Posted on 07/29/2009 9:31:48 PM PDT by Jet Jaguar
Army Maj. Stefan Cook sought out a notorious lawyer in February, formally volunteered for an Afghan deployment in May and was granted orders to deploy in June.
But the Army reservist’s intention appeared not so much to fight for America as to fight against President Barack Obama, in furtherance of a bizarre conspiracy theory.
In July, Cook filed a lawsuit against the Army, the defense secretary and the president, claiming that Obama could not lawfully order him to go to war because he is not the legitimate president of the United States.
Cook is one of the so-called “Birthers,” a small group of activists who subscribe to a fringe conspiracy theory alleging that Obama was not born in the United States and therefore cannot legally serve as president. The conspiracy theory, proven false by numerous media investigations as well as officials in the state of Hawaii where Obama was born, first surfaced early in the presidential campaign, but in recent months it has continued to fester on the Internet.
For a moment, at least, Cook’s lawsuit managed to revive the rumor — or at least gain his lawyer, Orly Taitz, a few more minutes of screen time on the cable news networks.
Taitz, a Russian-born dentist who got her law degree online, is the public face of the Birthers. She has been trying to get the conspiracy theory heard in court since before the election. So far, all of the lawsuits brought by the Birthers have been summarily dismissed.
And in Cook’s case, the Army refused to be baited.
Soon after Cook filed his lawsuit challenging the legitimacy of his deployment, the Army ruled that since he volunteered to go to Afghanistan, he was within his rights to change his mind. No lawsuit was needed.
In fact, said Lt. Col. Maria Quon, a spokeswoman for Army Human Resources Command, “he just had to call or e-mail.”
On July 14, the commanding general of Special Operations Command Central formally revoked Cook’s orders. Two days later, a Georgia court dismissed the case.
Lt. Col. Holly Silkman, a spokeswoman for SOCCENT, said the Army couldn’t let Cook’s critical engineer billet be hijacked by further legal wrangling. Cook was scheduled to deploy on July 15, and his position cannot sit empty.
The officer Cook was supposed to replace “is going to have to remain in Afghanistan a while longer,” Silkman said, noting the Army is seeking a replacement. “No one has been identified yet, but it is a priority fill, so we’re working on it and expect to fill it soon. Engineers are in high demand.”
Taitz, unfazed by the facts, claimed victory.
The military has shown its cards “and they have nothing to play with,” Taitz said. “By revoking the orders, it’s clear to anybody. Think reasonably: Why would the military undermine itself by revoking its orders?”
Her conclusion: The Army let Cook out of his orders because officials couldn’t prove in court that Obama was born in the United States and is therefore the legitimate commander in chief.
“That’s ridiculous,” CENTCOM spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Bill Speaks said, calling Cook’s claims “a bizarre conspiracy theory.”
“Suffice to say [that revoking the orders] is certainly not an acknowledgement or validation in any way of his claims,” Speaks said.
Taitz, who in a phone interview compared Obama to Hitler, often strayed from the merits of Cook’s case into broader political rants.
“I have one question: Why would any member of the U.S. military risk his life or take any orders . . . from someone who is refusing to prove he is the legitimate president?” Taitz said. “We can’t stand for the arrogant, obnoxious behavior of Obama. He wants to defraud the whole nation.”
Stripes requested an interview with Cook, but Taitz did not make him available before deadline.
Cook’s legal ploy drew condemnation from Brandon Friedman, vice chairman of VoteVets.org, a political action committee seeking to elect veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to public office.
“That’s not leadership. That’s not the way Maj. Cook was trained and brought up in the Army,” Friedman said. “You don’t leave a unit like that, and you certainly don’t do it because you’re trying to make a political statement.”
I think you might well be right. All I know is that the Military would not want to be in the middle of this.
They fight for the Nation, not a man, and if push comes to shove, I think they want to be able to stand down against orders to deploy in the united states Illegally. As is suggested by some in talking about 80K troops training in Georgia to act as peace keepers inside the country. They can’t legally do that, deploy to function in that capacity. Perhaps they do not want to play their trump card too early?
Heck if I know. I am most likely real far off the mark. I am too tired, not thinking straight.
Oh the jokes that come to mind with that one.....
But after-birth is no laughing matter so I am just gonna bite my fingertips... LOL
I don't know. I mean, I think it's clear enough for civilians to dispute it. But the military has to be held to a different standard. The problem is, there has never been a process in place where the incoming CinC shows his papers and is officially vetted by some constitutionally supervised authority.
This is the root of the military angle of this whole BC thing in a nutshell. Because I definitely do seperate the civilian world from the military realm in this issue. I think each realm has its own legitimate courses of action.
