or used when the public service may require it.
    35. Classical works of art, libraries, scientific collections, or precious instruments, such as astronomical telescopes, as well as hospitals, must be secured against all avoidable injury, even when they are contained in fortified places whi1st besieged or bombarded.
    36. If such works of art, libraries, collections, or instruments belonging to a hostile nation or government, can be removed without injury, the ruler of the conquering state or nation may order them to be seized and removed for the benefit of the said nation. The ultimate ownership is to be settled by the ensuing treaty of peace.
    In no case shall they be sold or given away, if captured by the armies of the United States, nor shall they ever be privately appropriated, or wantonly destroyed or injured.
    37. The United States acknowledge and protect, in hostile countries occupied by them, religion and morality; strictly private property; the persons of the inhabitants, especially those of women; and the sacredness of domestic relations. Offenses to the contrary shall be rigorously punished.
    This rule does not interfere with the right of the victorious invader to tax the people or their property, to levy forced loans, to billet soldiers, or to appropriate property, especially houses, lands, boats or ships, and the churches, for temporary and military uses.
    38. Private property, unless forfeited by crimes or by offenses of the owner, can be seized only by way of military necessity, for the support or other benefit of the Army or of the United States.
    If the owner has not fled, the commanding officer will cause receipts to be given, which may serve the spoliated owner to obtain indemnity.
    39. The salaries of civil officers of the hostile government who remain in the invaded territory, and continue the work of their office, and can continue it according to the circumstances arising out of the war–such as judges, administrative or political officers, officers of city or communal governments–are paid from the public revenue of the invaded territory until the military government has reason wholly or partially to discontinue it. Salaries or incomes connected with purely honorary titles are always stopped.
    40. There exists no law or body of authoritative rules of action between hostile armies, except that branch of the law of nature and nations which is called the law and usages of war on land.
    41. All municipal law of the ground on which the armies stand, or of the countries to which they belong, is silent and of no effect between armies in the field.
    42. Slavery, complicating and confounding the ideas of property (that is, of a thing), and of personality (that is, of humanity), exists according to municipal or local law only. The law of nature and nations has never acknowledged it. The digest of the Roman law enacts the early dictum of the pagan jurist, that “so far as the law of nature is concerned, all men are equal.” Fugitives escaping from a country in which they were slaves, villains, or serfs, into another country, have, for centuries past, been held free and acknowledged free by judicial decisions of European countries, even though the municipal law of the country in which the slave had taken refuge acknowledged slavery within its own dominions.
    43. Therefore, in a war between the United States and a belligerent which admits of slavery, if a person held in bondage by that belligerent be captured by or come as a fugitive under the protection of the military forces of the United States, such person is immediately entitled to the rights and privileges of a freeman. To return such person into slavery would amount to enslaving a free person, and neither the United States nor any officer under their authority can enslave any human being. Moreover, a person so made free by the law of war is under the shield of the law of nations, and the former owner or State can have, by the law of postliminy, no belligerent lien or claim of service.
    44. All wanton violence committed against persons in the invaded country, all destruction of property not commanded by the authorized officer, all robbery, all pillage or sacking, even after taking a place by main force, all rape, wounding, maiming, or killing of such inhabitants, are prohibited under the penalty of death, or such other severe punishment as may seem adequate for the gravity of the offense.
    A soldier, officer, or private, in the act of committing such violence, and disobeying a superior ordering him to abstain from it, may be lawfully killed on the spot by such superior.
    45. All captures and booty belong, according to the modern law of war, primarily to the government of the captor.
    Prize money, whether on sea or land, can now only be claimed under local law.
    46. Neither officers nor soldiers are allowed to make use of their position or power in the hostile country for private gain, not even for commercial transactions otherwise legitimate. Offenses to the contrary committed by commissioned officers will be punished with cashiering or such other punishment as the nature of the offense may require; if by soldiers, they shall be punished according to the nature of the offense.
    47. Crimes punishable by all penal codes, such as arson, murder, maiming, assaults, highway robbery, theft, burglary, fraud, forgery, and rape, if committed by an American soldier in a hostile country against its inhabitants, are not only punishable as at home, but in all cases in which death is not inflicted the severer punishment shall be preferred.

    SECTION III.–Deserters–Prisoners of war–Hostages–Booty on the battle-field.

    48. Deserters from the American Army, having entered the service of the enemy, suffer death if they fall again into the hands of the United States, whether by capture or being delivered up to the American Army; and if a deserter from the enemy, having taken service in the Army of the United States, is captured by the enemy, and punished by them with death or otherwise, it is not a breach against the law and usages of war, requiring redress or retaliation.
    49. A prisoner of war is a public enemy armed or attached to the hostile army for active aid, who has fallen into the hands of the captor, either fighting or wounded, on the field or in the hospital, by individual surrender or by capitulation.
    All soldiers, of whatever species of arms; all men who belong to the rising en masse of the hostile country; all those who are attached to the Army for its efficiency and promote directly the object of the war, except such as are hereinafter provided for; all disabled men or officers on the field or elsewhere, if captured; all enemies who have thrown away their arms and ask for quarter, are prisoners of war, and as such exposed to the inconveniences as well as entitled to the privileges of a prisoner of war.
    50. Moreover, citizens who accompany an army for whatever purpose, such as sutlers, editors, or reporters of journals, or contractors, if captured, may be made prisoners of war and be detained as such.
    The monarch and members of the hostile reigning family, male or female, the chief, and chief officers of the hostile government, its diplomatic agents, and all persons who are of particular and singular use and benefit to the hostile army or its government, are, if captured on belligerent ground, and if unprovided with a safe-conduct granted by the captor’s government, prisoners of war.
    51. If the people of that portion of an invaded country which is not yet occupied by the enemy, or of the whole country, at the approach of a hostile army, rise, under a duly authorized levy, en masse to resist the invader, they are now treated as public enemies, and, if captured, are prisoners of war.
    52. No belligerent has the right to declare that he will treat every captured man in arms of a levy en masse as a brigand or bandit.
    If, however, the people of a country, or any portion of the same, already occupied by an army, rise against it, they are violators of the laws of war and are not entitled to their protection.
    53. The enemy’s chaplains, officers of the medical staff, apothecaries, hospital nurses, and servants, if they fall into the hands of the American Army, are not prisoners of war, unless the commander has reasons to retain them. In this latter case, or if, at their own desire, they are allowed to remain with their captured companions, they are treated as prisoners of war, and may be exchanged if the commander sees fit.
    54. A hostage is a person accepted as a pledge for the fulfillment of an agreement concluded between belligerents during the war, or in consequence of a war. Hostages are rare in the present age.
    55. If a hostage is accepted, he is treated like a prisoner of war, according to rank and condition, as circumstances may admit.
    56. A prisoner of war is subject to no punishment for being a public enemy, nor is any revenge wreaked upon him by the intentional infliction of any suffering, or disgrace, by cruel imprisonment, want of food, by mutilation, death, or any other barbarity.
    57. So soon as a man is armed by a sovereign government and takes the soldier’s oath of fidelity he is a belligerent; his killing, wounding, or other warlike acts are no individual crimes or offenses. No belligerent has a right to declare that enemies of a certain class, color, or condition, when properly organized as soldiers, will not be treated by him as public enemies.
    58. The law of nations knows of no distinction of color, and if an enemy of the United States should enslave and sell any captured persons of their Army, it would be a case for the severest retaliation, if not redressed upon complaint.
    The United States cannot retaliate by enslavement; therefore death must be the retaliation for this crime against the law of nations.
    59. A prisoner of war remains answerable for his crimes committed against the captor’s army or people, committed before he was captured, and for which he has not been punished by his own authorities.
    All prisoners of war are liable to the infliction of retaliatory measures.
    60. It is against the usage of modern war to resolve, in hatred and revenge, to give no quarter. No body of troops has the right to declare that it will not give, and therefore will not expect, quarter; but a commander is permitted to direct his troops to give no quarter, in great straits, when his own salvation makes it impossible to cumber himself with prisoners.
    61. Troops that give no quarter have no right to kill enemies already disabled on the ground, or prisoners captured by other troops.
    62. All troops of the enemy known or discovered to give no quarter in general, or to any portion of the Army, receive none.
    63. Troops who fight in the uniform of their enemies, without any plain, striking, and uniform mark of distinction of their own, can expect no quarter.
    64. If American troops capture a train containing uniforms of the enemy, and the commander considers it advisable to distribute them for use among his men, some striking mark or sign must be adopted to distinguish the American soldier from the enemy.
    65. The use of the enemy’s national standard, flag, or other emblem of nationality, for the purpose of deceiving the enemy in battle, is an act of perfidy by which they lose all claim to the protection of the laws of war.
    66. Quarter having been given to an enemy by American troops, under a misapprehension of his true character, he may, nevertheless, be ordered to suffer death if, within three days after the battle, it be discovered that he belongs to a corps which gives no quarter.
    67. The law of nations allows every sovereign government to make war upon another sovereign State, and, therefore, admits of no rules or laws different from those of regular warfare, regarding the treatment of prisoners of war, although they may belong to the army of a government which the captor may consider as a wanton and unjust assailant.
    68. Modern wars are not internecine wars, in which the killing of the enemy is the object. The destruction of the enemy in modern war, and, indeed, modern war itself, are means to obtain that object of the belligerent which lies beyond the war.
    Unnecessary or revengeful destruction of life is not lawful.
    69. Outposts, sentinels, or pickets are not to be fired upon, except to drive them in, or when a positive order, special or general, has been issued to that effect.
    70. The use of poison in any manner, be it to poison wells, or food, or arms, is wholly excluded from modern warfare. He that uses it puts himself out of the pale of the law and usages of war.
    71. Whoever intentionally inflicts additional wounds on an enemy already wholly disabled, or kills such an enemy, or who orders or encourages soldiers to do so, shall suffer death, if duly convicted, whether he belongs to the Army of the United States, or is an enemy captured after having committed his misdeed.
    72. Money and other valuables on the person of a prisoner, such as watches or jewelry, as well as extra clothing, are regarded by the American Army as the private property of the prisoner, and the appropriation of such valuables or money is considered dishonorable, and is prohibited.
    Nevertheless, if large sums are found upon the persons of prisoners, or in their possession, they shall be taken from them, and the surplus, after providing for their own support, appropriated for the use of the Army, under the direction of the commander, unless otherwise ordered by the Government. Nor can prisoners claim, as private property, large sums found and captured in their train, although they have been placed in the private luggage of the prisoners.
    73. All officers, when captured, must surrender their side-arms to the captor. They may be restored to the prisoner in marked cases, by the commander, to signalize admiration of his distinguished bravery, or approbation of his humane treatment of prisoners before his capture. The captured officer to whom they may be restored cannot wear them during captivity.
    74. A prisoner of war, being a public enemy, is the prisoner of the Government and not of the captor. No ransom can be paid by a prisoner of war to his individual captor, or to any officer in command. The Government alone releases captives, according to rules prescribed by itself.
    75. Prisoners of war are subject to confinement or imprisonment such as may be deemed necessary on account of safety, but they are to be subjected to no other intentional suffering or indignity. The confinement and mode of treating a prisoner may be varied during his captivity according to the demands of safety.
    76. Prisoners of war shall be fed upon plain and wholesome food, whenever practicable, and treated with humanity.
    They may be required to work for the benefit of the captor’s government, according to their rank and condition.
    77. A prisoner of war who escapes may be shot, or otherwise killed, in his flight; but neither death nor any other punishment shall be inflicted upon him simply for his attempt to escape, which the law of war does not consider a crime. Stricter means of security shall be used after an unsuccessful attempt at escape.
    If, however, a conspiracy is discovered, the purpose of which is a united or general escape, the conspirators may be rigorously punished, even with death; and capital punishment may also be inflicted upon prisoners of war discovered to have plotted rebellion against the authorities of the captors, whether in union with fellow-prisoners or other persons.
    78. If prisoners of war, having given no pledge nor made any promise on their honor, forcibly or otherwise escape, and are captured again in battle, after having rejoined their own army, they shall not be punished for their escape, but shall be treated as simple prisoners of war, although they will be subjected to stricter confinement.
    79. Every captured wounded enemy shall be medically treated, according to the ability of the medical staff.
    80. Honorable men, when captured, will abstain from giving to the enemy information concerning their own army, and the modern law of war permits no longer the use of any violence against prisoners in order to extort the desired information, or to punish them for having given false information.

    SECTION IV.–Partisans–Armed enemies not belonging to the hostile army–Scouts–Armed prowlers– War-rebels.

    81. Partisans are soldiers armed and wearing the uniform of their army, but belonging to a corps which acts detached from the main body for the purpose of making inroads into the territory occupied by the enemy. If captured they are entitled to all the privileges of the prisoner of war.
    82. Men, or squads of men, who commit hostilities, whether by fighting, or inroads for destruction or plunder, or by raids of any kind, without commission, without being part and portion of the organized hostile army, and without sharing continuously in the war, but who do so with intermitting returns to their homes and avocations, or with the occasional assumption of the semblance of peaceful pursuits, divesting themselves of the character or appearance of soldiers–such men, or squads of men, are not public enemies, and therefore, if captured, are not entitled to the privileges of prisoners of war, but shall be treated summarily as highway robbers or pirates.
    83. Scouts or single soldiers, if disguised in the dress of the country, or in the uniform of the army hostile to their own, employed in obtaining information, if found within or lurking about the lines of the captor, are treated as spies, and suffer death.
    84. Armed prowlers, by whatever names they may be called, or persons of the enemy’s territory, who steal within the lines of the hostile army for the purpose of robbing, killing, or of destroying bridges, roads, or canals, or of robbing or destroying the mail, or of cutting the telegraph wires, are not entitled to the privileges of the prisoner of war.
    85. War-rebels are persons within an occupied territory who rise in arms against the occupying or conquering army, or against the authorities established by the same. If captured, they may suffer death, whether they rise singly, in small or large bands, and whether called upon to do so by their own, but expelled, government or not. They are not prisoners of war; nor are they if discovered and secured before their conspiracy has matured to an actual rising or to armed violence.

    SECTION V.–Safe-conduct–Spies– War-traitors– Captured messengers-Abuse of the flag of truce.

    86. All intercourse between the territories occupied by belligerent armies, whether by traffic, by letter, by travel, or in any other way, ceases. This is the general rule, to be observed without special proclamation.
    Exceptions to this rule, whether by safe-conduct or permission to trade on a small or large scale, or by exchanging mails, or by travel from one territory into the other, can take place only according to agreement approved by the Government or by the highest military authority.
    Contraventions of this rule are highly punishable.
    87. Ambassadors, and all other diplomatic agents of neutral powers accredited to the enemy may receive safe-conducts through the territories occupied by the belligerents, unless there are military reasons to the contrary, and unless they may reach the place of their destination conveniently by another route. It implies no international affront if the safe-conduct is declined. Such passes are usually given by the supreme authority of the state and not by subordinate officers.
    88. A spy is a person who secretly, in disguise or under false pretense, seeks information with the intention of communicating it to the enemy.
    The spy is punishable with death by hanging by the neck, whether or not he succeed in obtaining the information or in conveying it to the enemy.
    89. If a citizen of the United States obtains information in a legitimate manner and betrays it to the enemy, be he a military or civil officer, or a private citizen, he shall suffer death.
    90. A traitor under the law of war, or a war-traitor, is a person in a place or district under martial law who, unauthorized by the military commander, gives information of any kind to the enemy, or holds intercourse with him.
    91. The war-traitor is always severely punished. If his offense consists in betraying to the enemy anything concerning the condition, safety, operations, or plans of the troops holding or occupying the place or district, his punishment is death.
    92. If the citizen or subject of a country or place invaded or conquered gives information to his own government, from which he is separated by the hostile army, or to the army of his government, he is a war-traitor, and death is the penalty of his offense.
    93. All armies in the field stand in need of guides, and impress them if they cannot obtain them otherwise.
    94. No person having been forced by the enemy to serve as guide is punishable for having done so.
    95. If a citizen of a hostile and invaded district voluntarily serves as a guide to the enemy, or offers to do so, he is deemed a war-traitor and shall suffer death.
    96. A citizen serving voluntarily as a guide against his own country commits treason, and will be dealt with according to the law of his country.
    97. Guides, when it is clearly proved that they have misled intentionally, may be put to death.
    98. All unauthorized or secret communication with the enemy is considered treasonable by the law of war.
    Foreign residents in an invaded or occupied territory or foreign visitors in the same can claim no immunity from this law. They may communicate with foreign parts or with the inhabitants of the hostile country, so far as the military authority permits, but no further. Instant expulsion from the occupied territory would be the very least punishment for the infraction of this rule.
    99. A messenger carrying written dispatches or verbal messages from one portion of the army or from a besieged place to another portion of the same army or its government, if armed, and in the uniform of his army, and if captured while doing so in the territory occupied by the enemy, is treated by the captor as a prisoner of war. If not in uniform nor a soldier, the circumstances connected with his capture must determine the disposition that shall be made of him.
    100. A messenger or agent who attempts to steal through the territory occupied by the enemy to further in any manner the interests of the enemy, if captured, is not entitled to the privileges of the prisoner of war, and may be dealt with according to the circumstances of the case.
    101. While deception in war is admitted as a just and necessary means of hostility, and is consistent with honorable warfare, the common law of war allows even capital punishment for clandestine or treacherous attempts to injure an enemy, because they are so dangerous, and it is so difficult to guard against them.
    102. The law of war, like the criminal law regarding other offenses, makes no difference on account of the difference of sexes, concerning the spy, the war-traitor, or the war-rebel.
    103. Spies, war-traitors, and war-rebels are not exchanged according to the common law of war. The exchange of such persons would require a special cartel, authorized by the Government, or, at a great distance from it, by the chief commander of the army in the field.
    104. A successful spy or war-traitor, safely returned to his own army, and afterward captured as an enemy, is not subject to punishment for his acts as a spy or war-traitor, but he may be held in closer custody as a person individually dangerous.

    SECTION VI.–Exchange of prisoners–Flags of truce–Flags of protection.

    105. Exchanges of prisoners take place–number for number–rank for rank–wounded for wounded–with added condition for added condition–such, for instance, as not to serve for a certain period.
    106. In exchanging prisoners of war, such numbers of persons of inferior rank may be substituted as an equivalent for one of superior rank as may be agreed upon by cartel, which requires the sanction of the Government, or of the commander of the army in the field.
    107. A prisoner of war is in honor bound truly to state to the captor his rank; and he is not to assume a lower rank than belongs to him, in order to cause a more advantageous exchange, nor a higher rank, for the purpose of obtaining better treatment.
    Offenses to the contrary have been justly punished by the commanders of released prisoners, and may be good cause for refusing to release such prisoners.
    108. The surplus number of prisoners of war remaining after an exchange has taken place is sometimes released either for the payment of a stipulated sum of money, or, in urgent cases, of provision, clothing, or other necessaries.
    Such arrangement, however, requires the sanction of the highest authority.
    109. The exchange of prisoners of war is an act of convenience to both belligerents. If no general cartel has been concluded, it cannot be demanded by either of them. No belligerent is obliged to exchange prisoners of war.
    A cartel is voidable as soon as either party has violated it.
    110. No exchange of prisoners shall be made except after complete capture, and after an accurate account of them, and a list of the captured officers, has been taken.
    111. The bearer of a flag of truce cannot insist upon being admitted. He must always be admitted with great caution. Unnecessary frequency is carefully to be avoided.
    112. If the bearer of a flag of truce offer himself during an engagement, he can be admitted as a very rare exception only. It is no breach of good faith to retain such flag of truce, if admitted during the engagement. Firing is not required to cease on the appearance of a flag of truce in battle.
    113. If the bearer of a flag of truce, presenting himself during an engagement, is killed or wounded, it furnishes no ground of complaint whatever.
    114. If it be discovered, and fairly proved, that a flag of truce has been abused for surreptitiously obtaining military knowledge, the bearer of the flag thus abusing his sacred character is deemed a spy.
    So sacred is the character of a flag of truce, and so necessary is its sacredness, that while its abuse is an especially heinous offense, great caution is requisite, on the other hand, in convicting the bearer of a flag of truce as a spy.
    115. It is customary to designate by certain flags (usually yellow) the hospitals in places which are shelled, so that the besieging enemy may avoid firing on them. The same has been done in battles when hospitals are situated within the field of the engagement.
    116. Honorable belligerents often request that the hospitals within the territory of the enemy may be designated, so that they may be spared.
    An honorable belligerent allows himself to be guided by flags or signals of protection as much as the contingencies and the necessities of the fight will permit.
    117. It is justly considered an act of bad faith, of infamy or fiendishness, to deceive the enemy by flags of protection. Such act of bad faith may be good cause for refusing to respect such flags.
    118. The besieging belligerent has sometimes requested the besieged to designate the buildings containing collections of works of art, scientific museums, astronomical observatories, or precious libraries, so that their destruction may be avoided as much as possible.

