LATEST: Go to for the latest Article II eligibility news ...
Friday, May 13, 2011

Video: Here's the first interview with Lieutenant Colonel Dr. Terry Lakin after his early release from Fort Leavenworth prison. LTC Lakin's brother Dr. Greg Lakin joined him during the interview. The interview aired on America's Web Radio on 5/13/2011. 

View the first of pictures of LTC Terry Lakin enjoying his freedom here: 

Photoshop Expert & Author Mara Zebest Declares Obama's Latest Hawaiian Birth Certificate A Complete Phony -Details here.

Irrefutable Proof Obama's New Birth Certificate Forged Using Nordyke Birth Certificates -Details here.

Comparative Analysis By Pro Graphics & Special Effects: Trump Vs. Obama; Birth Certificate Fraud -Details here. 

Busted: White House Now Claims They Ordered Short-Form COLB From Hawaii Department Of Health In 2008 Yet COLB Is Date Stamped 2007 -Details here. 

Confirmed: Democratic Party of Hawaii would not certify in 2008 that Obama was constitutionally and legally eligible for the Office of President -Details here. 

Notre Dame Professor Charles Rice: Obama's eligibility could be biggest political fraud in the history of the world; time for a new approach -Details here. 

Attorney Mario Apuzzo: All presidents born after 1787, except for Chester Arthur and Barack Obama, met the “natural born Citizen” criteria. -Details here. 

Commander Charles Kerchner: List of U.S. Presidents - Eligibility under Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) or Natural Born Citizen (NBC) Clause or Seated due to Election Fraud -Details here. 

Jack Cashill Discusses Obama's Fraudulent Social Security Number Reserved for Connecticut Applicants -Video here. 

Detailed reports on Obama's SS# can be found here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here. Visit the Birther Vault for the long list of evidence against Hawaii officials and all of the people questioning Obama's eligibility; [].
LTC Lakin - A Sampling of Common Blunders and Uncorroborated Statements by Members of Congress about Obama’...
Obama Committed Draft Registration Fraud! Whose SSN is He Using? Wash Times Natl Wkly 20110502 pg 5



  2. well that speech didnt say much i thought he was going to speak about obamas eligibility and what he had found out and also if he planned to pursue it now after he was set free

  3. Lakin must now sue Soetoro. If he doesn't, he will regret it. He might not regret it right away, but over time he will. He must not delay. He was done wrong by Soetoro and now must be fully restored. One could argue he has a duty to sue and pursue the truth. Not just for Lakin, but for the country as a whole.

  4. Lakin is a hero, a conscientious objector, a true patriot. Wen you see how the press ignored Lakin and turned obnoxious weirdo Cindy Sheehan into a media superstar, it's absolutely sickening.

    As we expose Obama with the fake birth certificate, we have opportunity that may not come again in our lifetimes: to expose the media - citing specifics by name - to the our fellows in the public. It will be hard work, but then so was exposing Obama - and now he is tied to a forgery; it's only a matter of time.

    Obama is going the way of Nixon: times 1000. To make the results generally permanent, we need to send the mainstream media with him. And we will.

  5. I would love for the plight of obama an LAKIN to be reversed!

  6. @dust

    LTC Lakin is still under the UCMJ so he can't yet speak freely about Obama...

  7. California birther/dualer/doubterMay 14, 2011 at 3:06 PM

    But once Lakin, as expected, gets dishonorably drummed out of the military, I say he should take the matter to court. No one can say he doesn't have standing unless he is a libturd who thinks otherwise for anyone who embarrasses this two-bit fraud. Pro Graphics, this indeed is a golden opportunity to torpedo the lapdogs wrapped around our Dear Leader's finger.

  8. "Lakin must now sue Soetoro. "

    My lawyer and I are preparing a class action lawsuit against the leaders of the birther movement, including ORYR . They are not only guilty of libel against the president but also against his supporters (which is the basis of my lawsuit)

    considering judges rulings against the birthers, it should be an easy way to bankrupt these people and take their money.

  9. You'll get your day in court. You'll probably want to murder me when you end up paying dearly.

  10. "They are not only guilty of libel against the president but also against his supporters..."


    I thought in America we are innocent until proven guilty...


  11. Whose the leaders of the "birther" movement?

    Can I join?

    Are you going to sue World Net Daily as well?

  12. @Anonymous

    My response to your "class action lawsuit" is right HERE.

  13. Yes, WND will be included. The hospital he promised to pay 15 grand to will be in on the action, as well as Fukino and several other people in Hawaii that you've slandered.

    thought I'd give you a head start to prepare .. this will be a quick open and shut case.

    you'll be served within a few weeks after we subpena blogspot for your identity. If you wish to bypass the subpena process for privacy concerns, I'll let you give your info to the Law firm representing us.

  14. By the way, I don't post as anonymous on the birther debunker forum I'm a member of. You have obtained my full name in the past and posted my information / libeled me.

  15. You sound fairly young on the radio show you called into the other day. You don't seem to have a real job so I'm guessing you still live with your parents. (early 20s?) .. Your parents could still be held financially responsible for the things you do in their house.

  16. "My response to your "class action lawsuit" is right"

    you seem confident that you won't lose anything ... you do know things like this (posting Photoshopped photos of people you slander - in this case Obama) will be used as evidence of your libelous nature...

  17. Class action lawsuit from a bunch anonymous obot cowards? LMAO
    wanh wanh wanh..........

    Bill C.

  18. "I thought in America we are innocent until proven guilty...

    you'll have an opportunity to prove your innocence in court. We've been stockpiling evidence of your defamation of character (mine and many others) for over a year now, so I imagine you'll have a hard time with this.

  19. One more thing, tell all the prominent people in the birther movement you know that perhaps this class action lawsuit against you will give you a chance to ask for discovery. Anyone who wants to admit libel, we'll gladly ad as defendants.

  20. @ObamaRelease YourRecords

    LOL - took me by surprise!

    I think Birthers would welcome such a lawsuit. In a civilian court, as opposed to military, we would be entitled to discovery, and since so many expert witnesses content that the birth certificate is an obvious fake, we could subpoena the original and have it forensically tested with electron microscope fiber analysis and chemical absorption tests, including the inks on the signatures, stamps and printers ink on the document itself. That would first mean being able to read the document. That in turn would first mean establishing its existence, which I, for one, am now becoming convinced does not exist despite what Hawaii says. if it does it has Obama listed as being of another nationality, as almost certainly do his school admission records. This fake thing a kid could slap together is manifest of an act of subterfuge born of genuine desperation. Nobody takes a chance like this for the hell of it.

    Don't you wish you could be a fly on the wall in the living quarters right now?

    Michelle: Barack, what are we going to do? Did you see The Globe? They KNOW!

    Barack: Look, I told you to drop it! It's going to be okay!

    Michelle: What about Donald Trump?

    Barack (long pause): I dunno. Don't worry. We'll take care of it. let's just see what happens.

    That ultra-cool swagger is just a street-punk bluff. Obama's version of wagging a finger and saying, "I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinski." And now he's been caught.

    Screwed. On a giant scale.

  21. @ObamaRelease YourRecords

    In 60s B movie Martian voice, "Take me to your leader."

  22. @ORYR
    LMFAO. Water is getting deeper,the rats are starting to drown.


  24. You may want to add Google to that very long list you plan on suing being most of the photoshopped images used here come from

  25. By the way Obamarroid, a defendant has a right to face his/her accuser. You won't be able to hide behind the id "anonymous".

  26. @Anonymous
    You'll "let" ORYR prepare? LOL! You'll shit if you eat regular and that's about it, you impotent fool.

  27. "we could subpoena the original"

    You admitted on the Andrea Shea show that you have absolutely no knowledge or experience in the legal profession. Yet you still talk out your behind making absolutely false statements like this?

    Oh yeah, your understanding of internet technology is extremely lacking as well. is not the source of the images. They merely INDEX sites on the internet automatically, which ends up giving you LINKS to the source.

    Regardless, It doesn't matter WHERE you got the Photoshopped images. The fact that you constantly use them will NOT look good on your character in this libel lawsuit.

    Your obvious lack of technical or legal knowledge is going to get you in a world of shit.

    One last time, are you willing to contact the law firm and give them your contact information or are you going to force us to subpena it from your ISP/website host?

  28. "a defendant has a right to face his/her accuser. You won't be able to hide behind the id "anonymous"."

    No shit sherlock. I'm suing him for libeling my real name, which he has. I chose to post anonymously here lately simply because I don't want to endure any more e-mail harassment from the likes of you until the court case gets underway.

  29. @Anonymous

    "we could subpoena the original"

    Where did I say that, obot?

    "One last time, are you willing to contact the law firm and give them your contact information or are you going to force us to subpena it from your ISP/website host?"

    Sure, send me the contact info. I will be happy to contact them.

  30. Is that you Foggy? Or is this Sully?

    I've only used 2 real names from Fogbow at this site.

    If it is the latter, you're nuts if you think my post was "libel"...

    I have never privately emailed any person from Fogbow, EVER!

