Army Doc: Deployment Orders Illegal Without Pres. Obama's Birth Records

7NEWS ^ | December 14, 2010 | Deb Stanley,

[george76]

FORT MEADE, Md. -- A military court was set to hear the case Tuesday of an Army doctor charged with refusing to deploy to Afghanistan because he says he doubts whether President Barack Obama was born in the U.S. and therefore questions his eligibility to be commander in chief.

Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin, an 18-year Army veteran from Greeley, disobeyed orders to report earlier this year to Fort Campbell in Kentucky to prepare for deployment, saying he believed the orders were illegal.

In videos posted on YouTube, Lakin aligned himself with so-called "birthers" who question whether Obama is a natural-born citizen as the U.S. Constitution requires for presidents.

Lakin said in the videos that any reasonable person looking at available evidence would have questions about Obama's eligibility to be president and that he had "no choice" but to disobey orders. Lakin said he would "gladly deploy" if Obama's original birth certificate were released and proved authentic.

[truth_seeker]

“How would evidence concerning Obama’s birthplace exonerate Lakin from failure to obey the lawful orders of three superior officers? One has no bearing on the other.”

Those who challenge Obama’s eligibility are not a unified front.

—some want to challenge the authenticity of any birth documents, count pixels, claim fakery, etc.

—others offer “proof” that Obama was born elsewhere, in Kenya.

—still others state that although a person can be native born, eg. in Hawaii, Obama is not NBC according to
Vattel.

November 2012 will come around before any of these avenues reaches a conclusion.

I think a civilian challenge has better odds, than a career officer risking his future without even knowing which of the three situations above is correct, or even that one of the three is correct.

You can’t base a legal defense in a military proceeding on a fishing expedition.

[American Constitutionalist]

" I will go on record as saying that I am not nor have I ever been a Birther. I will also go on record as saying that as soon as Birthers come up with solid evidence supporting their claims then my position would most likely change. "

I will go as far to say, I whole heartedly agree with you in that, yes, we do need some solid evidence, but, isn't that what most birthers are saying ? to have some court, some government offical to at least look into it ? ... as they say in court to the jury, " beyond REASONABLE doubt " .....