[r9etb]

The military never responds to a refusal to deploy by rescinding the orders, then saying "carry on."

The difference in this case being that Mr. Cook is a reservist, and is not subject to the UCMJ until he's been activated, which he was not.

Ever been in the military? The rescinding of Maj. Cook's orders is highly unusual. In fact, I'd venture to guess that it's unprecedented - which tells that something else has to be going on.

There is more to Mr. Cook's fate than a simple revocation of orders, though that in and of itself was an appropriate action.

Mr. Cook has also found himself out of his (civilian) DOD contractor job, apparently as a result of this action. The DoD revoked his security clearance, and thus he was apparently no longer eligible for the post he held. That, too, was probably an appropriate response, given that his political/legal activities can reasonably be seen as a security risk.

I would imagine that he is also no longer a member of the Reserves.

[ScreamingFist]

The DoD revoked his security clearance, and thus he was apparently no longer eligible for the post he held. That, too, was probably an appropriate response, given that his political/legal activities can reasonably be seen as a security risk.

OK. We know where you stand. Your security clearance, as an.....orbitdude...trumps values and Constitution. Thanks for your meaningless opinion.