Skip to comments.
DOES ANYONE REMEMBER MICHAEL NEW? Texas soldier takes a constitutional stand
Michael New Website ^
| July 1966
| Michael New
Posted on 07/02/2002 12:17:33 PM PDT by varina davis
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 301 next last
To: tpaine
I doubt this phony is a vet, or a lawyer. - To much of a buffoon to be either.
Says the man who on a daily basis soils the good name of one of our founding fathers. :)
To: tpaine
Isn't it time for you to go on one of your 'sudden' vacations? :)
Comment #23 Removed by Moderator
To: VA Advogado
Sorry, pal you're WRONG. Obediance in the military is not ABSOLUTE without qualifiers, else we'd end up giving the same defense as the Nazis at Nuremberg. We are to obey all lawful orders, in accordance with the UCMJ - and above all, with the US Constitution as the guiding, ultimate document of our allegiance.
It is clear this assinine UN mission trumped neither the USMJ or the Constitution, hence Michael New's stance was correct and admirable.
24
posted on
07/02/2002 4:21:21 PM PDT
by
fogarty
To: varina davis
..Texan who was perhaps ahead of his time?...I was thinking perhaps he was born 200 years too late. Can't you just see someone as brave and as steadfast as Michael New, manning the walls of the Alamo? Thanks for posting this, Varina.
Comment #26 Removed by Moderator
To: All
To think of all the garbage that Clinton pardonned at the end of his term....it makes one sick.
27
posted on
07/02/2002 4:29:27 PM PDT
by
Violette
To: TADSLOS
As far as I am concerned the US Congress owes this man back pay and a huge apology.
He is right. They are WRONG.
28
posted on
07/02/2002 4:35:32 PM PDT
by
RISU
To: DeaconBenjamin
New v. Perry, et al. More than six years after he was penalized for refusing to put on the United Nations uniform and to submit to the command and control of a foreign military officer, and having exhausted his military appeals when the United States Supreme Court denied his petition for Writ of Certiorari, Michael New now seeks to re-open the habeas corpus proceeding he filed in 1995 in an effort to obtain a judicial determination of the constitutional issues presented by the government's actions. Our firm filed a motion for leave to file an amended and supplemental habeas corpus petition in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, which the government has opposed.
May 7, 2002
From www.lawandfreedom.com
thank you for the update.
To: varina davis
United States Supreme Court denied his petition for Writ of Certiorari, What does this mean? Is he in jail or is he with his family?
30
posted on
07/02/2002 4:46:31 PM PDT
by
Violette
To: fogarty
Sorry, pal you're WRONG. Obediance in the military is not ABSOLUTE without qualifiers, else we'd end up giving the same defense as the Nazis at Nuremberg.
Glad you don't make these calls. This kid's a huckster just like his lawyer.
To: VA Advogado
A clownish buffoons reply. - Thanks.
32
posted on
07/02/2002 4:51:37 PM PDT
by
tpaine
To: tpaine
A clownish buffoons reply. - Thanks.
In case you don't remember, he likes his juice fresh squeezed.
To: one_particular_harbour
Perhaps you haven't seen Col.Ray much because he's involved with cases in Wash DC, not scurrying around with you and your types behind the ambulances in your " ... local (KY)legal scene" - No, really !!
34
posted on
07/02/2002 4:53:04 PM PDT
by
CIBvet
To: VA Advogado
And YOUR service record is ??? Mr. Laaw-ya.
35
posted on
07/02/2002 4:53:33 PM PDT
by
CIBvet
To: tpaine
You drinking again?
To: Violette
United States Supreme Court denied his petition for Writ of Certiorari, What does this mean? Is he in jail or is he with his family?No, he's not in jail, but you'll have to ask his attorney for the status quo of his case (see post in this thread).
To: CIBvet
And YOUR service record is ??? Mr. Laaw-ya.
Never disobeyed a lawfull order gringo.
To: VA Advogado
This kid's a huckster just like his lawyer Are you saying then that if a soldier that was directed to carry out Hitler's commands made a stand against his "Chief in Command" to not carry out an order against humanity, that he would have been a huckster? This kid was protecting the principles on which our country rests and was actually obeying the law. And he was being incrediby brave in doing so.
39
posted on
07/02/2002 4:55:19 PM PDT
by
Violette
To: Violette
Are you saying then that if a soldier that was directed to carry out Hitler's commands made a stand against his "Chief in Command" to not carry out an order against humanity, that he would have been a huckster?
What did Hitler actually ask him to do? LOL
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 301 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson