Pentagon orders soldier fired for challenging prez

[Guest 3pugguy]

As long as we do not run for any public office, and do not appear IN UNIFORM or as an official represenitive of the govt or military, endorse violence or overthrow of the federal govt. We are allowed to demostrate, attend protests, and file law suits against any person or persons in the govt that we feel fit. We can not however file against the govt as an entitiy. I should also say that we are not allowed to use any govt equipment such as phone, computers, cells to try to endorse any political party, canidate, or movement.

And once again I ask the question that nobody has been able to answer, What crime did he commit? He did not refuse orders, he did not fail to show for movement. He asked a question that millions of Americans are asking. I have stated my stance on why the BC is being covered up. Maybe he believes he was not born here and has not seen the evidence to change his mind. That does not matter. Before you can follow an order you must ask your self 1. Is it legal, 2. is it moral, 3. is it unjust? if the answer to any of these is NO then you do not have to follow that order, end of story. Now who decides what your morals are? Trying to dictate to him what his morals are is no different that trying to tell him what he has to think.

First, thanks for clarifying on the commission/status. As I wrote, I did not know, since I have never been a reservist or Guardsman. Nor do I think he is necessariy a criminal. But I am asserting this - he made a choice and now he is suffering consequences for his choice. Just as he made his decision to question the legality of an election that has been certified by people much smarter than me, I make the decision to say he should pay for that action if his employer chooses to do so (and I worked for a defense contractor and doubt the one I worked for would have tolerated it, either).

I guess it bothers me so much the fact that the guy's military position has become a greater part of the story than the issue of what he questions. And as I have written earlier, the fact so many of our Tennesseans have gone and done their duty.

Do I think he is a screwball? Sure, but my opinion is only that; however, he is a big boy and had to know going into this something not good for him might happen.

Do appreciate your response and discussion. One thing I bet we agree on: this will be an interesting case/event for a lot of reasons and likely will generate discussion for quite a while.

Have a good one!

[Guest 3pugguy]

Yea, I've never been in the Military, so I wasn't sure how all that worked.

What happens if you refuse to follow an order that you feel is unconstitutional, but your superiors feel as if it's within their rights/powers?

you best have some solid ground on which to base your objecton (and the backing of some of your mates) or you will be up creek. And that solid ground better include evidence.

What is amazing to me is how these issues come up, as the military now is all volunteer; what did the people think they were signing up to do? Not unlike when I was in the Navy and people got upset with orders to a (wait for it)....ship!

[Guest redbarron06]

First, thanks for clarifying on the commission/status. As I wrote, I did not know, since I have never been a reservist or Guardsman. Nor do I think he is necessariy a criminal. But I am asserting this - he made a choice and now he is suffering consequences for his choice. Just as he made his decision to question the legality of an election that has been certified by people much smarter than me, I make the decision to say he should pay for that action if his employer chooses to do so (and I worked for a defense contractor and doubt the one I worked for would have tolerated it, either).

I guess it bothers me so much the fact that the guy's military position has become a greater part of the story than the issue of what he questions. And as I have written earlier, the fact so many of our Tennesseans have gone and done their duty.

Do I think he is a screwball? Sure, but my opinion is only that; however, he is a big boy and had to know going into this something not good for him might happen.

Do appreciate your response and discussion. One thing I bet we agree on: this will be an interesting case/event for a lot of reasons and likely will generate discussion for quite a while.

Have a good one!

My point is simply that the guy has committed no crime. He raised a question. I can say what is the best way of robbing a waffle house? but until I actually use action i have committed no crime. The man is being persicuted and loosing his job becuase of a question. He asked a question. I work for the govt and we ask that question and many others every day. I have asked my boss (he is a major also) and his boss (a LTC) and I still have my job and I am still in the guard. This guy is being made an example of by the socialist admin. It is that simple. They are telling both the US and the military that if you stand up to us we will runion your life!

[TripleDigitRide]

what did the people think they were signing up to do?

Collect the benefits.

• Educational Benefits - GI Bill, Tuition Assistance, Servicemember Opportunity Colleges, Education on Duty, etc.
  