    SECTION VII.–The parole.

    119. Prisoners of war may be released from captivity by exchange, and, under certain circumstances, also by parole.
    120. The term parole designates the pledge of individual good faith and honor to do, or to omit doing, certain acts after he who gives his parole shall have been dismissed, wholly or partially, from the power of the captor.
    121. The pledge of the parole is always an individual, but not a private act.
    122. The parole applies chiefly to prisoners of war whom the captor allows to return to their country, or to live in greater freedom within the captor’s country or territory, on conditions stated in the parole.
    123. Release of prisoners of war by exchange is the general rule; release by parole is the exception.
    124. Breaking the parole is punished with death when the person breaking the parole is captured again.
    Accurate lists, therefore, of the paroled persons must be kept by the belligerents.
    125. When paroles are given and received there must be an exchange of two written documents, in which the name and rank of the paroled individuals are accurately and truthfully stated.
    126. Commissioned officers only are allowed to give their parole, and they can give it only with the permission of their superior, as long as a superior in rank is within reach.
    127. No non-commissioned officer or private can give his parole except through an officer. Individual paroles not given through an officer are not only void, but subject the individuals giving them to the punishment of death as deserters. The only admissible exception is where individuals, properly separated from their commands, have suffered long confinement without the possibility of being paroled through an officer.
    128. No paroling on the battle-field; no paroling of entire bodies of troops after a battle; and no dismissal of large numbers of prisoners, with a general declaration that they are paroled, is permitted, or of any value.
    129. In capitulations for the surrender of strong places or fortified camps the commanding officer, in cases of urgent necessity, may agree that the troops under his command shall not fight again during the war unless exchanged.
    130. The usual pledge given in the parole is not to serve during the existing war unless exchanged.
    This pledge refers only to the active service in the field against the paroling belligerent or his allies actively engaged in the same war. These cases of breaking the parole are patent acts, and can be visited with the punishment of death; but the pledge does not refer to internal service, such as recruiting or drilling the recruits, fortifying places not besieged, quelling civil commotions, fighting against belligerents unconnected with the paroling belligerents, or to civil or diplomatic service for which the paroled officer may be employed.
    131. If the government does not approve of the parole, the paroled officer must return into captivity, and should the enemy refuse to receive him he is free of his parole.
    132. A belligerent government may declare, by a general order, whether it will allow paroling and on what conditions it will allow it. Such order is communicated to the enemy.
    133. No prisoner of war can be forced by the hostile government to parole himself, and no government is obliged to parole prisoners of war or to parole all captured officers, if it paroles any. As the pledging of the parole is an individual act, so is paroling, on the other hand, an act of choice on the part of the belligerent.
    134. The commander of an occupying army may require of the civil officers of the enemy, and of its citizens, any pledge he may consider necessary for the safety or security of his army, and upon their failure to give it he may arrest, confine, or detain them.

    SECTION VIII.–Armistice–Capitulation.

    135. An armistice is the cessation of active hostilities for a period agreed between belligerents. It must be agreed upon in writing and duly ratified by the highest authorities of the contending parties.
    136. If an armistice be declared without conditions it extends no further than to require a total cessation of hostilities along the front of both belligerents.
    If conditions be agreed upon, they should be clearly expressed, and must be rigidly adhered to by both parties. If either party violates any express condition, the armistice may be declared null and void by the other.
    137. An armistice may be general, and valid for all points and lines of the belligerents; or special–that is, referring to certain troops or certain localities only. An armistice may be concluded for a definite time; or for an indefinite time, during which either belligerent may resume hostilities on giving the notice agreed upon to the other.
    138. The motives which induce the one or the other belligerent to conclude an armistice, whether it be expected to be preliminary to a treaty of peace, or to prepare during the armistice for a more vigorous prosecution of the war, does in no way affect the character of the armistice itself.
    139. An armistice is binding upon the belligerents from the day of the agreed commencement; but the officers of the armies are responsible from the day only when they receive official information of its existence.
    140. Commanding officers have the right to conclude armistices binding on the district over which their command extends, but such armistice is subject to the ratification of the superior authority, and ceases so soon as it is made known to the enemy that the armistice is not ratified, even if a certain time for the elapsing between giving notice of cessation and the resumption of hostilities should have been stipulated for.
    141. It is incumbent upon the contracting parties of an armistice to stipulate what intercourse of persons or traffic between the inhabitants of the territories occupied by the hostile armies shall be allowed, if any.
    If nothing is stipulated the intercourse remains suspended, as during actual hostilities.
    142. An armistice is not a partial or a temporary peace; it is only the suspension of military operations to the extent agreed upon by the parties.
    143. When an armistice is concluded between a fortified place and the army besieging it, it is agreed by all the authorities on this subject that the besieger must cease all extension, perfection, or advance of his attacking works as much so as from attacks by main force.
    But as there is a difference of opinion among martial jurists whether the besieged have a right to repair breaches or to erect new works of defense within the place during an armistice, this point should be determined by express agreement between the parties.
    144. So soon as a capitulation is signed the capitulator has no right to demolish, destroy, or injure the works, arms, stores, or ammunition in his possession, during the time which elapses between the signing and the execution of the capitulation, unless otherwise stipulated in the same.
    145. When an armistice is clearly broken by one of the parties the other party is released from all obligation to observe it.
    146. Prisoners taken in the act of breaking an armistice must be treated as prisoners of war, the officer alone being responsible who gives the order for such a violation of an armistice. The highest authority of the belligerent aggrieved may demand redress for the infraction of an armistice.
    147. Belligerents sometimes conclude an armistice while their plenipotentiaries are met to discuss the conditions of a treaty of peace; but plenipotentiaries may meet without a preliminary armistice; in the latter case the war is carried on without any abatement.

