Posted on 07/14/2009 5:16:06 AM PDT by NMEwithin
U.S. Army Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook, set to deploy to Afghanistan, says he shouldn’t have to go. His reason? Barack Obama was never eligible to be president because he wasn’t born in the United States. Actually, Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961, two years after it became a state. Cook’s lawyer, Orly Taitz, who has also challenged the legitimacy of Obama’s presidency in other courts, filed a request last week in federal court seeking a temporary restraining order and status as a conscientious objector for his client. In the 20-page document — filed July 8 with the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia — the California-based Taitz asks the court to consider granting his client’s request based upon Cook’s belief that Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States and is therefore ineligible to serve as commander-in-chief of the U.S. Armed Forces. Cook further states he “would be acting in violation of international law by engaging in military actions outside the United States under this President’s command. ... simultaneously subjecting himself to possible prosecution as a war criminal by the faithful execution of these duties.” Cook, a reservist, received the orders mobilizing him to active duty on June 9. According to this document, which accompanies Cook’s July 8 application for a temporary restraining order, he has been ordered to report to MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Fla., on Wednesday. From there, the Florida resident would go to Fort Benning before deploying overseas. A hearing to discuss Cook’s requests will take place in federal court here Thursday at 9:30 a.m.
That's an interesting perspective. I am curious though. Using that principle as a guideline, would you still support Maj. Cook if it was 2003 and the eve of the Afghanistan invasion and he was questioning Pres. Bush's legitimacy due to the whole "he stole the election" controversy? That would be similar in principle.
If he were truly in doubt as to the legitimacy of President Bush's election, I would argue that he would have been duty bound to either satisfy his misgivings regarding the lawfulness of the order, knowingly disobey the order and accept the consequences thereof, or resign his commission.
I seriously doubt that any soldier today, would be placing themselves in legal/moral/ethical jeopardy, by following this major’s orders.
What happens if all military folks decided not to serve???
You sign the dotted line, you are Government property. No matter whose the prez
Fixed.
That's one of his concerns. If he deployed and carried out his missions, and it later came to light that O was not a legal CinC, all his actions would have been in obedience of an unlawful order. With the US leaning ever closer to participating in international courts, this could very well be a legitimate concern in the next few years. If I were still on active duty, I can't say I'd follow the Major's same course of action, but I certainly understand his concerns.
This clown should have resigned his commission when Obama was sworn in if that's his problem, not tried to stage this manifestly phony attempt to get out of being sent somewhere where there's shooting going on.
I'll agree on one and a half of that. First, the half part. satisfy his misgivings just as long he doesn't put the men under his command in danger
Second, resign his commission. I would applaud him for putting integrity over career.
Third, I cannot support him disobeying orders. In doing that he disrupts the chain of command which puts the lives of the men under him at greater risk. It's one thing to turn the other cheek, another to turn another's cheek.
Do you honestly think anything would happen to every military member of the US?
In case its not obvious...
Im not really debating what this guy should do or not. Nor am I really supporting or disagreeing with his actions. MY main focus is on the thought process of those among us who are making stupid arguments.
Ive become disgusted with folks who believe and argue that it is the sole duty of military officers to follow the orders of the president regardless of anything else. These same people completely disregard the oath that was taken and the reason for taking it. It is because of idiots like these that this country has fallen as far as it has and that Marxists were allowed to void the constitution that both officers and enlisted SWORE to protect.
Servicemembers are obligated to disobey unlawful orders. The only point at issue is the legitimacy of the order.
“Does JAG get involved since he is MIL?”
This is a civil matter. I’d be very surprised if JAG got involved beyond observing and perhaps gathering information, if that, for subsequent action against this major in a military court.
He is not fleeing the scene of a battle, he is advancing towards one, the biggest one this country’s constitution has ever faced, and one George Washington and the other founding fathers anticipated when they wrote the Natural born clause into the Constitution.
Suppose that the left get us further entwined in the international court system, and the good Major's unit were involved in a Haditha type incident. Suppose now that the left relinquished jurisdiction to the Hague, and it later came to light that the military were not operating under the auspices of a legitimate head of state.
Hypothetical? Of course, but in the event O is not a legal president, anything the Major (and his subordinates) would do overseas would essentially be in the capacity of private citizens, and theoretically without the aegis normally afforded the members of uniformed services.
We view this differently because we are the USA, and historically, might makes right. O wants to surrender our superpower status and make us just another nation like everybody else, operating under some umbrella of international law...
Obama didn't issue the order to this officer, it came from his superior officer in his chain of command. What makes that person's order unlawful?
The discussion on the Columbus Ledger site is quite heated. May not be to the standards normally here but worth checking occasionally.
Read Title 10 USC 12301-12304. Reservists are, under most circumstances, activated under order of the President.
Which brings us to the crux of this whole debate. The question of the orders lawfulness rests in Obama's legitimacy to hold the office. At this time Obama is the legitimate President. Should someone present evidence to the contrary then Maj Cook would be right in his actions.
Obama himself isn't ordering this 'officer' to report, someone in his hierarchy is. I think this gentleman will find that that officer's order is valid.
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.