• Advanced Technical and Specialty Training
  
• Cash Bonuses
  
• Tax-Free Housing & Food Allowances, or Free Room & Board
  
• 30 Days of Vacation per Year
  
• Space A Travel - Free flights between bases
  
• Substantial discounts and deals throughout the private sector (link to Deals center)
  
• The pride and honor of serving your country
  
• World travel
  
• Health & Dental Care for your and your family
  
• Special deals on Home Loans (VA Loans link)
  
• Being part of a larger family with a proud history - the military tradition
  
• Pension
  

They do make it sound very tempting. I've met more than a few memers of our military who've openly admitted they never expected to go to war. They wanted the free education. I'm sure they weren't the only few.

[Guest 3pugguy]

My point is simply that the guy has committed no crime. He raised a question. I can say what is the best way of robbing a waffle house? but until I actually use action i have committed no crime. The man is being persicuted and loosing his job becuase of a question. He asked a question. I work for the govt and we ask that question and many others every day. I have asked my boss (he is a major also) and his boss (a LTC) and I still have my job and I am still in the guard. This guy is being made an example of by the socialist admin. It is that simple. They are telling both the US and the military that if you stand up to us we will runion your life!

Well, I will leave it as this: I don't think the big boys in the WH are in this as deep in this as we are giving them credit for nor do I think they would make this one guy an example. But, we will see, I reckon.

What scares me is how casually America is accepting all of this mounting debt - truly a nightmare scenario for future generations.

I do gain a lot from all the different views and enjoy reading them. It is what makes the world go round and I guess it's my version of the barber shop from my youth, where the men (and of course here we have women members) would gather and shoot the breeze, sometimes heatedly, but in the end, would all shrug and go hunting or whatever together, still friends. I sure hope we (on TGO) always keep it as such - agree, disagree, bitch at one another, but in the end, recall we have way more in common than not.

Have a good evening and thanks for the responses/thoughts.

[Guest 3pugguy]

Collect the benefits.

• Educational Benefits - GI Bill, Tuition Assistance, Servicemember Opportunity Colleges, Education on Duty, etc.
  
• Advanced Technical and Specialty Training
  
• Cash Bonuses
  
• Tax-Free Housing & Food Allowances, or Free Room & Board
  
• 30 Days of Vacation per Year
  
• Space A Travel - Free flights between bases
  
• Substantial discounts and deals throughout the private sector (link to Deals center)
  
• The pride and honor of serving your country
  
• World travel
  
• Health & Dental Care for your and your family
  
• Special deals on Home Loans (VA Loans link)
  
• Being part of a larger family with a proud history - the military tradition
  
• Pension
  

They do make it sound very tempting. I've met more than a few memers of our military who've openly admitted they never expected to go to war. They wanted the free education. I'm sure they weren't the only few.

Yeah, I know...and I had an advantage back in 76 when I joined and knew what I was getting into. I grew up in the shadow of Ft Campbell, my Dad was a WWII vet, as were most of the men I knew as a kid.

And as an adolescent and young teen, saw guys not much older than me and the Dads of school friends go off to Viet Nam (I missed that by a couple of years) and more than a few from Clarksville not come home.

[Guest redbarron06]

Collect the benefits.

• Educational Benefits - GI Bill, Tuition Assistance, Servicemember Opportunity Colleges, Education on Duty, etc.
  
• Advanced Technical and Specialty Training
  
• Cash Bonuses
  
• Tax-Free Housing & Food Allowances, or Free Room & Board
  
• 30 Days of Vacation per Year
  
• Space A Travel - Free flights between bases
  
• Substantial discounts and deals throughout the private sector (link to Deals center)
  
• The pride and honor of serving your country
  
• World travel
  
• Health & Dental Care for your and your family
  
• Special deals on Home Loans (VA Loans link)
  
• Being part of a larger family with a proud history - the military tradition
  
• Pension
  

They do make it sound very tempting. I've met more than a few memers of our military who've openly admitted they never expected to go to war. They wanted the free education. I'm sure they weren't the only few.

