Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: usmcobra; Non-Sequitur
Of course not, it was a lesson in questioning orders, there are always orders that MUST be questioned as well as those that CANNOT be, what makes The American armed forces different from all other nations is that we are trained to think and act on our own even if that means disobeying orders especially illegal ones.

Agreed. However, I would suggest that such training to questions orders applies to any orders given with the military itself. Obama is the civilian commander of the military. The military is not in a position and should not be in a position to question orders from their civilian commander unless those orders are clearly illegal under the Constitution or laws of the United States.

For me, therein lies the heart of the argument where Lakin is concerned. Lakin had no evidentiary proof and no court ruling stipulating that Obama is ineligible. Therefore, his orders were not clearly illegal. Our system of justice does not require the accused to prove himself innocent of the charges/accusations. So by making a baseless accusation about the CIC, Lakin himself became the accused in a court martial. The court martial's purpose is not to prove Lakin's accusation correct.

If Lakin had solid, evidentiary proof of Obama's ineligibility, I could accept his decision to question his orders. And he likely would not have been court martialed for following the proper channels as he did. I believe the issue would have been resolved through the chain of command. The Secretary of the Army or the Secretary of Defense would have reviewed the evidence and submitted it to the U.S. Congress for investigation. The Secretary could have either sent Lakin to Afghanistan pending the outcome of the Congressional investigation or revoked Lakin's orders.

As it happened, Lakin had no proof of his accusation and therefore was required to obey his orders. To me, it's that simple.

672 posted on 12/15/2010 9:45:20 AM PST by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 660 | View Replies ]


To: BuckeyeTexan

Catch 22 really, Obama won’t supply the proof he is ineligible therefore you expect everyone in the military to ignore the giant pink elephant in the room.

There have been countless discussions on natural born citizenship and obama’s COLB and birth certificate but the case has not been tested in any court, realistically it is an officer’s duty that he is sworn to obey to protect the constitution that includes putting his life on the line to resolve this issue rather then wait until someone else does it for him.

If Lakin had legal proof from a court of law that Obama was not eligible he would not have to disobey an order, Obama would no longer be president.


678 posted on 12/15/2010 9:57:42 AM PST by usmcobra (.Islam: providing Live Targets for United States Marines since 1786!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 672 | View Replies ]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Lakin could well have known of the evidence submitted in court cases, showing what the HDOH has now indirectly confirmed in 3 different ways: that the Factcheck COLB is a forgery.

It would be reasonable to expect that if the alleged POTUS presented a forgery rather than something genuine, there must be something even more legally damaging on the original than forgery or perjury would be legally damaging.

The HDOH has made a statutory admission that Obama’s BC is amended, which means it is not legally valid. If Lakin knew that before he disobeyed - which he may well have known - would that have been just reason for him to believe that Obama “failed to qualify” by Jan 20th, since even his birth date was legally undocumented at that point (and even now)?

Also - going back to the Iran scenario - wouldn’t Lakin have to assume that there WAS an order for combat in Iran unless he had physical proof, himself, that the POTUS had never issued the order? What kind of proof would be good enough for him to use in that regard? If he had gone to his superiors and asked them if a valid POTUS had authorized combat in Iran and they had fiddled around for a year and refused to answer his question, would he be required to assume that his deployment order to Iran was valid, since he didn’t have any proof that it wasn’t?


781 posted on 12/15/2010 2:15:16 PM PST by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 672 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson