Both Oil for Immigration & Citizen Wells are reporting the following contact to the Joint Chiefs of Staff written by Dr. Douglas W. Schell.

Dr. Schell was a commissioned officer in the USAF and is speaking from that perspective. His email to the JCS details the Constitutional crisis that will ensue if an ineligible Obama takes office. He states:obamaistoast

[...] could well split the military between those who will stand by the Constitution vs. those who stand by traitors in order to keep their military offices.


Here’s my question.

What happens if you serve in the military and believe that Obama is not legitimately POTUS . . . that he is a usurper or worse? You are sworn to uphold the Constitution of our Republic. Your obligation & loyalty is to the country and not to any individual man or woman.

Further, is there any possibility that the military would consider/or act on removing a person that has fraudulently obtained the office and is ineligible? I would not want to be faced with this dilemma.



Filed under 2008 Election, Barack Obama, Congress, Culture, LEGAL ISSUES, LIFE, political party, politics, Uncategorized


  1. anonymous

    I say good riddance to those who would not fall in line; people who would disobey a command are not fit to shine my shoes.

  2. sportsone234

    What if the command is from someone that is a fraud and a usurper?

  3. anonymous

    They’ve been following commands from an unelected fraud for the last 8 years.

  4. ToddonCapeCod

    Anonymous, you ass.
    Bush was elected. Twice.
    Get over it, idot

  5. Does anyone have a link to that Army Times survey?

  6. angels81

    The fringe on the right and the left have really fallen off the deep end. They just can’t except the fact that the majority of the voting public voted for Obama, the man they hate beyond all reason. The supreme court, congress and the people aren’t buying any of this tin foil hat birth certificate stuff. People like, Berg and the loony fringe element on the web are wasting time and money running with these dreams of changing the will of the people with some far out charge that the courts, congress and the people have already dealt with.

  7. You do what your officers tell you to do.

    This writer is delusional.

  8. angels81

    Beckwith, you don’t have much knowledge about the UCMJ which states the chain of command. All service personal are bond by the UCMJ, which puts the commander in chief at the top. If people think the military would start a coup to take over this country because they don’t think the president is not really the president, then this country is doomed. The fringe wingnuts are really spending to much time in the land of OZ.

  9. sportsone234

    The question is legitimate and remains.


  10. angels81

    This thread is asking the question… Would the military serve, if they thought the president wasn’t a natural born citizen, even thou the majority of the people have voted and congress and courts agree that he is president. So if they refuse to follow the UCMJ and not serve the commander in chief, that sure sounds like a military coup to me.

  11. Ted

    The coup would be by the usurper. To oust the coup (e.g., by the military) would be to RESTORE the constitutional republic.

  12. angels81

    Nice try Ted, but so far the people, congress and the supreme court disagree with your pipe dream.

  13. To angels81:

    As a veteran, I know exactly what the UCMJ is and I know that members of the military are obliged to follow the “lawful orders” of their officers “in the chain of command.”

    You just didn’t understand my post – at all.

  14. angels81

    1/12/09- Supreme Court threw out Bergs latest suit without comment, so as of now, if the military was to refuse to support President Obama, the military would be in revolt against the lawful government of the United States of a America.

  15. Jimmy

    I think if you defy an order you deserve what comes your way.

  16. Annie O

    A dilemma indeed. With all of Obama’s planned spending we hear nothing about spending to protect our Armed Forces. So what if he sends our troops somewhere and they are inadequately protected?

    Or what if US military agendas change under Obama? What if Obama wants our troops in Africa?

    Obama could clear any doubts by producing his documents. WHY DOESN’T HE???

  17. sportsone234

    I purposely posed the question about the military carrying out orders from an ineligible official for a reason.

    Most of the country thinks and talks in sound bytes with very little deliberative thought. What are the various sides to this topic and what are the long term consequences of carrying out (what some would term illegal orders) from an illegal source?

    Could someone who is actually (or has served) in the military answer this question.

    What are recruits, officers, etc. told concerning this? Is the training to carry all orders regardless of the source or consequence? Is defying an order the same thing as refusing to carry out an illegal order?

    Thanks to all who continue to discuss this topic in a respectful manner!

  18. angels81

    Annie O, why should he? He has produced a legal document that has satisfied all the requirements needed. It is up to the people who charge Obama as to not being legal to prove their case. So far Berg or anyone else hasn’t come up with one fact to prove their case against Obama. The courts have thrown out all these case, without comment, because they have no legal merit. In this country, you need credible charges to pass the legal smell test, and no one has come close yet.

  19. angels81

    sportsone: No court in the land has found one credible case that has any legal merit to question Obama’s status to become President. Rumors and questions don’t count when it comes to the law. If the courts find nothing of merit, the military will have no doubt who is the commander in chief. Just because some people think otherwise, doesn’t make it so. Until the courts say Obama is not president, the military will follow the constitution and the UCMJ. By the way, I’m a Nam vet.

  20. Pingback: You’d Never Know from the British Media this Problem even Exists……….. « uk1884

  21. gaetano

    Hey angels 81 ,you are so full of sh%% that you eyes must be brown by now.No one has been given the chance to proove their suit.Can`t you see this cover up? This Obamma charactor or whoever he his has to answer questions sooner or later,and no one will let this go untouched .He might become president,but this bullsh%% will take him out.

  22. angels81

    gaetano- Come back to the real world. The courts have thrown all these cases out because they don’t meet the legal requirements to be heard. The law is a funny thing in that you first have to show standing , and these nut jobs can’t even jump that hurdle. As far as a cover up, please tell me, is the supreme court part of the cover up? How about the state of Hawaii? What about congress? Maybe God is part of the cover up too? Did I miss anybody?

  23. angels81 keeps saying that the SCOTUS “have thrown all these cases out.”

    Fact is, none of them have been “thrown out.”

    angels 81 is delusional.

  24. angels81

    Beckwith, You know by my previous post what I mean by, throwing out. Like I said above, you have to have standing within the law. The Supreme Court have deemed that none of these suits have any standing, that is why thy have been dismissed without comment. Since they have no standing with the court, they have no case.

  25. bored09

    I would just like to make a statement. No I do not think the military would attempt a coup unless the majority of americans were demonstrating against a president they did not feel met the requirements. (Not saying Obama here, just anyone in general). I do have a question of my own though. When ANY of us go for a job interview we have to produce evidence to our prospective employer that we are legally allowed to work in the US. As the employers of the POTUS dont the american people have the right to demand the same proof? I say yes we do

  26. Joe

    I am a senior military officer. I swore to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.” Therefore, I will uphold the Constitution against any usurper who hijacks the Presidency. If a usurper is not eligible under the Constitution to hold the office of President, I have no duty to follow his/her orders. More importantly, I have an affirmative duty to expose him and restore order.

  27. Pingback: More Questions About Soetero-Obama…..Day 9, January 28, 2007 « The Usurpation Chronicles

  28. The question you ought to worry about is whether any renegade servicepeople will take their oath seriously enough, but contrary to your odd, unsupported view, determine that your assault on Obama is the threat to the U.S.

    Did you see the video of Obama speaking to the troops last week? The sane members — more than 99.99%, it appears — have already determined Obama is the president.

    See it here:

  29. As the employers of the POTUS dont the american people have the right to demand the same proof? I say yes we do.

    But the American people (with a capital A) do not have a right to ignore the proof once it’s been presented — or in this case, presented six separate times.

    If you present proof of your citizenship to a potential employer and the employer refuses to look at it, he has no right to claim that as an issue in the hire decision. In some cases, the employer might be subject to prosecution.

    Six times Obama’s made the showing that he’s eligible. There is not a shred of evidence to refute. There is no document that shows a different citizenship at any point. There is no one who has presented an affidavit of information that would invalidate Obama’s eligibility.

    Since the proof has been presented, and since there is no rebuttal at all, the issue is settled. And so the courts have ruled.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s