Yea they make it sound temping until you find out that about 30% of what they tell you is false. Free dental for your family Not pension. If you get hurt bad enough to get kicked out or can stay 20 years and be able to walk on 2 good knees at that point. World travel? Yea with a gun in your hand. Substancial discounts? Well if 10% is substancial I guess I would go with that. That is the standard rate if a place offers any at all. I will have to make a shameless plug for Chick-fi-la in Smyrna though. 50% for military, LEO and I think firemen. But that is rare. I have actually called an airline and asked for a price and when I told them I was military the price went up. As far as guard you get none of the above unless you are activated with the exception of the education benifits and VA benifits. The guard education bennies can actually be better than AD on some schools.

[Guest canynracer]

have you?

Nope, but I am not criticizing the actions of someone that is/has either.

This man questioned the legality of an order, nothing more, and some folks are ready to demote him, then dishonerably discharge him. Nothing in the OP tells you of his past service, based on what is posted, you have no idea his accomplishments, but he should be considered a whack job because he questioned an order.

Please

[LagerHead]

It's amazing how some see part of a story and jump to conclusions. This major was on Fox News the other morning explaining his actions. He's been deployed many times before, so he's not scared and trying to dodge his duties. He, and many other officers, are worried that if Obama is NOT a natural born citizen then any order to them is null and void: thereforre subjecting them to CRIMINAL PROSECUTION for war crimes for any actions that they take. He wants proof that Obama is a legal sitting president before he deploys. If he shows proof, then he'll be happy to deploy.

This is bull. Although the CIC is the ultimate authority for all orders given in the military, it in no way makes anything they do legal or illegal. Did he get verification that Bush was "legal"? I seriously doubt that. I'm not sure what his motivations are, but he is misguided in his argument.

[E4 No More]

This is bull. Although the CIC is the ultimate authority for all orders given in the military, it in no way makes anything they do legal or illegal. Did he get verification that Bush was "legal"? I seriously doubt that. I'm not sure what his motivations are, but he is misguided in his argument.

I hope that you are saying that the major's position is bull, and are not calling me a liar.

I don't care enough about whether he's legally right or wrong. I was pointing out his stated position after many others on here were jumping to conclusions and getting diarrhea of the keyboard. I do know that there are several legal scholars worried about exactly the same thing that this major is worried about, so if pushed into taking a side I'll side with the legal scholars.

[Guest redbarron06]

Did he get verification that Bush was "legal"? I seriously doubt that. I'm not sure what his motivations are, but he is misguided in his argument.

Was there a question of weither or not Bush, Clinton, Bush 1, Reagan, Nixon or Kennedy were born here. When was the last time we have a president that the question was raised? I am not defending his actions but he is not the only making the claim. Why has the administration spent a million $ trying to keep the long form BC from being released? I am not saying he was or was not born in HI but even a blind man can see that the amount of money spent on hiding it there has to be something that is being hidden.

[dunndw]

I'd be willing to bet that IF he does have a legal birth certif. it has him down as Caucasian instead of Black. That would be enough to stir up a storm in and of itself. That would look bad on the chosen one, therefore it cannot see the light of day.

[Guest gunslinger707]

Was there a question of weither or not Bush, Clinton, Bush 1, Reagan, Nixon or Kennedy were born here. When was the last time we have a president that the question was raised? I am not defending his actions but he is not the only making the claim. Why has the administration spent a million $ trying to keep the long form BC from being released? I am not saying he was or was not born in HI but even a blind man can see that the amount of money spent on hiding it there has to be something that is being hidden.

If it look's like a Duck,walk's like a Duck,skwak's like a Duck,IT dang sure ain't a chicken!!!!

[Guest mustangdave]

I'd be willing to bet that IF he does have a legal birth certif. it has him down as Caucasian instead of Black. That would be enough to stir up a storm in and of itself. That would look bad on the chosen one, therefore it cannot see the light of day.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and agree with this idea...that would shake things up by the ROOTS

[Guest redbarron06]

I'd be willing to bet that IF he does have a legal birth certif. it has him down as Caucasian instead of Black. That would be enough to stir up a storm in and of itself. That would look bad on the chosen one, therefore it cannot see the light of day.

That is the very reason that I think he is hiding it. He has used 16% of his racial makup up to gain 100% of his fame and I would guess more than a third of his votes. Those just happen to be the traits that came out as his body matured. No control over it but he could have controled what he used it for. He has most of the black community fooled. Remimber the scene in Philly? "We are going to have a black president one way or another" spewed by a black panther. Well we still dont have one.

[Guest dlstewart01]

Edited July 23, 2009 by dlstewart01

[Guest dlstewart01]

Just to stir the pot. Someone sent me this in an e-mail.

And I was in the military and places you would not like to be.

While I've little interest in getting in the middle of the Obama birth issue, Paul Hollrah over at FSM did so yesterday and believes the issue can be resolved by Obama answering one simple question:

What passport did he use when he was shuttling betweenNew York, Jakarta, and Karachi?

So how did a young man who arrived in New York in early June 1981, without the price of a hotel room in his pocket, suddenly

come up with the price of a round-the-world trip just a month later?

And once he was on a plane, shuttling between New York, Jakarta, and Karachi, what passport was he offering when

he passed throu gh Customs and Immigration?

The American people not only deserve to have answers to these questions, they must have answers. It makes the debate over Obama's citizenship a rather short and simple one.

Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20?

A : Yes, by his own admission.

Q: What passport did he travel under?

A: There are only three possibilities.

1) He traveled with a U.S. Passport,

2) He traveled with a British passport, or

3) He traveled with an Indonesia passport.

Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. Passport in 1981?

A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department's "no travel" list in 1981.

Conclusion:

When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981 he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport.

If he were traveli ng with a British passport that would provide proof

that he was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims.

And if he were traveling with an Indonesian passport that would tend to prove that he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, prior to being adopted by his Indonesian step-father in 1967.

Whatever the truth of the matter, the American people need to know how he managed to become a "natural born" American citizen between 1981 and 2008.

Given the destructive nature of his plans for America, as illustrated by his speech before Congress and the disastrous spending plan he has presented to Congress, the sooner we learn the truth of all this, the better.

If you Don't care that Your President is not a natural born Citizen and in Violation of the Constitution, then Delete this and go into your cocoon.

[Guest Muttling]

Snopes.com evaluation of the above:

snopes.com: Barack Obama's Passport

[Guest dlstewart01]

Snoops has positioned itself, or others have labeled it, as the 'tell all final word' on any comment, claim and email.

But for several years people tried to find out who exactly was behind snopes.com. Only recently did Wikipedia get to the bottom of it - kinda makes you wonder what they were hiding. Well, finally we know. It is run by a husband and wife team - that's right, no big office of investigators and researchers, no team of lawyers. It's just a mom-and-pop operation that began as a hobby.

David and Barbara Mikkelson in the San Fernando Valley of California started the website about 13 years ago - and they have no formal background or experience in investigative research. After a few years it gained popularity believing it to be unbiased and neutral, but over the past couple of years people started asking questions who was behind it and did they have a selfish motivation? The reason for the questions - or skepticisms - is a result of snopes.com claiming to have the bottom line facts to certain questions or issue when in fact they have been proven wrong. Also, there were criticisms the Mikkelsons were not really investigating and getting to the 'true' bottom of various issues. I can personally vouch for that complaint.

A few months ago, when my State Farm agent Bud Gregg in Mandeville hoisted a political sign referencing Barack Obama and made a big splash across the internet, 'supposedly' the Mikkelson's claim to have researched this issue before posting their findings on snopes.com. In their statement they claimed the corporate office of State Farm pressured Gregg into taking down the sign, when in fact nothing of the sort 'ever' took place.

I personally contacted David Mikkelson (and he replied back to me) thinking he would want to get to the bottom of this and I gave him Bud Gregg's contact phone numbers - and Bud was going to give him phone numbers to the big exec's at State Farm in Illinois who would have been willing to speak with him about it. He never called Bud. In fact, I learned from Bud Gregg no one from snopes.com ever contacted anyone with State Farm. Yet, snopes.com issued a statement as the 'final factual word' on the issue as if they did all their homework and got to the bottom of things - not!

Then it has been learned the Mikkelson's are Jewish - very Democratic (party) and extremely liberal. As we all now know from this presidential election, liberals have a purpose agenda to discredit anything that appears to be conservative. There has been much criticism lately over the internet with people pointing out the Mikkelson's liberalism revealing itself in their website findings. Gee, what a shock?

So, I say this now to everyone who goes to to get what they think to be the bottom line facts...'proceed with caution.' Take what it says at face value and nothing more. Use it only to lead you to their references where you can link to and read the sources for yourself. Plus, you can always google a subject and do the research yourself. It now seems apparent that's all the Mikkelson's do.

[Guest Muttling]

This is bull. Although the CIC is the ultimate authority for all orders given in the military, it in no way makes anything they do legal or illegal. Did he get verification that Bush was "legal"? I seriously doubt that. I'm not sure what his motivations are, but he is misguided in his argument.

This was my point exactly.

To ALL posters, how would you react if a member of the Obama admin was convicted of a crime? (more on this later)

Obama's validity of citizenship was questioned prior to the elections and even went to court. If the attorneys for the Republican Party (acting very appropriately in my opinion) couldn't make a solid argument for him not being a citizen then it not reasonabe for a soldier to say "I know the courts said you're a citizen, but I don't believe it based on what the internet says so I shouldn't have to follow orders nor do what I volunteered to do."

Heck....The major's own attorney said this case is a threat to US national security.

If new information has come to light that justifies a new review of his citizenship, go for it. We have plenty of civilians who aren't a part of national defense that would be more than happy to sue Obama just like we had people file suit against Bush, Chenney, and a number of cabinet members.

Speaking of Bush................Where you questioning his rightfulness to be president when Safavion and Libby were convicted of CRIMES for things they did while working for the Bush administration?

Back to my first question, how would you respond if someone in the Obama admin was convicted of a crime and how does that compare to how you responded when Bush's people were convicted?

Lets add to the stew, how did you respond when Clinton avoided conviction but pretty much admitted to a crime?

Do you base your views of their behavior political orientations or their actions?

[Guest Muttling]

What on the internet isn't proceed with caution? What e-mails like the one you posted aren't proceed with caution? Why is Snopes less believable an un-named individual who sent you an e-mail?

Thus, I call upon you to provide evidence that the U.S. State Department had labeled Pakistan as a do not travel to country in 1981. That is the crux of the argument that you have quoted, show me evidence of it.

EDIT: Interestingly, Ronald Reagan sought a LOT of financial aid for Pakistan in 1981 and we viewed them as an ally in our effort to thwart the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a1281pakistanaid

Snoops has positioned itself, or others have labeled it, as the 'tell all final word' on any comment, claim and email.

But for several years people tried to find out who exactly was behind snopes.com. Only recently did Wikipedia get to the bottom of it - kinda makes you wonder what they were hiding. Well, finally we know. It is run by a husband and wife team - that's right, no big office of investigators and researchers, no team of lawyers. It's just a mom-and-pop operation that began as a hobby.

David and Barbara Mikkelson in the San Fernando Valley of California started the website about 13 years ago - and they have no formal background or experience in investigative research. After a few years it gained popularity believing it to be unbiased and neutral, but over the past couple of years people started asking questions who was behind it and did they have a selfish motivation? The reason for the questions - or skepticisms - is a result of snopes.com claiming to have the bottom line facts to certain questions or issue when in fact they have been proven wrong. Also, there were criticisms the Mikkelsons were not really investigating and getting to the 'true' bottom of various issues. I can personally vouch for that complaint.

A few months ago, when my State Farm agent Bud Gregg in Mandeville hoisted a political sign referencing Barack Obama and made a big splash across the internet, 'supposedly' the Mikkelson's claim to have researched this issue before posting their findings on snopes.com. In their statement they claimed the corporate office of State Farm pressured Gregg into taking down the sign, when in fact nothing of the sort 'ever' took place.