    SECTION IX.–Assassination.

    148. The law of war does not allow proclaiming either an individual belonging to the hostile army, or a citizen, or a subject of the hostile government an outlaw, who may be slain without trial by any captor, any more than the modern law of peace allows such international outlawry; on the contrary, it abhors such outrage. The sternest retaliation should follow the murder committed in consequence of such proclamation, made by whatever authority. Civilized nations look with horror upon offers of rewards for the assassination of enemies as relapses into barbarism.

    SECTION X.–Insurrection– Civil war–Rebellion.

    149. Insurrection is the rising of people in arms against their government, or portion of it, or against one or more of its laws, or against an officer or officers of the government. It may be confined to mere armed resistance, or it may have greater ends in view.
    150. Civil war is war between two or more portions of a country or state, each contending for the mastery of the whole, and each claiming to be the legitimate government. The term is also sometimes applied to war of rebellion, when the rebellious provinces or portions of the state are contiguous to those containing the seat of government.
    151. The term rebellion is applied to an insurrection of large extent, and is usually a war between the legitimate government of a country and portions of provinces of the same who seek to throw off their allegiance to it and set up a government of their own.
    152. When humanity induces the adoption of the rules of regular war toward rebels, whether the adoption is partial or entire, it does in no way whatever imply a partial or complete acknowledgment of their government, if they have set up one, or of them, as an independent or sovereign power. Neutrals have no right to make the adoption of the rules of war by the assailed government toward rebels the ground of their own acknowledgment of the revolted people as an independent power.
    153. Treating captured rebels as prisoners of war, exchanging them, concluding of cartels, capitulations, or other warlike agreements with them; addressing officers of a rebel army by the rank they may have in the same; accepting flags of truce; or, on the other hand, proclaiming martial law in their territory, or levying war taxes or forced loans, or doing any other act sanctioned or demanded by the law and usages of public war between sovereign belligerents, neither proves nor establishes an acknowledgment of the rebellious people, or of the government which they may have erected, as a public or sovereign power. Nor does the adoption of the rules of war toward rebels imply an engagement with them extending beyond the limits of these rules. It is victory in the field that ends the strife and settles the future relations between the contending parties.
    154. Treating in the field the rebellious enemy according to the law and usages of war has never prevented the legitimate government from trying the leaders of the rebellion or chief rebels for high treason, and from treating them accordingly, unless they are included in a general amnesty.
    155. All enemies in regular war are divided into two general classes–that is to say, into combatants and non-combatants, or unarmed citizens of the hostile government.
    The military commander of the legitimate government, in a war of rebellion, distinguishes between the loyal citizen in the revolted portion of the country and the disloyal citizen. The disloyal citizens may further be classified into those citizens known to sympathize with the rebellion without positively aiding it, and those who, without taking up arms, give positive aid and comfort to the rebellious enemy without being bodily forced thereto.
    156. Common justice and plain expediency require that the military commander protect the manifestly loyal citizens in revolted territories against the hardships of the war as much as the common misfortune of all war admits.
    The commander will throw the burden of the war, as much as lies within his power, on the disloyal citizens, of the revolted portion or province, subjecting them to a stricter police than the non-combatant enemies have to suffer in regular war; and if he deems it appropriate, or if his government demands of him that every citizen shall, by an oath of allegiance, or by some other manifest act, declare his fidelity to the legitimate government, he may expel, transfer, imprison, or fine the revolted citizens who refuse to pledge themselves anew as citizens obedient to the law and loyal to the government.
    Whether it is expedient to do so, and whether reliance can be placed upon such oaths, the commander or his government have the right to decide.
    157. Armed or unarmed resistance by citizens of the United States against the lawful movements of their troops is levying war against the United States, and is therefore treason.

16. birdie
    April 29th, 2009 @ 6:13 pm

    Orly, this is ridiculous the phone just keeps ringing and ringing with no answer. We have written and they wont answer or listen. Bring a bus load of people to Eric Holder’s office and demand action and protest! Enough is enough, they will not listen to us unless they get embarassed by protesters pressing them for answers!

17. Paul Davidson, Sr
    April 29th, 2009 @ 7:13 pm

    Sounds like their backs are against the wall and they are delaying because they don’t know what to do.
    THIS IS GREAT!!!

    I will continue to write and call.

    Keep it up Orly!!!

18. Linda Starr
    April 29th, 2009 @ 7:48 pm

    When we fax or call, what terminology do we use? We are asking them to do….??? I would like to be precise about what WE are asking for (you have already explained what you did, but that is different).

