Posted on 07/15/2009 12:31:54 PM PDT by kellynla
The Department of Defense has compelled a private employer to fire a U.S. Army Reserve major from his civilian job after he had his military deployment orders revoked for arguing he should not be required to serve under a president who has not proven his eligibility for office.
According to the CEO of Simtech Inc., a private company contracted by the Defense Security Services, an agency of the Department of Defense, the federal agency has compelled the termination of Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook.
Cook's attorney, Orly Taitz, wrote in her blog that Simtech CEO Larry Grice said he would try to find another position within the company for Cook, but nothing is currently available.
The Department of Defense does contracting in the general field of information technology/systems integration, at which Cook, a senior systems engineer and architect, was employed until taking a military leave of absence on July 10 in preparation for his deployment to Afghanistan.
"Grice told Plaintiff, in essence, that the situation had become 'nutty and crazy,' and that plaintiff would no longer be able to work at his old position," Taitz wrote.
Grice made clear that it was Defense Security Services that had compelled Simtech to fire Cook.
According to the report, Grice told Cook "there was some gossip that 'people were disappointed in' the plaintiff because they thought he was manipulating his deployment orders to create a platform for political purposes."
The Simtech CEO then discussed Cook's expectation of final paychecks, without any severance pay, and wished the soldier well.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
I’d like to see our entire military stand down under this issue. Force ostammer to put up or shut up. Americans will not long stand for no military protection over lack of production of a birth certificate.
I’ve said since it became apparent that ostammer would be the rat nominee that anybody who joins the military under his watch is an utter fool.
my prayer, frater veterano, is that the judge - a former Marine - will do the right thing here, and it seems to be the case.
JG
(retired Coastie)
We MUST rally around this man! Lets start a fund for him. Does anyone have a similar job they can offer him?
What is Obama hiding and Why?
Indeed, this certainly seems highly illegal, and will get even worse if there is a paper trail (e-mails) from DOD to Simtech demanding that Cook be terminated.
Counter-argument: Numberg’s ‘Orders’ Defense
You cannot have it both ways. (Unquestioning obedience xor legal/moral accountability.)
Simple logic.
So your saying that he volunteered to join the case in Feb. then submits a formal written request to Human Resources Command to serve knowing that he was just going to refuse the order? Do you have a link to that? If that’s the case then while I still support him, that does straddle a fine line. I’m for the truth but not for gaming our military, leave that for the left.
The problem with that argument now is that Maj. volunteered to serve back in May according to what some posters have stated, if that is true the argument will be “Well, why did you volunteer in the first place”
There, fixed it for you.
So, are you saying that if your commanding officer tells you to kill American civilians, you'd act like a good little Nazi and do it?
I'm retired military also, and I disagree with you. Major Cook hinges his action not on whether he might kill an enemy or not. Or, as you consider -- Getting out first, then protesting??? If this is true, then the other side of the coin must also be so: don't protest, just follow your orders, point the gun and pull the trigger.
"I was following orders" is a pitiful defense - it didn't work for the Germans at the Nuremberg Trials, and it won't work in Afghanistan or Iraq if the worst case scenario occurs (that Obama is not a legitimate president, and has ordered American military into harms way, and these men and women have killed opfor on those orders).
Rather, he maintains that if he does so at the behest of an illegitimate NCA, then all the protections built into our National & International laws regarding War, Just War, protection under the Code of War as a legal combatant including restrictions on what he can and cannot do in a war situation, protection under Geneva Conventions should he be captured by the enemy, etc... all these are null and void, and his actions would be morally reprehensible, and no different from a brutal murderer.
We Must have a legitimate National Command Authority. We - Humanity - recognize our organization into nation-states (among other units), and that these nation-states have a history of conflict amongst each other. We recognize that even War has rules; a "casus belli" for reason of conflict; the humane treatment of enemy POW and civilians; the careful distinctions that define who is a legal Prisoner of War and who - such as the stateless terrorists who destroy innocent life indiscriminately - is merely a brute. We recognize that there is a certain, narrow and legal way in which a Nation-State can go to war and commit it's armed forces towards defeating and destroying enemy forces. And that process begins with the NCA. The "buck stops here" as it were, because it also starts there.
In closing, I quote the following passage:
"He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions."
This was part of a proclamation by a group of men who chafed under tyranny, decided to stand up to it, and were impelled to explain their reasons to the nations of the world. The italics are mine; it is significant that they were explicit in denouncing the method of warfare used by killers who did not abide by nor were subject to the rules of War.
We the people, via democratic elections, entrusted the fate and responsibility of our nation to the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania. Concordant within that sacred trust is the soulful knowledge that our military will at times be called upon to fight, and that within those conflicts, some of that very same kin we love and respect will give their last, full measure.
I ask you... if we can ask this readiness of our military to make the ultimate sacrifice, cannot a member of that military have the right to be 100%, completely certain of proof of legitimacy from the person who may order him to his denouement?
I believe Major Cook - as do you & I, sir, for the Oath we swore still lives - stands ready to his duty faithfully and lawfully.
JG
Not mutiny. Refusal to obey an unlawful order.
I am not saying that *I’d* do it. I’d say that true military discipline calls upon you to do it. You may not like it, or understand how it could possibly be right, and find it entirely reprehensible, but military discipline requires you to follow orders. What if those “civilians” were actually disguised enemy troops?
That is why the quality of the officers we promote is so important. If you believe in the credibility of military judgment as our nation has promoted it, then this should be no problem with you.
this looks like a job for the RICO statute...
t
* The Uniform Code of Military Justice, subchapter 10 Punitive Articles, makes it clear that military personnel need to obey:These articles require the obedience of LAWFUL orders. An order which is unlawful not only does not need to be obeyed, but obeying such an order can result in criminal prosecution of the one who obeys it. Military courts have long held that military members are accountable for their actions even while following orders -- if the order was illegal.1. the "lawful command of his superior officer;" 890.ART.90 (2);
2. the "lawful order of a warrant officer, NCO, or petty officer", 891.ART.91(2);
3. the "lawful general order or regulation", 892.ART.92 (1);
4. the "lawful order“, 892.ART.92(2)
I wouldn't count on it. Especially since we're not allowed to see his REAL birth certificate as proof.
And especially since only a soul-less ghoul would push legislation that would deny medical attention to a live, fully formed human infant. On that basis alone, I'd be willing to bet that Barry AND Michelle are both non-humans.
Do you have a source for that assertion, please?
It’s not the place of individual soldiers to decide whether they think the CiC is “legitimate” or not and whether or not they feel like obeying orders. Did these soldiers ever see Bush’s or Clinton’s or any other President’s “long form, vault copy Birth Certificate”? Did you?
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.