I personally contacted David Mikkelson (and he replied back to me) thinking he would want to get to the bottom of this and I gave him Bud Gregg's contact phone numbers - and Bud was going to give him phone numbers to the big exec's at State Farm in Illinois who would have been willing to speak with him about it. He never called Bud. In fact, I learned from Bud Gregg no one from snopes.com ever contacted anyone with State Farm. Yet, snopes.com issued a statement as the 'final factual word' on the issue as if they did all their homework and got to the bottom of things - not!

Then it has been learned the Mikkelson's are Jewish - very Democratic (party) and extremely liberal. As we all now know from this presidential election, liberals have a purpose agenda to discredit anything that appears to be conservative. There has been much criticism lately over the internet with people pointing out the Mikkelson's liberalism revealing itself in their website findings. Gee, what a shock?

So, I say this now to everyone who goes to to get what they think to be the bottom line facts...'proceed with caution.' Take what it says at face value and nothing more. Use it only to lead you to their references where you can link to and read the sources for yourself. Plus, you can always google a subject and do the research yourself. It now seems apparent that's all the Mikkelson's do.

Edited July 24, 2009 by Muttling

[Guest dlstewart01]

What on the internet isn't proceed with caution?

Thus, I call upon you to provide evidence that the U.S. State Department had labeled Pakistan as a do not travel to country in 1981. That is the crux of the argument that you have quoted, show me evidence of it.

I just got that in an e-mail from a supervisor where I retired from. It is not my writing. I don't have to prove anything contained in it. I was just stirring the pot.

I am an old man and seen a lot in my day, Yes I participated in operation Apache Snow, 1969 in Vietnam. APACHE SNOW I paid my dues!!!

Probably got sprayed with agent orange once too many times.

My gut feel on this is he is not a US citizen. Can I prove it. Of coarse not. This will probably go down with other never to be answered question such as who killed Kennedy.

I posted the original post but this is not my fight. Actually I posted it because he was fired from his civilian job for challenging the government. This should make us all wonder what our government will do next. Whether he was right or wrong, that shouldn't have happened.

If the good Major truly believes this, let him fight it till he either wins, looses, or just gets tired.

There are many credible people out there who want to fight this battle as well.

Y'all have a good one.

Edited July 24, 2009 by dlstewart01

[Guest chevy59tom]

Now comes Government Agency Authority to serve Major Cook for his denial to recognize Usurper-In-Chief Obama Lamma Ding Dong Soetoro whatever. Obama is a liar, he did not "grow up" in Hawaii as he just said about Apollo 11, he was going to school in INDONESIA. He was a full Indonesian Muslim. He has even stated America is "not a Christian nation anymore". I guess the next thing he will say is that we don't have to defend or follow THE CONSTITUTION because I AM PRESIDENT and I DIDN'T HAVE TO.... Major Cook was carrying out his duty to protect and defend the Constitution, now he is being punished for this ? Is this another Fort Sumter ? Here it comes, get ready.

[LagerHead]

I hope that you are saying that the major's position is bull, and are not calling me a liar.

I don't care enough about whether he's legally right or wrong. I was pointing out his stated position after many others on here were jumping to conclusions and getting diarrhea of the keyboard. I do know that there are several legal scholars worried about exactly the same thing that this major is worried about, so if pushed into taking a side I'll side with the legal scholars.

Not calling you a liar. Believe me, I'm not polite enough to veil an insult.

[E4 No More]

I have seen earlier reports referring to Hawaii's Governor as a Democrat, and quite frankly, the belief that a Democrat Governor was squelching his Birth Certificate prompted my suspicion that something was being hidden. I have gone online and discovered that she is in fact a Republican, and that changes my stance on the subject.

In todays political climate, I am convinced that if "The One" was not a natural born citizen, then the Republican Governor would have made sure that information was released and verified. Either that or she simply doesn't follow the Democrats' modus operandi. After all, the Democrats had no problem with going after "Joe the plumber".