Battle of the Bilge

Jul 16 2009

The Curious Case of Major Stefan Cook

78 responses so far

78 Responses to “The Curious Case of Major Stefan Cook”

1. # Patrick McKinnionon 16 Jul 2009 at 9:09 pm

   BTW, the “Lt.Commander Walter Fitzpatrick” mentioned is a Naval Academy graduate that was retired in 1994 after 19 years and having been passed up for promotion three times, retiring as an O-3. He currently runs a website critical of the JAG and the UCMJ, and recently wrote a letter on Naval Academy Stationary accusing President Obama of “Treason”.

2. # Matton 17 Jul 2009 at 2:01 am

   The fact is that there are only 3 constitutional requirements to be President of the US and Commander in Chief. One of those is to be a “Natural Born Citizen”.

   The only constitutionally legal definition of Natural Born citizen (as confirmed by the Supreme court multiple times) is a person born in a country to parents who are citizens of that country. Both of Obama’s parents must have been citizens at the time of his birth in order for him to be qualified – however, Obama has said himself that his father was a Kenyan citizen. (I have more sources if you need them).

   This means Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen and was never constitutionally qualified to be president. This information has been suppressed and rarely, if ever, covered by the media. Court cases have been filed, and all of them have been thrown out without a hearing of the facts. The military is currently reporting to an Usurper.

   It looks like Taitz and Cook created a strategy to get better publicity on this topic and executed well enough to get a decent amount of national coverage of the issue. Good for them, but they should have known that the military would just say “you were the one that wanted to go to Afghanistan in the first place Cook! Fine – don’t go, now beat it!”

3. # Lola Getzon 17 Jul 2009 at 4:20 am

   Matt, nowhere in the Constitution does it state that a natural born citizen has to have TWO parents who are citizens of the United States, nor has the Supreme Court ever indicated this. You are, quite simply, repeating a lie.

4. # Dr.Don 17 Jul 2009 at 7:01 am

   The article speaks of the Zero as being the majority elected and thoroughly vetted CinC.

   There were huge irregularities in the 2008 elections, with Black Panthers at the polling stations in Philadelphia and many black people freely admitting to having voted more times than they could count.

   The vetting of this impostor was just about totally nonexistent as any of you who were alive that far back will be able to remember. There were no serious questions asked, and the only answers given were “hope and change.” Would you accept “hope and change” as a military strategy? I doubt it.

   Zero has gone to extraordinary lengths to erase his own past and to recreate it in his own two (ghostwritten) autobiographies. There is almost nothing of his past that can be found and that in itself is evidence of fraud. No honest man covers his tracks to this extent; it is not necessary. He is clearly hiding much.

   So the question remains, how long will the American military support an impostor?

5. # Tedon 17 Jul 2009 at 7:54 am

   So if is he is a natural born citizen, why not just release his long form birth certificate, passport, and college records? What is he trying to hide? And why has he spend $950,000 in legal fees stopping others from viewing the documents? What’s the big deal Barry?

6. # Matthew LoFiegoon 17 Jul 2009 at 8:04 am

   Appreciate the interest in comments but this article is about the military proceedings about Major Cook. Theorists may have some valid questions but please don’t use this platform to turn it in to a discussion on the birth certificate issue. Whatever counter arguments to the usual statements of the long form certificate of birth (which Hawaii does not release, they only release copies), or any other issues will just be met with denial or new accusations, as we have seen happen time and again. There have been numerous cases brought to the federal courts and each have been dismissed. If President Obama did release all the records, nothing would change. They’d be called forgeries and the mission to get him out of office would continue.
   
   Please, keep comments limited to the case of Major Cook and his actions. The military chain of command accepts the legitimacy of their Commander in Chief.

7. # Stephen J Cyrieron 17 Jul 2009 at 8:08 am

   The Officer Corps at one time represented what was perhaps the noblest quality of American culture. Today, it as it stands, it is a hollow shell of what it once was. The Corps is now The Corporation, populated by middle managers occupying corner offices, more concerned with pensions, career moves ,and the next promotion.

   Shun Major Cook if you must, but his patriotism is more linked to General Washington’s than some 20 and out green shirt pseudo-bureaucrat’s. By his inaction our C-in-C divides us.

   It pains me to no end, to speak one syllable against our military, forgive me.

8. # WestPoint78on 17 Jul 2009 at 9:08 am

   Stephen J Cyrier:

   It is ironic for you to attempt such a flaccid link between Cook’s alleged “patriotism” and that of George Washington.

   I refer you to Washington’s address to his officers at Newburgh, NY where he shut down a brewing insurrection by a gaggle of disloyal and insubordinate officers just like MAJ Cook. Washington would have recognized Cook for what he is… well, except for the tin-foil hat.

   Whatever your issues with the Officer Corps might be, Stefan Cook has betrayed his oath and violated the trust of his commission, his unit and his fellow soldiers with this act of political grandstanding. It is my hope that he is swiftly turned into a cautionary tale for others who would allow their personal prejudices to over ride their commitment to duty.

9. # Stephen J Cyrieron 17 Jul 2009 at 10:02 am

   During the Nuremberg Trials of 1946 the German Military rationalized their crimes against humanity by offering up the defense “Orders are Orders”. The Nuremberg Trials were the culminating event, of 12 years of prior acquiescence to a corrupt politician who usurped power then proclaimed himself Der Fuhrer . In 1946, America, all of America the military included, shook their heads at such blind obedience. This ability to obey, but with reason, sets us apart I suppose. Patriotism and Fanaticism are not the same.

   During the Revolutionary War, the Prussian General, Baron Friedrich Wilhelm Augustus von Steuben, trained our soldiers at Valley Forge. In a letter to a colleague, he remarked ” In the Prussian Army, you order a soldier to do something, and it is done, but with these Americans, you order them to do something, they will do it also but first they want to know why they should do it.” While not an exact quote, the general idea is conveyed.

   No one is advocating, a questioning of every order that comes down the chain of command. I advocate that only lawful and legal orders are obeyed. Unlawful orders are not legal orders and must not be confused with “orders are orders”. The Commander-In- Chief knows what he must do. We know what he must do.

   Some of America’s Officer Corps are still alive, who witnessed the events of World War II and the aftermath. If today’s contemporary officer needs guidance, seek out one of these patriots, ask their viewpoint

10. # Matthew LoFiegoon 17 Jul 2009 at 11:41 am

    Note – Post deleted due to its irrelevance to this article.

11. # Stephen J Cyrieron 17 Jul 2009 at 11:52 am

    # Patrick McKinnionon 16 Jul 2009 at 9:09 pm
    BTW, the “Lt.Commander Walter Fitzpatrick” mentioned is a Naval Academy graduate that was retired in 1994 after 19 years and having been passed up for promotion three times, retiring as an O-3. He currently runs a website critical of the JAG and the UCMJ, and recently wrote a letter on Naval Academy Stationary accusing President Obama of “Treason”.

    Since you seem to have access to LtCommander Fitzpatrick’s personnell file, please take note the naval rank of LtCommander is regarded as O-4.

    I once knew a mere 0-5, and all he did was fly a P-51 over Europe, a F-86 over Korea and 300 combat missions over Vietnam in a F-100. What a lowly creature he was…………

12. # Patrick McKinnionon 17 Jul 2009 at 12:25 pm

    Stephen J Cyrier – Typo, I meant O-4. Still, USNA graduate, and after 19 years in service he retired in 1994 as an O-4, having been passed up for promotion three times.

    The reason why he was passed up may have something to do with the court-martial he got where he was convicted on one count of financial negligence. (mishandling ship morale funds)

    The Seattle PI has a story on him dating to 21 April 1994.

    As for Major Cook, the timeline looks rather interesting.

    1 Feb 2009 – Major Stephen Cook publically signs up as a plaintiff for Dr. Orly. (The Right Side of Life blog)

    25 Mar 2009 – On “Free Republic”, he publically stated he was one of Dr. Orly’s plaintiffs.

    9 May 2009 – Major Cook volunteers for deployment. This is three months after agreeing to take part in Dr. Orly’s lawsuit. Due to the terms of his volunteering as a reservist, he can cancel out up to 24 hours before deployment.

