LTC Lakin's Appeal Denied

U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals ^ | 10/12/10 | Clerk of the Court

[BuckeyeTexan]

Nope. The law is clear. His orders were lawful regardless of Obama’s status.

[Non-Sequitur]

So an American officer is compelled to bow before a criminal usurper?

No, just obey the orders of his superior officers.

[Red Steel]

Those who have encouraged LTC Lakin to pursue this fool’s errand are going to walk away scot free to tilt at the next windmill and Lakin’s career will be destroyed.

LTC Lakin has move well beyond his career and he pursued this all by himself.

[BuckeyeTexan]

Exactly. It’s pathetic that a good man was convinced to pursue this.

[Non-Sequitur]

Larkin’s attorney should file a motion to delay any further proceedings until after the Nov. 2nd elections.

If memory serves the court martial is due to begin in mid-December.

I bet the mood of the courts will change dramatically!

I'll bet it doesn't.

[Red Steel]

Hey Marxist, [mlo] shouldn’t you be over at DU or Kos and kids?

Yeah, it should be.

[23 Everest]

Nope. The law is clear. His orders were lawful regardless of Obama’s status.

Yes they were, however he has to serve the Constitution first!

[mlo]

"Hey Marxist, shouldn’t you be over at DU or Kos and kids?"

Hey, I'm not the one disparaging our country. It's you birthers that post anti-American comments like the one I replied to.

And for the record, I'd be willing to bet you are more of a Marxist than I am.

[Non-Sequitur]

Is the Court Martial still scheduled for November 4th then?

Mid-December, according to Lakin's website.

[23 Everest]

Just like the men who served under Lt. Calley?

[Non-Sequitur]

Just like the men who served under Lt. Calley?

Believe it or not, there is a difference between being ordered to murder civilians and being ordered to report to your brigade commander's office.

[Red Steel]

Right, and the legal rational argued by the courts about the ‘de facto officer doctrine’ does not cover Obama in this case.

[OneWingedShark]

>Nope. The law is clear. His orders were lawful regardless of Obama’s status.

He has sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution; to leave the question of Obama’s eligibility unresolved would be dishonorable and Conduct Unbecoming an Officer.

...Or do you want to argue that a military officer has no interest or obligation to see the Constitution followed?

[Non-Sequitur]

He has sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution; to leave the question of Obama’s eligibility unresolved would be dishonorable and Conduct Unbecoming an Officer.

What is honorable about refusing to obey the orders of your brigade commander and two other superior officer?

[23 Everest]

What the hell are you talking about? I’m disparaging this country?

Wasn’t it your favorite, Hillary Clintoon that said it was patriotic to disagree with any administration. The sheep are not going to take this crap anymore. That’s why I’m a member of the TEA PARTY.

[BuckeyeTexan]

No. I wouldn’t argue that. But a military court martial can’t resolve that question. It’s irrelevant as far as they’re concerned.

[23 Everest]

You make my argument. He was ordered to go over with his men and kill/murder people.

[Springfield Reformer]

So distinguish your proposition from the Nuremburg defense. I’m just trying to understand. Whenever these Lakin threads come up, someone always raises the question of whether “just obeying orders” theory works for this situation, and no one ever seems to address head on how it is that at Nuremburg the defendants were held responsible for wrong-doing despite their otherwise legitimate orders. If that’s the case, simply reciting the same canard they used for their defense as if it were a stand-alone universal truth seems highly suspect. There must be a better, more complete answer out there than some hypothetically unconditional obligation to always follow the orders of a superior officer.

[curiosity]

Whenever these Lakin threads come up, someone always raises the question of whether “just obeying orders” theory works for this situation, and no one ever seems to address head on how it is that at Nuremburg the defendants were held responsible for wrong-doing despite their otherwise legitimate orders.

So are you claiming Lakin was being ordered to commit genocide?

[BuckeyeTexan]

No. He wasn’t ordered to kill anyone.