19. Anne
    April 29th, 2009 @ 8:36 pm

    Orly:

    The only way that I think would be helpful is that you go to Washington, DC and have an appointment with Eric Holder and Jeffrey Taylor in person or attend their meetings where they give speech and meet them in front of the audience just like you did to Chief Justice John Roberts. I would encourage you to go to Washington, DC once a month to pursue them into working with you. I have admired you as you have not given up on what you are doing. Keep on persisting until our big victory finally comes. This reminds me of one widow in the Scripture (Luke 18:2 – 6. May the Lord be with you with His arms wrapped around you as long as you put your trust in Him. His victory is already in your heart. Thanks for working so hard on this judical system with the Constitution of the USA.

    Anne

20. David
    April 29th, 2009 @ 11:14 pm

    Orly, I support you 100 percent but the Writ of Mandamus or Writ of Certiorari is exactly what the Supreme Court has already denied in all of the other cases. Granted it was Scalia, Kennedy and Souter who denied the cases even after they were supposedly distributed for conference, but I believe the entire Supreme Court is giving you the run around and are all in it together.

21. dr_taitz@yahoo.com
    April 30th, 2009 @ 5:49 am

    Demand immediate response to Quo Warranto Easterling v Obama -with Holder and James v Obama with Taylorl

22. dr_taitz@yahoo.com
    April 30th, 2009 @ 6:00 am

    I sent an e-mail to Mr. Farah

23. Ginger
    April 30th, 2009 @ 9:12 am

    Proverbs 29, 12

    A wicked ruler will have wicked aides on his staff.

    Proverbs 29, 16

    When rulers are wicked, their people are too; but good men will live to see the Tyrant’s down fall.

24. Ginger
    April 30th, 2009 @ 9:29 am

    Mister Milquetoast;

    I have also said on posts that after Barry’s 100 days of doing his part to tare down our country he would for some reason step down giving Biden the presidency. Then evil Pelosi will be vice president. Biden will go by means of health making Pelosi president and she appoints Reid as vice president. I believe this is the agreement she made to cover up for the whole fraud. Race card was used from day one. Barry is just the dressing! This is why he just travels around and parties all the time. We the people will never give up proving he is a illegal immigrant and all the bills he signed will be null and void.

25. Ginger
    April 30th, 2009 @ 11:02 am

    Orly, I ran across this old e-mail I had found from a web site with a U-Tube video. It was Barry standing in back of a truck with his cousin Raila Odinga, campaigning for him in Kenya. He, Barry said “Democracy can’t work without Freedom of Information and Freedom of the Press.” “with out it………..He was saying this to a group of males standing around them.

    I have not checked yet to see if it was still up but here is the web site address. https://blog.changeandexperience.com You do not need to let this be read until you can research! Hey it is his words. What is the saying on the miranda rights?” “What you say can and will be held against you.” It was on U-Tube

    God Bless all of You…………

26. Ginger
    April 30th, 2009 @ 11:05 am

    ATTN…….Orly……..It is a Hillary blog check it out. Click HOME on top.

    God Bless America

27. William
    April 30th, 2009 @ 12:04 pm

    Just a thought…..

    This may not be reviewed simply as it could be an incorrect avenue to file. Here is some research material that helped me better understand the proper avenue of QW and past history/cases.

    It is also my opinion, that the petitions should be used and changed to the United States v. Obama, rather than personal clients.

    https://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/03/04/quo-warranto-legal-brief-part-1/

    https://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/03/05/quo-warranto-legal-brief-part-2-the-federal-quo-warranto-statute-is-the-only-constitutional-means-of-removing-a-sitting-president-other-than-impeachment/

    https://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/03/10/quo-warranto-legal-brief-part-3-standing-trial-by-jury-history-of-statute-separation-of-powers-cont

28. William
    April 30th, 2009 @ 12:34 pm

    David,

    I agree with you whereby you stated:

    [Writ of Mandamus or Writ of Certiorari is exactly what the Supreme Court has already denied in all of the other cases.]

    It appears that Eric Holder is hopeful of dropping the QW, and/or hopeful that Dr. Orly takes it straight to the Supreme Court, in which case, there will never be a trial by jury.

29. Ginger
    April 30th, 2009 @ 1:13 pm

    Has anyone tried sending letters to their attorney generals, senators, congress people, judges, Holder, etc , in their local newspapers? I guess I know the answer! Even though you pay for the ad they still will not let you! Barry does not allow us freedom of speech but we have to listen to his ????????

30. Joe
    April 30th, 2009 @ 3:39 pm

    Orly,

    I’m not sure if complaining about Holder and Taylor to the Board of Overseers (discipline agency for Lawyers) could get them off their butt and spring into action. Found this person on the internet:

    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
    Leonard H. Becker, Bar Counsel
    District Columbia Board on
    Professional Responsibility
    515 5th Street, N.W., Building A, Rm 127
    Washington, D.C. 20001-2797
    Phone: 202/638-1501 Fax: 202/638-0862

    Considering that Obama has them in his back pocket, Holder and Taylor probably don’t worry about losing their practice. I just wanted to suggest this in case it could make a difference.
    Keep up the great work!!!

31. kc
    April 30th, 2009 @ 5:04 pm

    Why don’t people just operate like news hounds when they really want a story or wish to get some action on camera – if they can’t get results any other way? I doubt if you’ll get anywhere with the manufactured red tape and front men (women) who serve only to buffer the ones you really need to respond to you personally. So find out the home phone numbers …. or addresses …. and then make up signs with a group of folks and protest in front of their homes with statements that these appointees will not respond to properly channeled legal questions. Get it on camera – even get your own videographers and put it all on YouTube to get some attention. Maybe that will be picked up by other media or blogs and then at least get more attention. And continue the noise (even if you have to keep some distance) – the neighbors will see and hear.

    Same with the Occidental College individual with the authority to act who stated or wrote that the request for Obama records was “legitimate” – before he/she called on the attorneys to fight it. Then, with that admitted statement in hand, go after that individual (rather than the college) and sue her (him). Those are the tactics that O’s attorneys use – they go after individuals and threaten personally that they will hit them with every monetary sanction available. Well then, their individuals should be placed in the same positions of distress.

32. Ron
    May 1st, 2009 @ 6:16 am

    It seems I saw on television that skip tracers start with a number like 202-514-7566 and start adding or subtracting digits to get another number in the same organization.

    Holder and Taylor may have ordered their staffs to stonewall the public.

33. dr_taitz@yahoo.com
    May 1st, 2009 @ 2:23 pm

    there was no attachment in your post, what was there

34. dr_taitz@yahoo.com
    May 1st, 2009 @ 2:35 pm

    cAN YOU DO IT?

35. Ron
    May 1st, 2009 @ 5:33 pm

    Payday Loans Canada is quite likely a comment spam bot, not a real person.

    I see them all the time at the political forum at which I an Administrator.

    Notice how the post has a generic “fill in the blanks” quality to it.

    We enter suspected spam bot IP#s into Google search. If the spam bot has been around a while, Google will return all sorts of obvious information on their spamming activities. Then we put the spam bot IP# on a ban list.

• Search for:
• Tweet

• EVIDENCE AGAINST OBAMA — YouTube Indiana Trial of Obama !

• EVIDENCE AGAINST OBAMA — Indiana Trial of Obama, 2nd Copy

• Evidence on Barack Obama

  Obama File with Exhibits
  Affidavit of Paul Irey
  Obama file Exhibits 1 - 7
  Obama file Exhibit 8 - Part 1
  Obama file Exhibit 8 - Part 2
  Obama file Exhibits 9-13
  Obama file Exhibits 14-21
  Request for Docs under FOIA and Emergency Motion for Reconsideration
  Exhibits sent to Inspector Generals and Congress

• RSS Feed: Subscribe for Free RSS Feed

  

• ---

  PETITION TO CONGRESS:
  Ban importation of 200,000 Syrian migrants into the US

  

  ---

• Petition the White House to institute Edward Snowden, National Whistleblower – Patriots against Government Corruption Day

  

• URGENT! PLEASE SIGN PETITION TO CONGRESS

• OrlyTaitzEsq.com

  • Untitled

• TAITZ REPORT

  Subscribe today to stay in touch with our progress. Send this channel out to your email lists. Thank you for your support. CHANNEL (Google Plus) SUBSCRIBE TO YOUTUBE
• 

• Official Facebook

  
  

• Recent Posts

  • (no title)

• IMPORTANT NOTICES – PLEASE READ!

  Historic DVD Now Available! DVD of the historic trial in GA and DVD of a historic testimony in NH, where evidence was provided showing Obama using a forged birth certificate and a stolen social security number. The DVDs are in a beautiful commemorative case with personal autographs from attorney Dr. Orly Taitz $22.50 each +$2.50 for shipping and handling. --------- To order these DVDs, donate $25.00 by credit card on the website RunOrlyRun.com and email orly.taitz@gmail.com with you name and address. Or send a $25.00 check with your name and address to: Orly Taitz for US Senate 2012, 29839 Santa Margarita ste 100, RSM, CA 92688.

• Advertisement / Sponsors

  
  29839 Sta Margarita Pkwy,
  Ste 100
  Rancho Sta Margarita, CA 92688
  orly.taitz @gmail. com
  (949) 766-7687
  
  
  --------------------------------------
  
  Videography by Barbara Rosenfeld
  --------------------------------------
  
  

  Bumper Sticker
  $9.99 thru PayPal

  --------------------------------------
  
  
  --------------------------------------

  Orly Taitz Photo Collections

  
  

• April 2024

  M	T	W	T	F	S	S
  1	2	3	4	5	6	7
  8	9	10	11	12	13	14
  15	16	17	18	19	20	21
  22	23	24	25	26	27	28
  29	30

• Pages

  • #409755 (no title)
  • …Defendant Obama defaulted in Grinols et al v Obama et al
  • …Grinols Subpoenas
  • ..Grinols Order, Summons, TRO, Complaint
  • .Affidavit of Mike Zullo
  • 1. Judd v Obama
  • 2. Farrar v Obama
  • 3. Taitz v Sebelius
  • 4. Taitz v Indiana, IN Judge Orders Trial
  • 5. Taitz v Astrue
  • 6. Mississippi Filed Complaint Update
  • 7. Taitz Walters v Sec of State Kansas
  • Videos
  • Video: Orly before NH Election Committee