    9 June 2009 – Major Cook gets his deployment orders for 15 July 2009.

    10 July 2009 – Five days before his voluntary deployment, Major Cook and Dr. Orly Taitz file their lawsuit.

    So he volunteered to go on active duty AFTER agreeing to be part of Dr. Orly’s lawsuit. This smells a lot like a setup to me.

13. # Rock Peterson 18 Jul 2009 at 12:49 am

    I support Major Cook and would like to shoot a national PAC TV commercial with him. Do you have a way to conatct him?

    [b]Edit – It’s never good to put personal information on blog comments. I’m sure you can find a way to contact his lawyer via the internet, but since I certainly don’t endorse it, I’m not going to recommend it or provide it. -Matt[/b]

14. # Matthew LoFiegoon 18 Jul 2009 at 8:38 am

    To Lola It’s their newest strategy. The constitution states in Article 2, Section 1:

    No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.

    From the Fourteenth Amendment:

    All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

    The definition of natural born citizen is never spelled out in the Constitution, but subsequent Supreme Court decisions have not addressed the issue of children of non-citizens specifically. The statement “The only constitutionally legal definition of Natural Born citizen (as confirmed by the Supreme court multiple times) is a person born in a country to parents who are citizens of that country” is not technically correct.

15. # Matthew LoFiegoon 18 Jul 2009 at 4:02 pm

    Updated article with an interesting video from Friday night’s Lou Dobbs CNN program (courtesy media matters)

16. # Scion of Greedon 21 Jul 2009 at 6:54 pm

    If B. Hussein Obama had the same kind of legitimate papers as the average Joe Schmoe from Kocomo, the issue never would have arisen. It came to the fore because there is meat on the end of that hook, if you will. The truth is, B. Hussein has no original papers, but a copy of paper from the State of HI with no handwriting on it whatsoever, just something typed-up and minimal, strangely unsigned by anyone. Accordingly, it looks to be something made “after the fact.” Likely it was when you think of the scandal his birth was — at that time. People didn’t do what B. Hussein’s mother did in those days, and one thing we all agree on is that she left the country, the only question being “when.” Indeed, his own African relatives have said B. Hussein wasn’t “born in the USA,” and judging by the way he has deftly avoided (and treated) them all (his own aunt for example, illegally staying in the country collecting welfare in a Boston, MA project), one must reason that he has something to hide…”Where there is smoke, there is liar.”

17. # Matthew LoFiegoon 21 Jul 2009 at 9:09 pm

    Fact Check

    Hate to go back to it, but if you haven’t read it, you need to do so. I find Fact Check to be the closest thing out there that is non-partisan. A little info on Fact Check from their site:

    About FactCheck.org
    Our Mission

    We are a nonpartisan, nonprofit “consumer advocate” for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics. We monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews and news releases. Our goal is to apply the best practices of both journalism and scholarship, and to increase public knowledge and understanding.

    The Annenberg Political Fact Check is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. The APPC was established by publisher and philanthropist Walter Annenberg in 1994 to create a community of scholars within the University of Pennsylvania that would address public policy issues at the local, state and federal levels.

    The APPC accepts NO funding from business corporations, labor unions, political parties, lobbying organizations or individuals. It is funded primarily by the Annenberg Foundation.

18. # Mary Joon 22 Jul 2009 at 10:59 am

    I worked as a Department of the Army Civilian Employee for almost ten years. During that time I worked at the U.S. Army Garrison, Yongsan, in Seoul, South Korea from January 1977 until July 1979. I came in contact with members of the U.S. Army on a daily basis- both at work and in social settings. I remember that American parents who had children born to them at the 121st Ecacuation Hospital- in Seoul would comment on how their children could do anything in later life with the exception that they could never be President.

    To be a Natural Born Citizen means that a child must be born in one of the Fifty States of the United States- not Kenya, and not the Panama Canal Zone.

