Posted on 07/10/2009 3:22:39 PM PDT by rxsid
"MAJOR STEFAN FREDERICK COOK, Plaintiff,
v.
COLONEL WANDA L. GOOD, COLONEL THOMAS D. MACDONALD, DR. ROBERT M. GATES, UNITED § STATES SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, Rule 65(b) Application for BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, de facto Temporary Restraining Order PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES, Defendants.
APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
Plaintiff Major Stefan Frederick Cook has received from the Defendants in this cause what appear to be facially valid orders mobilizing him to active duty with the United States Army in Afghanistan on July 15, 2009 (Exhibit A).
AN OFFICER’S DUTY TO OBEY LAWFUL ORDERS: This Plaintiff, at the time of his original induction, took the United States military oath, which reads: "I, Stefan Frederick Cook, 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 the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God" Title 10, Subtitle A, Part II of the United States Code contains the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). 10 U.S.C. §890 (ART.90), makes it an offence subject to court-martial if any military personnel “willfully disobeys a lawful command of his superior commissioned officer," 10 U.S.C. §891 (ART.91) "lawful order of a warrant officer", and most importantly, 10 U.S.C. §892 (ART.92) provides court-martial for any officer who (1) violates or fails to obey any lawful general order or regulation; (2) having knowledge of any other lawful order issued by a member of the armed forces, which it is his duty to obey, fails to obey the order; or (3) is derelict in the performance of his duties; In each case, Plaintiff submits that it is implicit though not expressly stated that an officer is and should be subject to court-martial, because he will be derelict in the performance of his duties, if he does not inquire as to the lawfulness, the legality, the legitimacy of the orders which he has received, whether those orders are specific or general. Unfortunately the Uniform Code of Military Justice does not provide a means for ascertaining the legality of orders, and accordingly, this Plaintiff is left with no choice but recourse to the ordinary civil courts of the United States to seek a determination of what he considers to be a question of paramount constitutional and legal importance: the validity of the chain of command under a President whose election, eligibility, and constitutional status appear open to serious question.
Plaintiff Major Stefan Frederick Cook is not a pacifist. He does not object to war or the use of military force in the implementation of national policy or the enforcement of international law. Above all, Plaintiff is not a coward, he is not engaged in mutiny, sedition, insubordination, contempt, disrespect, or any kind of resistance to any general or specific lawful order of which he knows or has received notice. Plaintiff Major Stefan Frederick Cook realizes and accepts as a matter of political reality (although it is very hard for him to bear personally) that many may criticize or even shun him, saying that he is not acting in the best interests of his country for trying to uphold the plain letter of the Constitution. Others may cynically ridicule this Plaintiff when, as an officer responsible not only to obey those above him but to protect those under his command, he comes to this Court asking for the right to establish the legality of orders received not only for his own protection, but for the protection of all enlisted men and women who depend on HIS judgment that the orders he follows are legal. Above all, when Plaintiff Major Stefan Frederick Cook submits and contends that he files and will prosecute this lawsuit and seeks an injunction or temporary restraining order against the enforcement of potentially illegal orders for the benefit of all servicemen and women and for the benefit all officers in all branches of the U.S. Military, he knows that those in power illegitimately may seek to injure his career. He knows that he risks all and he does so in the conscientious belief that he does so for not merely his own, but the general good. But Plaintiff cannot escape from the mandates of his conscience and his awareness, his educated consciousness, that all military personnel but especially commissioned officers have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ.
NEVER BEFORE IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES
Plaintiff presents the key question in this case as one of first impression, never before decided in the history of the United States: Is an officer entitled to refuse orders on grounds of conscientious objection to the legitimate constitutional authority of the current de facto Commander-in-Chief? In the alternative, is an officer entitled to a judicial stay of the enforcement of facially valid military orders where that officer can show evidence that the chain-of-command from the commander-in-chief is tainted by illegal activity? ..."
http://www.scribd.com/doc/17266905/05311066823
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/
Where’s the evidence of a million dollars spent by BHO?
I’m not sure about the sequence of Dr Taiz’s blogs. but based on #2946, it look like the Cook case isn’t going to happen on 7/16. Is this correct?
“Mr Chairman, I rise to speak in support of President Palin’s pick of Orly Taitz for Attorney General.”
Perhaps it’s just me, but you seem to have a vested interested in finding for Obama.
Apparently, Sun Tzu never unstood the value of diversions.
I would rather listen to Winston Churchill: “We will fight them on the seas, we will fight them on the beaches, we will fight them in....” etc (paraphrased, for sure)
“Where’s the evidence of a million dollars spent by BHO?”
You can start here:
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=HOW+MUCH+HAS+OBAMA+SPENT+FIGHTING+ELIGIBILITY+LAWSUITS&fr=yfp-t-119&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8
Well he just appointed his roommate at Occidental to an ambassadorship.
I thank you for the frmail, as well.
Bumping Major Cook, and wish him success in his endeavors.
He is a true patriot, and I am proud to stand with him.
You can of course point to any court that has backed Obama. Not merely declared that the person bringing the action did not have standing to do so. IOW, what court has ruled that BHO is eligible.
The Supreme Court itself ruled on Bush vs. Gore.
BTW, welcome to Free Republic.
Armygoz
Since Jul 10, 2009
This should be required reading. But we both know it won't be.
AFAIK, he hasn't said he won't deploy. OTOH, the court will probably rule he doesn't have standing unless and until he does.
I agree! Here is a statement made by Major Cook. He has support of Freepers all across the country!
http://blog.spiritualpatriot.com/
Stefan F. Cook Major, US Army / Statement Press Release
11. July 2009 @ 21:22 In Uncategorized
[1] Dr. Orly Taitz has filed on my behalf a [2] Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) in Columbus Georgia to prevent me from deploying to Afghanistan until such time as Barack Obama produces definitive proof that he is a [3] natural born US citizen. The basis for the TRO is this: It is my duty as an officer in the US Army to seek clarification as to the legality of orders directed to me by someone in my chain of command (The President of the United States/Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States) who is not eligible to do so. Should Barack Obama be found not to be a natural born citizen of the US and I follow such an illegal order, I could be subject to punishment under the [4] Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) as well as should I have the misfortune of being captured by the enemy in Afghanistan, I could be subject to prosecution for war crimes as I was conducting military operations illegally. I will not subject myself to such a possibility. As an extension of this, each and every Soldier, Sailor, Airman and Marine who is deployed overseas could possibly find themselves in the same situation as I detailed above. This is an unacceptable position. However, should Barack Obama definitively prove that he is in fact a natural born citizen of the US, and as such, eligible to be President of the US/[5] Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the US, I shall deploy to Afghanistan as so ordered. This deployment to Afghanistan was a voluntary request on my part. I am a patriotic citizen of the USA and [6] Officer in the US Army and want to discharge those duties assigned to me in an [7] honorable and legal fashion. I have thought long and hard on my decision to file this TRO. I realize that this action may well end my career as an Army [6] Officer. I have discussed this decision with my family and they are understanding and supportive. This has been a gut-wrenching decision to make.For my entire career in the Army, it has been pounded into us that it is our duty to seek clarification on orders we deem to be questionable in their legality. You sit through the academic exercise and have a discussion about it and move on to the next subject. But when the situation actually arises (like my current situation), well that’s something else entirely. You experience that “holy crap” moment and have to make a decision that may well affect your life from that point on. I find myself in that position right now. I have to have the [9] moral courage to prosecute a course of action that is most distasteful, but yet needs to be done.
Onward into the breach, and [10] faciendum est.
Stefan F. Cook
Major, US Army
Right on and I’m standing with him too! Show us the birth certificate Obama!!
You wrote- “Bumping Major Cook, and wish him success in his endeavors.
He is a true patriot, and I am proud to stand with him.”
Better yet, where’s the birth certificate??
You wrote- “Where’s the evidence of a million dollars spent by BHO?”
Well put! My support offered!!
You wrote- “Major Cook is deserving of all the public support we can muster. His public stand against the control of our military forces by a presidential poser is a brave and selfless act.
Kind thoughts and supportive prayers going out for him and all military personnel everywhere.”
Not being eligible to the office of President. Thus not able to issue a lawful order of any sort. Should the Major obey an unlawful order, he himself would be subject to punishment under the UCMJ, not to mention possible international charges of war crimes. The Major thus wishes to be assured that the person issuing those orders has the lawful authority to do so.
I hope he prevails. Either way, if Obama is eligible or not, he deserves to know, and so do we.
Of course if BO is not eligible, that will open a can of worms, and guarantee full employment for lawyers for decades to come until the last worms are untangled.
Agree and I’ll 2nd that!!
You wrote- “Go Major Cook! This is exactly what the legal system is meant for and thanks for your service.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.