Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fox News Alert - Eligibility

Posted on 07/14/2009 3:29:17 PM PDT by MacSuibhne

Obama - Soldier questioning eligibility - Fox News


TOPICS: Military/Veterans
KEYWORDS: bhodod; birthcertificate; certifigate; eligibility; foxnews; obama; reservists; stefancook
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-114 next last
Fox News - Brett Bair to discuss the Soldier who is asking for proof that Obama is a Natural Born Citizen before being deployed.
1 posted on 07/14/2009 3:29:18 PM PDT by MacSuibhne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MacSuibhne

2 posted on 07/14/2009 3:30:37 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist ("President Obama, your agenda is not new, it's not change, and it's not hope" - Rush Limbaugh 02/28)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Saw it. Thanks!


3 posted on 07/14/2009 3:33:04 PM PDT by patriot08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Mainstream and viral.Finally!


4 posted on 07/14/2009 3:34:16 PM PDT by taxtruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MacSuibhne

‘Saw this earlier today on Drudge. I think it’s going to take a number of these lawsuits to challenge the HOPE-DOPE to either put up, or step down! Congressional Republicans don’t have the numbers, nor the desire to do it. I’d love for ZER0 to have to continue spending millions to fight these lawsuits. At some point, especially with his quickly dropping public support, people may start to take notice.


5 posted on 07/14/2009 3:36:48 PM PDT by RocketMan1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MacSuibhne

I hope this is the rip cord finally being pulled to put this nation’s survival on a parachute from this fiasco called the Obamanation.


6 posted on 07/14/2009 3:41:43 PM PDT by jonrick46 (The Obama Administration is a blueprint for Fabian Socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MacSuibhne
Brett Bair to discuss the Soldier who is asking for proof that Obama is a Natural Born Citizen before being deployed.

I hope Brett Bair gives ample coverage to the relevant punitive sections of the UCMJ, which apply to soldiers who refuse to follow orders. Beginning, perhaps, with Articles 87 (Missing Movement), 88 (Contempt toward Officials) and 94 (Mutiny and sedition).

And I hope he dwells at length at the penalties associated with these violations.

It is NOT up to this soldier to decide what orders he is or is not going to follow, especially given that the deployment orders are both lawful and appropriate.

7 posted on 07/14/2009 3:41:58 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RocketMan1

‘Saw this earlier today on Drudge. I think it’s going to take a number of these lawsuits to challenge the HOPE-DOPE to either put up, or step down! Congressional Republicans don’t have the numbers, nor the desire to do it. I’d love for ZER0 to have to continue spending millions to fight these lawsuits. At some point, especially with his quickly dropping public support, people may start to take notice.
+++++++++++++

Nice thoughts..


8 posted on 07/14/2009 3:48:42 PM PDT by SeattleBruce (God, Family, Country and the Tea Party! Take America Back! [I hate the TRAITORS in the enemedia.])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: r9etb

I agree with you. I’m sure however, that this soldier feels he is doing his patriotic duty by challenging what he sees as a threat to this nation from within. I just wish that we could see concerted civil efforts to force 0bama’s hand. Enough of them, and it will be hard not to notice.


9 posted on 07/14/2009 3:50:27 PM PDT by RocketMan1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: r9etb

It is NOT up to this soldier to decide what orders he is or is not going to follow, especially given that the deployment orders are both lawful and appropriate.
+++++++++++++++++

Isn’t this his whole case...if orders were given by an illegitimate Commander in Chief?


10 posted on 07/14/2009 3:51:33 PM PDT by SeattleBruce (God, Family, Country and the Tea Party! Take America Back! [I hate the TRAITORS in the enemedia.])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: r9etb

Have you even read the entire case?

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/?p=3064


11 posted on 07/14/2009 3:52:01 PM PDT by CheneyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RocketMan1

Well, his patriotic duty is do follow his orders.

Period.

What this soldier “feels” stopped being important the day he took his oath.


12 posted on 07/14/2009 3:53:10 PM PDT by Lord_Baltar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
"It is NOT up to this soldier to decide what orders he is or is not going to follow"

It certainly is up to the individual to decide. Only in a Nazi Germany would one expect otherwise.

Semper Fi
An Old Man

13 posted on 07/14/2009 3:53:32 PM PDT by An Old Man (Use it up, Wear it out, Make it do, or Do without.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MacSuibhne

The man is a true patriot. Bravo!


14 posted on 07/14/2009 3:58:09 PM PDT by dforest (Anyone dumb enough to have voted for him deserves what they get.. No Pity!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
It is NOT up to this soldier to decide what orders he is or is not going to follow, especially given that the deployment orders are both lawful and appropriate.

What if it was an order to execute American civilians?

Or to fire upon Tea Party protesters?

One of the nice things about the UCMJ is that you get to defend your actions under it, it isn't a case of if you are charged, you are automatically guilty, despite what people like John Murtha have tried to ram down our throats.

15 posted on 07/14/2009 3:58:27 PM PDT by usmcobra (Your chances of dying in bed are reduced by getting out of it, but most people still die in bed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lord_Baltar
What this soldier “feels” stopped being important the day he took his oath

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the State of (STATE NAME) against all enemies, foreign and domestic;

One could assume he is taking his oath literally!!! Domestic enemies......... Obama is just one.

16 posted on 07/14/2009 4:00:24 PM PDT by MrPiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MrPiper

OK, so you’d defend a soldier who, say, considered Dubya the same way?

I can’t believe what I’m reading here....


17 posted on 07/14/2009 4:02:02 PM PDT by Lord_Baltar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
0 is illegitimate - makes all his orders fruit of a tainted tree.
18 posted on 07/14/2009 4:02:17 PM PDT by mad_as_he$$ (Nemo me impune lacessit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
That soldier has more guts than I do.

I hope that the judge does NOT tell the soldier to follow orders or he will send the soldier to prison for a long time.

19 posted on 07/14/2009 4:05:10 PM PDT by john mirse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lord_Baltar

They hung Hitler’s Generals for just “following orders”.


20 posted on 07/14/2009 4:05:47 PM PDT by outhousepatrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
"It is NOT up to this soldier to decide what orders he is or is not going to follow"

The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 809.ART.90 (20), makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the "lawful command of his superior officer," 891.ART.91 (2), the "lawful order of a warrant officer", 892.ART.92 (1) the "lawful general order", 892.ART.92 (2) "lawful order". In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ.

The essential attributes of a lawful order include: (1) issuance by competent authority -- a person authorized by applicable law to give such an order; (2)communication of words that express a specific mandate to do or not do a specific act; and (3)relationship of the mandate to a military duty. [T]he accused may challenge an order on the grounds that it would require the recipient to perform an illegal act or that it conflicts with that person‘s statutory or constitutional rights.“ United States v. Deisher, 61 M.J. 313, 317(2005)"

21 posted on 07/14/2009 4:13:38 PM PDT by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

it was posted on another thread that Cook’s orders had been revoked. Stay tuned for confirmation


22 posted on 07/14/2009 4:17:02 PM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Lord_Baltar

AFAIK, there were no similar questions regarding Bush. It’s a well known fact that ZER0 has not proven his eligibility. Active duty officers take “an Oath to Protect and Defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic.” This soldier is basing his case upon the “enemies .. domestic” in the lawsuit.

As I said earlier .. it would be nice if instead, a well-heeled CIVIL organization or two would bombard the Courts with eligibility cases.


23 posted on 07/14/2009 4:18:09 PM PDT by RocketMan1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MacSuibhne; penelopesire; seekthetruth; television is just wrong; jcsjcm; BP2; Pablo Mac; ...

Should be on The Grapevine site later tonight

http://www.foxnews.com/specialreport/index.html


24 posted on 07/14/2009 4:18:35 PM PDT by STARWISE (The Art & Science Institute of Chicago Politics NE Div: now open at the White House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: An Old Man

He took an oath to up hold the Constitution of the United State not an oath to Obama.


25 posted on 07/14/2009 4:24:06 PM PDT by hoosiermama (ONLY DEAD FISH GO WITH THE FLOW.......I am swimming with Sarahcudah! Sarah has read the tealeaves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MacSuibhne

Email your thanks to Brett at Special@foxnews.com

He’ll cover it when ever there is a new activity....He got the question put up on FOX NATION a few weeks back.