  31. I am concerned and perhaps someone could assuage me? I believe that there are serious questions that need to be answered about Mr. Obamas eligibility. No other president has had an issue like this dog them like this. There should be a congressional investigation and legal challenges. I wanted to get that said so that no one thinks I am being critical of the eligibility issue. What my concern is of the attempt to set a precedent of desertion as a legitimate form of protest. Mr. Lakin refused to deploy with his unit because of political objections he had. Many soldiers and sailors who were to deploy to Vietnam said that without a declaration of war that their orders were illegal and did not need to be followed. You can look at deserters who said that Iraq was an illegal war and served prison time for it. I am a Navy Veteran. If one of my sailors refused to deploy with our ship because he thought "George Bush stole the election in Florida." I would have had him arrested on the spot! Mr. Lakins unit deployed without their doctor to a combat zone, God only knows what the consequences to that are. I am concerned that this effort may undermine the fighting capability and chain of command of our military by saying that individuals should not follow orders as a form of political protest. How fast would our military fall apart if every sailor could pick and choose their duty when political leaders do something they don't like... Cam someone talk me down?

  32. we could subpoena the original"

    Where did I say that, obot?"

    ---> you just said it a few minutes ago. Are you mentally incompetent?

    "we could subpoena the original and have it forensically tested with electron microscope fiber analysis and chemical absorption tests"

    You really do have a short term memory when it comes to things you've posted. No wonder you don't remember all the people you've libeled.

    By the way, I never said YOU are the one who sent e-mail harassment. I did, however, start receiving the tasteless e-mails after you ran your libelous article mentioning me.

  33. @Anonymous

    I just re-read all my comments posted here and don't see where I posted that.

    I did see PG posted it...

    Again, send me the contact info and I will call and give them my info.

  34. Post script,

    Just to add one last point to my concern above. In the trials of the others who refused to deploy, they were not allowed to present why they refused as well. The only 2 questions that Mr. Lakins trial determined: 1) Did you know you were to deploy with your unit 2) did you or did you not follow a direct order to deploy? In the military either you are there or you are not, excuses are not accepted. The man dying on the operating table I'm Afghanistan does not care if Mr. Lakin didn't believe the president was an NBC, he just cares that there is a doctor to treat him. Mr. Lakin was not there to perform his duty

  35. That's my mistake on mixing up your message with PG ; I blame it on using tiny smart phone screen to view the page. :P

  36. @Anonymous May 14, 2011 6:12 PM

    Retired Air Force Lieutenant General Thomas McInerney has supplied an affidavit to the court

    in support of Army Lieutenant Colonel Terrence Lakin acknowledging pervasive concerns over Obama’s Constitutional eligibility and demands the putative President release his birth records or the court authorize discovery.

    LTG McInerney states “All officers must be and are trained that their loyalty to the Constitution requires them to obey all lawful orders, but they are also trained that they must disobey an illegal order, and that the failure to do either is equally a betrayal of their oath.”

    Let’s review the estimable insights by Brigadier General John S. Cooke on “MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL 20X” during a speech presented March 10, 1998:

    “As with most legal questions, a good place to begin is the Constitution. I know you are all familiar with the powers of Congress and the President over the armed forces and military justice, but I would like to begin with an even more fundamental point, the Preamble…”

    We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

    “It is important to recall two things when you consider those words. First, as lawyers and as military officers, we have as large a role as any members of our society in helping to meet those goals that the Framers adopted. That is something of which we can be proud.

    Second, those words remind us that all power flows from the people and that, through the genius of our constitutional structure, there is a direct bond between the people and the men and women in the armed forces. Every soldier, sailor, airman and marine takes the following oath…”

    I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will 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.

    “That oath is not to the President, the Congress, the Government, or to the fatherland or motherland; it’s to the Constitution, and thereby to the people. At the same time, the people, through Congress and the President, assume responsibility for the men and women of the Armed Forces, and a primary means by which they have exercised that responsibility is mentioned in that oath – the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice).

    As those charged with the administration of the UCMJ, we must bear in mind our responsibility and accountability to the people and their elected representatives. This is our system; but in a greater sense it is theirs. We are simply the trustees.”

  37. (Continued)
    Brigadier General Cooke’s view on evidence:

    “Today, a contested case that does not involve multiple motions, some tough evidentiary questions, and at least one expert is relatively rare. In military as in civilian courts, the role of science and experts has become more significant and more difficult for courts to deal with. In sum, we may be trying fewer cases today, but what we do try is relatively serious and tends to be more complex.

    The increasing significance of scientific evidence and expert testimony has important implications. These include not only what is or is not admissible, and how to help fact finders rather than confuse them - I think courts will work that out under our current rules, albeit with some difficulty. A less noticed but no less important systemic issue is the cost associated with this evidence which carries the real risk of making some courts-martial too expensive to handle out of a command operating budget. A single case can easily run up bills in the six figures. Equally important is ensuring that the defense has fair access to pursue and present such evidence. I do not know the answer, but I am sure we will face the problem.”

    Brigadier General Cooke’s view on the “myth of the monolithic Pentagon”:

    “Decisions on the disposition of offenses begin, and often end, at the lowest levels. The discretion of higher level commanders can be constrained by the prior decisions of lower commanders. This is a product of our hierarchical system, and of rules against unlawful command influence especially designed to protect service members from certain effects of this system. Because of our history, a number of rules operate as “default mechanisms” in favor of the accused. Consequently, power is diffused, resulting in the increased likelihood of disparity of decisions concerning disposition. Our rules against unlawful command influence prohibit issuing general guidelines, exacerbating the disparity problem.

    Therefore, the commander should decide whether to invoke the judicial process or whether some other action is appropriate. Many of us would view turning this function over to lawyers or someone else to be a usurpation of command authority.”

    Brigadier General Cooke’s view on the so-called information revolution:

    “This ranges from fax machines to CNN to, of course, the Internet. For all its benefits, this also poses some problems. The speed with which information is moved depersonalizes and compresses the decision cycle – at a cost of the leavening effect on decision-making of old fashioned conversation and contemplation. Related to this is the phenomenon that what once might have been only a matter of local interest can now become an international incident in a matter of minutes. Aggravating these problems is the fact that the information is not always accurate; satellites and computers simply mean that one person’s bad idea, or bad facts, can now be shared with millions, rather than dozens, almost instantly.”

    Justice Ginsburg’s concurring opinion on Military Justice:

    In Weiss v. United States, 510 U.S. 163, 2 (1994)

    “The care the court has taken to analyze petitioners’ claims demonstrates once again that men and women in the Armed Forces do not leave constitutional safeguards behind when they enter military service. Today’s decision upholds a system notably more sensitive to due process concerns than the one prevailing through most of our country’s history, when military justice was done without any requirement that legally-trained officers preside or even participate as judge.”

  38. But does that mean then that you are saying a military coup is justified if a group of unelected generals believe that the President is breaking the constitution? This nation will survive Obama. Our congress as corrupt as it is is still better than the alternative of a non-representative government. We risk going down the dangerous path of the military in politics as happens in third world nations. Our framers feared 2 things, a central bank and a standing army as the great threats to liberty... I'm just curious if some of you realize the slippery slope Mr. Lakin wishes to set us on. No matter how much I may think Obama is illegitimate we must have faith in the process of democracy. Dont you agree?

  39. General Mcinerney is one man with an opinion...

  40. @Anonymous

    LTC Lakin NEVER encouraged other Soldiers to do the same as he did. In fact, he did just the opposite.

    If you listen to the numerous interviews he did over that time period you would know that.

    Try searching my youtube videos and have a listen for yourself.

    You can find them by clicking the Youtube image on the right side of this page...

  41. @anonymous @ 10:45

    We are not a Democracy. We are a Republic. If you forgot, recite the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. The Progressives wish to convert the USA into a pure democracy and throw the Constitution under the bus. The Progressives see pure democracy as a stepping stone to socialism. Thus they keep telling people it is all about democracy all the time. Pure democracies fail in history because they turn into mob rule with no fundamental supreme law to protect the unalienable rights of the minority. That is what the founders and framers wrote about in the Federalist Papers when the researched what type of government they would choose for the United States. They chose a Constitutional Republic. That fact needs to be relearned by most.

  42. Which Congressional district does Lt. Col. Lakin live in? Representive Lakin has a nice ring to it.

  43. @ May 14, 6 PM,

    "we could subpoena the original"

    I see this re-reading the posts. If you are quoting me and claim I said something on whoever's TV/Radio/Internet show, you have very obviously confused me with someone else, if that's the case, and that's fine - I don't care. Go sue them if you want, but you're up the creek if you are doing it on the basis of a connection between me and them. I've never said anything on anyone's *show*. Have a nice day.

  44. Looks like you guys are getting too close to the truth. They are nervous.

  45. Via Jerome Corsi's Facebook page:

    At the last minute HANNITY CANCELLED -- I guess joining Bill O'Reilly to dismiss the "Birthers" -- we had keep the first radio for Hannity for 3 months. He cancelled today. STEVE MALZBERG gets the first interview later this afternoon. Call Hannity and let him know what you think.


“As long as I am an American citizen and American blood runs in these veins I shall hold myself at liberty to speak, to write, and to publish whatever I please on any subject.” - Elijah Parish Lovejoy(1802-1837)

Comments posted here do not necessarily reflect the views of Readers are solely responsible for the content of the comments they post on this web site.