Posted on 07/14/2009 9:21:08 PM PDT by Danae
This story has been slipping under the Main Stream Media Radar for some time now.
U.S. Army Major Stefan Frederick Cook Filed a restraining order asking for legitimate confirmation that his Commander in Chief was legitimately in Office, giving him his orders to Deploy to Afghanistan with his unit.
Today in a stunning development, the Military rescinded those orders.
This has set a precedent heretofore unknown. The entire US Military can now not only question it's orders, a requirement of their duty when they believe that an order is given illegitimately, but can expect that their orders will also be rescinded should they question the legitimacy of the CIC who is the ultimate Authority in Command. In other words, Obama.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
You are correct.
Post #234 should say “. . . suggests that if/when it is established that Obama is not eligible to be POTUS . . .”
What little I have heard on that front certainly qualifies as skuttlebut, but certainly few of them take OholyO seriously.
Just look at Medvedev’s body language in that handshake photo, Obama bowing to the King Of Saudi, His associations with Chavez, backing a Usurper who was legitimately thrown out of Honduras! I mean DAMN that guy takes fake Ballots printed for him by chavez, tries to distribute them, gets caught, refuses to leave office, so the Military kicked his arse to the curb. And Obama supports reinstating the guy? WHAT?
Seriously, the world does NOT take this yahoo seriously, they are laughing their asses off as he hands America to china!
DAMN, how much clearer can it get to the average person that this guy is NOT a good guy, and this bastard is an usurper to the office he holds? He should be in Jail for treason.
No world leaders are going to take anything he says seriously. Let alone follow any treaty he signs.
Two things ensued: One, there was no commensurate surge in like objections across the breadth of my fellow military, which IMO shone the light of quirkiness upon the officer's objection. And Two, the mainstream media played up the "coward" angle by hitting up on conservative and populist news bites which by and large expressed chastisement at this officer for copping out like that. The media - being a leftist, dhimmi cesspool that we know it to be - used our righteous anger reaction to paint us as having yelled COWARD at the officer.
Quite different from Major Cook's challenge, which raises very real questions about the legality of being put in harms way by an illegal order.
These questions did figure prominently in nuremberg half a century ago. We in the military do have a standard for unlawful orders, as stipulated in the UCMJ. The Major, to borrow from current jargon surrounding this scandal, "has standing".
JG
(... that's "Narcissist-in-chief" :-)
I'm not quite sure what point of mine you are trying to answer. While some may not accept 0bama's legitimacy, it is by no means a settled fact -- you have no ability whatever to order military, he does at this time.
My question is not so much his authority but the conclusion being drawn that this revocation is automatically proving the illegitimate question, when I'm wondering if it is not simply keeping the major in the U.S. in order to begin prosecution of his disobeying orders. Should I be understanding from the action that the military is accepting the illegitimacy argument, that 0bama has no authority and all members of the military, should they so chose, may ignore any further orders at their whim?? Frankly I find this hard to believe.
Some news stories are using one or the other, some use both. Local radio station talk has indicated there is a difference. Can anyone explain?
revoked:
verb (used with object)
1. to take back or withdraw; annul, cancel, or reverse; rescind or repeal: to revoke a decree.
rescind:
–verb (used with object)
1. to abrogate; annul; revoke; repeal.
General dictionary definition shows no substantial difference, however I do not know if this is still the case when it comes to military, nor legal definition, of that I am not aware. Anyone else with more??
This is one of the most Cogent posts I have EVER read.
Very well put. I think this illustrates very clearly the seriousness of this situation.
Yep, sounds about right, the way you’re reading it.
Save for the date-time stamp on the beginning of The Crisis -
that would be 04 November 2008.
JG
Would he have been an America hating coward?
No.
Are you? Enquiring minds would like to know.
See Post 255, it explains it a LOT better than I can.
Grice also reported to Plaintiff that 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.
Perhaps I missed something along the way, is this currently? Is this a part of the revocation being discussed in the article??
Okay, it does clear some fog for me. I'll reply to it, thank you.
Thanks for your answer and thoughts on this. No problem looking up your previous answer- I can do a quick search of your posts :)
In my brief chats today with a couple of soldiers they tell me the order to rescind can only have come from the very top...
Absolutely. Its on Dr Taitz website, she added it to the filing actually, and that’s a direct quote. There should be a link with it. Its at that link.
BTTT
Ditto, thats what I have been told.
Considering the level of comprehension/understanding from elites in Washington, let alone Regular American Citizen, I can see this as fall-out if indeed 0bama is removed from office upon determining Constitutional illegitimacy.
To re-establish our authority, they could ask the President to step aside under the 25th amendment until the legality of the National Command Authority under Obama is Constitutionally verified - inventing whatever story they can all stomach. Biden would be President, Major Cook goes to his base (quietly), and Obama can debate the matter, resolve it, fake his way out of it, but the military gets taken out of the middle.
Makes the most sense, to take the military out, as you say. Only look at how they were able to constantly drumbeat what happened in Honduras as a military coup when it was nothing like at all.
There may/will be a debate about whether Biden is legitimate under the order of succession due to his election on Obama’s ticket, but it won’t be address that matter until Obama provides documents or admits there aren’t any.
In many of the pre-election threads, this brought up, later the reminder that while Biden did run on the ticket with 0bama, he is in fact voted on a separate ballot by the Electoral College -- I would tend to think that if this indeed does play out, it may well be determined that in order to allow a smoother transition, if you will, that Biden be seated as president. Trying to explain why he shouldn't would be even more difficult than trying to explain why 0bama should never have been allowed on a ballot in the first place, if indeed illegitimacy is determined. *For the good/sake of the country* and all that.
Those who might balk at the idea that Biden gets the chair, I would ask whether or not a damaged Biden would be so bad at that point. There would always be questions of what he knew, was he aware but allowed 0bama to go ahead anyway, the other Dems as well -- just how much did Hillary Clinton know but suppress in order to advance herself?? That will all depend on just how clear the problem can be explained to the American people ... right now, I'm not counting on the lamestream to do a good job of it at all.
I can honestly say I don’t hate American. Its government, on the other hand...
Actually that was John McCain.
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.