26 posted on 07/14/2009 4:26:31 PM PDT by hoosiermama (ONLY DEAD FISH GO WITH THE FLOW.......I am swimming with Sarahcudah! Sarah has read the tealeaves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RocketMan1
It’s a well known fact that ZER0 has not proven his eligibility

All of the relevant Constitutional officers of the Republic, including President of the Senate Richard Cheney of Wyoming, have affirmed Obama's eligibility and have certified his election in a proper and constitutional manner.

Until they are shown to be wrong, he is the perfectly legal President and C-in-C, and this soldier is (and should be) in deep doo-doo.

27 posted on 07/14/2009 4:30:56 PM PDT by Jim Noble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: r9etb; Lord_Baltar
Interesting comments from both of you. Thanks.

I'm not sure where I come down on this, but I think cases like this point to one of the reasons why some of the most effective military forces in U.S. history were those that didn't answer to a centralized government or national command structure. I'd cite the Green Mountain Boys, Daniel Morgan's Virginia Riflemen, and later the Texas Rangers as good examples of this.

28 posted on 07/14/2009 4:31:40 PM PDT by Alberta's Child (God is great, beer is good . . . and people are crazy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: All

The Kossacks are saying that the major (plaintiff) is a Freeper!


29 posted on 07/14/2009 4:33:01 PM PDT by proudtobeanamerican1 (Prayers Up! It's our last defense!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SeattleBruce
Isn’t this his whole case...if orders were given by an illegitimate Commander in Chief?

His orders were given by his immediate superiors.

30 posted on 07/14/2009 4:34:06 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Have you confirmed that ? Can’t find anything about it.


31 posted on 07/14/2009 4:34:55 PM PDT by STARWISE (The Art & Science Institute of Chicago Politics NE Div: now open at the White House)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

He’s willing to go to court to find out who just is in deep doo doo. I say it’s Obama.


32 posted on 07/14/2009 4:35:45 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: proudtobeanamerican1

I didn’t realise that was a crime....


33 posted on 07/14/2009 4:36:09 PM PDT by usmcobra (Your chances of dying in bed are reduced by getting out of it, but most people still die in bed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: An Old Man
It certainly is up to the individual to decide.

Then he can leave the Army in protest. At present, however, it would appear based on the UCMJ definition that he is engaged in mutiny.

Only in a Nazi Germany would one expect otherwise.

What?!? Are you really saying that soldiers (except Nazis) can pick and choose which orders they feel like following?

Semper Fi

Ah, irony....

34 posted on 07/14/2009 4:38:47 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: r9etb

However, the order(s) to deploy to Afghanistan received by his superiors come from the Pentagon that is run by the Secretary of Defense who gets his orders from Obama. Is Obama legally able to give lawful orders? Obama may not be.


35 posted on 07/14/2009 4:39:14 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
His orders were given by his immediate superiors.

So you are saying that his immediate superiors can order him to fly halfway around and attack an enemy?

36 posted on 07/14/2009 4:39:18 PM PDT by usmcobra (Your chances of dying in bed are reduced by getting out of it, but most people still die in bed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: usmcobra
What if it was an order to execute American civilians? Or to fire upon Tea Party protesters?

But it's not.

37 posted on 07/14/2009 4:40:03 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: r9etb

OK, and their orders, etc.? It is CIC Obama that is expanding our force in Afghanistan. If he’s illegit, aren’t his orders also illegit?


38 posted on 07/14/2009 4:40:35 PM PDT by SeattleBruce (God, Family, Country and the Tea Party! Take America Back! [I hate the TRAITORS in the enemedia.])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: usmcobra

The new Obama talking points are emerging.


39 posted on 07/14/2009 4:40:48 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law
In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders.

Are you suggesting that our presence in Afghanistan and the prosecution of the war therein is Unlawful?

40 posted on 07/14/2009 4:42:19 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
But it's not.

According to you an officer must follow his orders no matter who gives them or what they are.

Or are there some cases when an officer can disobey orders?

41 posted on 07/14/2009 4:43:10 PM PDT by usmcobra (Your chances of dying in bed are reduced by getting out of it, but most people still die in bed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: proudtobeanamerican1

He is a Freeper ... he is one of our family and we owe him our prayers for his safety and our attention to his welfare. What he is doing is more courageous than the leaky Leahy scum running the Senate Judiciary Committee, or any other democrat in Washington right now, IMHO.


42 posted on 07/14/2009 4:43:43 PM PDT by MHGinTN (Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: SeattleBruce
OK, and their orders, etc.? It is CIC Obama that is expanding our force in Afghanistan. If he’s illegit, aren’t his orders also illegit?

Get off your anti-Obama soap box for a moment and consider very carefully the magnitude of the extremely dangerous idiocy you and others on this thread appear to be supporting.

What you are supporting, in no uncertain terms, is a situation whereby the either military as a whole, or the individual members thereof, get to decide who they will or will not obey.

History is full of examples of the suicidal stupidity of such a position.

43 posted on 07/14/2009 4:45:15 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
“it would appear based on the UCMJ definition that he is engaged in mutiny.”
+++++++++++++++

The UCMJ, and the entire military is, of course, based on the chain of command. The top link is illegit, that is the basis of this soldier's complaint...

I too hope he knows the consequences, but for now, I'm saying this guy has some kahunas.

44 posted on 07/14/2009 4:46:11 PM PDT by SeattleBruce (God, Family, Country and the Tea Party! Take America Back! [I hate the TRAITORS in the enemedia.])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: r9etb

Every heard of the Mi Lai massacre?

It was drummed into every officer’s head at the academy, and yes, it is absolutely up to the officer to decide whether the orders issued are lawful or not.

The officer takes an oath to be loyal to the Constitution, not to his CO, the Pentagon, or the President.

The major is doing his job.

By the way, Obama can provide access to the documents before bedtime on the East Coast, and the Major can be on a plane to his post about 30 minutes later.

This is a simple matter to be resolved, legally. The onus is on the President to provide proof that his eligible to be Commander in Chief. I can tell you that every officer is under the same burden prior to their being provided their commissions as officers in the military.

This is a no brainer. I’m surprised more officers haven’t done this first. Shows that the educational standards at the academies are starting to slip.


45 posted on 07/14/2009 4:47:56 PM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: usmcobra
According to you an officer must follow his orders no matter who gives them or what they are.

Uh, no, little fella. I didn't say that. It's difficult to take you seriously after such an idiotic comment.

Or are there some cases when an officer can disobey orders?

Sure. When the orders are unlawful. But those deployment orders are not unlawful.

46 posted on 07/14/2009 4:49:10 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Lord_Baltar

So you don’t think the oath means anything. That having sworn to defend this country and the constitution from enemies foreign and domestic, he should just forget that oath.

If he were ordered to kill you, because you had a gun and the government had banned them, should he obey that order?

Just wondering at what point you think principle and individual integrity trump “orders.” Every German soldier that help put Jews into gas chambers or shallow graves before being shot was just following orders.

Hank


47 posted on 07/14/2009 4:50:02 PM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: STARWISE

havent seen confirmation anywhere..will have to wait. the post said they were revoked at 1700.


48 posted on 07/14/2009 4:52:47 PM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
I hope Brett Bair gives ample coverage to the relevant punitive sections of the UCMJ, which apply to soldiers who refuse to follow orders. Beginning, perhaps, with Articles 87 (Missing Movement), 88 (Contempt toward Officials) and 94 (Mutiny and sedition).

Well he hasn't missed a movement, or even said that he would. He's a reservist, he has his full first amendment rights, although I don't see how asking him to demonstrate his eligibility quite gets into "contempt", it's not like he's calling him a Long Legged Mack Daddy, or a Communist. It doesn't fit the definition of Mutiny, because there has been no act of violence or refusal to obey an order. Similarly it doesn't fit the definition of Sedition, again because their has been no revolt, violence or other disturbance. Going to court is a very unusual way of commiting either Sedition or Mutiny.

Now if he refused orders, that could be mutiny, but it would be an unlikely charge given the circumstances, and it's more clearly "failure to go".

49 posted on 07/14/2009 4:54:22 PM PDT by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeattleBruce
The top link is illegit, that is the basis of this soldier's complaint...

Oh, OK then. Then, apparently, by that standard any action taken by the military since January is illegal.

Perhaps the only legal thing the military could do right now is to just stop what they're doing, everywhere, because Obama is illegitimate. We probably ought to discharge the entire Army, Air Force, Navy and Marines, because Obama is illegitimate. If attacked, we cannot fire or otherwise respond, because Obama is illegitimate.

What stupidity you're trying to sell. Plain damned stupidity.

50 posted on 07/14/2009 4:55:32 PM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-114 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

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