Because there has never been an 'official definition' of 'natural born citizen' it necessarily means the issue is not clear from a military standpoint. As I see it, until that issue is definitely decided, all the military man has to rely upon is the normal course of things- was he elected, yes. Was he sworn in? Yes. Has he taken up the reins of government? Yes. Have all the other branches of govenment recognised him as President? Yes. These are all tangible things that the soldier can look at and see. What else that is actual and demonstrable does the soldier have to go on? By all those previous questions, he has no reason to question the legitimacy of Obama as commander. His only real question comes with something that has never been defined, that it is not clear how it would be defined if the situation went to court (our views on the subject notwithstanding) and that no other part of the government has even brought up as a legitimate issue. I think, by this standard, the officer must obey the order, particularly when the order itself is a legal one.
I mean, we can't just have soldiers guarding nukes walk off their posts because of something that has never even been properly defined. Surely nobody here is advocating that? Surely nobody is advocating that it would be correct for sailors to abandon, say, an aircraft carrier? I mean, we need to think seriously about what the ramifications of this are. If it's ok for Cook to do it, it's ok for every soldier to do it. We can't just have soldiers walking away from their posts. Not in my opinion anyway.
Yep. It's not fair to the servicemen and servicewomen.
It is ok for the CIC who has his finger on the nuclear trigger, yet he has never been properly defined?
I agree and go further, its not fair to any American.
Obama should be tried for treason if he refuses to do his duty. He isn’t upholding the constitution. He is FLAUNTING it.
I believe the Constitution must be obeyed. But whether I like it or not, it was the American people who put the man in office. Until the issue gets decided one way or the other, the man does have his finger on the button. That is the situation.
Whether I think it's wrong or not isn't going to change that.
There are only two possibilities. Obama is legitimate, or he is not. If he is not, then all orders and legislation issued under his authority are invalid. I would think that the more time that goes by, the more devastating it will be if he is removed. Can you think of any other path that would cause this to be decided as quickly? I can't.
All of the other lawsuits will be stone walled and delayed until they are irrelevant. But if sufficient numbers sign on to this suit they will have no choice. I have confidence in the military to deal effectively with any disruption this my cause while it is being settled.
I also think there are sufficient differences between this case and typical orders issued through the command structure that there will be no disruption to it. 1) Most all members of the military are smart enough to know the difference, and 2) the military will not allow it; NJP will be administered swiftly to anyone who attempts to use this as a means to disobey a normal order.
Great discussion, BTW. Thanks!
Cheers! I am trying to be a good denizen today ;-)
Hitler WISHES he had that sort of control over the USA....
Hitler hasnt wished anything in 64 years.
Will someone explain to me how Obamas birth announcement was printed in the Honolulu newspaper at the time of his birth 40+ years ago if he was born elsewhere? And who was the person who knew he would need would need a fake birth notice 40+ years in the future in order to illegally qualify for the Presidency of the USA. I am just seeking a reasonable, rational answer to that huge hole in the conspiracy theory. So, dont attack me, just explain it to me.
More to the point, I think, is the question: what would Obama’s mother/whoever have had to gain from lying about the place of his birth? Why go through all the trouble?
The theorists have to present some reasonable scenario where the incentive is so strong for Obama’s mother to convince others, at that time, that he was born in Hawaii, that she’d go about somehow faking a birth announcement.
That explains the deep discussion. (bah-dump-pishhh!)
In any case, at this point the discussion has morphed. There are various other reasons why barry may not be a NBC. From what I have seen the one that makes the most sense is that he is hiding an amended BC, as well as the original, that would show he lost US citizenship through adoption.
Yes...Stars and Stripes is biased. Their writings have been that way for quite a while. I’ve also noticed that The Military Channel loves to re-write history and often has a liberal slant. It is hard to find any channel or show to watch these days that is not subtly or in your face with leftist/liberal/marxist propaganda.
When a president was not properly vetted as a candidate, then the political leadership which failed to vet him has proven its incompetence to what SHOULD be a fatal degree for that party’s survival.
What kind of moron would expect this kind of problem NOT to occur from a poorly vetted president who hides his birth certificate?
I ask you — what kind of clowns would vet a presidential candidate without seeing his birth certificate? What kind of genius would expect there to be zero fallout from such a mess?
We have a chance to pass landmark legislation - the American Clean Energy and Security Act - which would help lessen our dependence on foreign oil by both funding clean alternative energy and bolstering efficiency. For those of us who fought terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan, this bill is a no brainer. It must pass.
This is cap and trade. It doesn't lessen our dependence on foreign oil or bolster energy efficiency.
You said — We don’t know any such thing.
—
Well, that was confirmed a couple of days ago...
http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2009/09-063.pdf
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‘i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”
You said — There is more than enough valid information available to show that Dr. Fukino’s statement is worthless without background detail in the form of the long form Birth Certificate itself.
—
Well, considering that it’s an official statement from the State of Hawaii that Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen, and is currently on the official website for the State of Hawaii, it sounds pretty solid to me...
And also considering that this is coming from the same State that the birth certificate originates from, and the one that has the records for it and the one that has been keeping it all along in their files and the one from whom anyone would have to get a certified copy of the birth certificate — it appears that they are in a position to know...
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.