    This last 2008 Presidential Election was unique in that neither the Democratic nor the Republican candidates were eligible to assume the office of President of the United States.

19. # Randy McDandyon 22 Jul 2009 at 12:50 pm

    I’m curious as to which group is the craziest; birthers, GW deniers or flat earthers? It’s a tough call.

20. # Randy McDandyon 22 Jul 2009 at 12:51 pm

    Mary Jo, Obama wasn’t born in Kenya. Do birthers ever actually do any serious research before they make accusations?! Sheesh!

21. # jackson tomason 23 Jul 2009 at 2:56 pm

    The whole birth issue is extremely curious. While the birthers can not prove that Obama does not satisfy the constitutional requirements to be POTUS; on the other hand Obama is not willing to show the people that he is indeed satisfy the constitutional requirements.

    All these debates over his birth certificates as posted on the website, the statements made by Hawaii officials are totally irrelevant.

    The US Presidential election process needs fixing. It is the failure of both parties to check their candidates’s constitutional reqirements before puting their name on the ballot. If Obama does indeed satisfy the Constitutional reqirements, all it needs to do is for the DNC or a Supreme Court judge to come out in national TV and declare that ‘yes, Mr. Obama is indeed a natural born citizen’ after examining his proper papers.

    Why this step is not being taken really boggles my mind. It makes the US just like a Banana Republic. As long as this issue is not resolved, people will continue to question his legality, and that is not good for both the US and the World.

22. # Matthew LoFiegoon 23 Jul 2009 at 10:20 pm

    It boggles my mind too. Hardcore conspiracy theorists are immune to evidence though. Obama could order all scientists to collaborate on a massive project to invent a time traveling device, take them back to personally watch him being born in Hawaii and they’d come back and say ‘it looked an awful lot like Kenya to me’.

    Kidding, but you get my general sentiment.

23. # Concerned Citizenon 29 Jul 2009 at 1:27 pm

    A lot of wasted time trying to find something to discredit the President who has answered his critics on the subject of his citizenship. This was ploy on the part of Maj Cook and Dr Taitz. What a joke and waste of time. Mr Obama was elected for 4 years; get over it and vote your guy/gal in the next time around.

24. # Jim Reidon 29 Jul 2009 at 2:01 pm

    The President’s middle name is irrelevant.

25. # JAMES HOLLANDon 29 Jul 2009 at 2:05 pm

    Children of Military Personnel, born overseas, to parents, both of whom are “U.S. CITIZENS” are also U.S. CITIZENS. First, the parent must obtain the Childs Birth Certificate of the Country in which it is born, next go to the nearest US Consulate of Embassy and Register the Childs Birth; you will be issued a Certificate of Birth to US CITIZENS, and the mothers Passport will be updated to include a picture of both her “AND” the child together on the Passport. This should be accomplished preferably in the country that the child is born in. I was Stationed in the Federal Republic of Germany (assigned to NATO out of Fontainebleau, France 298th Signal Company 19060-1963) My 2nd Son was born 12-03-60, he got a Landsthul German BC and wed were directed by the Command to the Frankfurt Embassy to obtain American Birth Certificate from the State Department; my wife and I, armed with our Birth Certificates, arrived at the Embassy and left with a Child with “DUAL Citizenships”. I was transferred back to France (LAON AFB, NATO Microwave System US ARMY) and Feb. 26, 1963 our Daughter was born, this time, we obtained French BC. My Command directed me to the US Embassy Paris, France for an American Registration of Birth and an American State Department Birth Certificate. Now I had two children with “DUAL CITIZENSHIPS”. Both of my children were eligible to run for PRESIDENT the same as President Gerald Ford. Why? Because my Children had “TWO” Natural born AMERICAN PARENTS (Notice that “S” means PLURAL??? or more than one.).
    Now check this out – Senator McCain was born in a US TERRITORY, FOR AT THE TIME OF HIS Birth, the Panama Canal was a Territory of the UNITED STATES the same as Hawaii, Guam, Puerto Rico, The Philippines (was), Cuba (was), California (was) and Alaska.

26. # MOAA life memberon 29 Jul 2009 at 2:06 pm

    i would love to have seen a continuing uproar such as this with the GWB election results in FL (both times). i was there and the election fraud and tampering was on a grand scale. so are these guys trying to get the Supreme Court to validate another election?

    wouldn’t it be nice if the critics would spend as much time getting factual information as they do spouting off? but some people just trust whatever they hear, no matter what the source. or they like to feel important by attracting attention to themselves, no matter how they do it.

27. # JEFFREY C. BERRYon 29 Jul 2009 at 2:16 pm

    1. The Panama Canal Zone was not part of the United States of America, therefore it is QUESTIONABLE if McCain was a “natural born citizen.”

    2. If Barak Obama’s was born in Hawaii why wasn’t the complete birth record produced rather than the front cover sheet?

    For my money neither was qualified to be President until it was clearly established that they were NATURAL BORN CITIZENS.

28. # JAMES HOLLANDon 29 Jul 2009 at 2:19 pm

    As per my previous entry: If these steps are not accomplished, the Child will NOT be considered an American, for there will NOT be any proof once one of the American Parents expires and his or her Golden thread of life breaks, except during Birth. There is an Oath that must be taken by the parents as well.

    At age 18 it is the Childs responsibility to declare they are rid of their Dual Citizenship of the other Country and swear allegiance to the USA.

    France refuses to recognize that though.

29. # Charles Walterson 29 Jul 2009 at 2:28 pm

    Back to the original issue. The oath of office is to defend the constitution of the United States. The issue of President Obama’s birth right is for the courts and has nothing to do with a military officer or enlisted person making a unilateral decision not to follow the orders of those military superiors appointed over them.

    Military orders are not signed by the President. They are signed by officers in the individual’s military service. Disobediance of a lawful order issued by a superior officer is punishable under the UCMJ. (check out the words on an officer’s promotion certificate). Missing a movement is missing a movement regardless of reason. If Major Cook has a reserve contract that authorized him to withdraw from his orders, great for him and bad on the Army for allowing such a contract clause to exist. Frankly, I would involuntarily bring Major Cook on active duty with orders to the combat zone regardless of his personal bias toward the President. If he refused, let the UCMJ dictate the next actions.

    As far as I am concerned, Major Cook needs to be separated from the military service for the good of the service.

    LtCol U. S. Marine Corps -Retired

30. # Basil Burrellon 29 Jul 2009 at 2:35 pm

    I don’t know why MOAA dignifies the claim of the President’s illegitimate election by conspriacy kooks by publishing their
    rants.

31. # Charles Walterson 29 Jul 2009 at 2:36 pm

    For clarification – an officer in the military services is appointed by the President with the advise and consent of the Senate. Further, the certificate states: “And this officer is to observe and follow such orders adn directions from time to time, as may be given by the President of the United States of America, or other superior officres acting in accordance with the laws of the United States of America.”

    The orders to active duty are issued by the individual’s military service and signed by superior officer (or at their direction).

32. # Gaylon Kingon 29 Jul 2009 at 2:40 pm

    The child born Barak H. Obama in Hawaii may not be the man that is serving as president. That child was taken outside the US for many years. Has a DNA test been conducted to establish that he is in fact the child born in Hawaii?

33. # Charles Walterson 29 Jul 2009 at 2:41 pm

    Gaylon King – you have got to be kidding!!!!

34. # Stanley Roeon 29 Jul 2009 at 2:44 pm

    Please send these conspiracy theorists to the supply room to get a hundred yards of firing line.
    They won’t suspect a thing and, afterwards, won’t get the joke.

35. # Richard Sweaton 29 Jul 2009 at 2:58 pm

    Obama and McCain were not the first to be challenged on where they were born. Andrew Jackson has been continually investigated by historians as to whether he was born aboard an immigrant Irish ship on the high sea, or in the Waxhaw Dist. of SC.
    There are two curious facts that have never been settled. If he was in fact born in the terriroty of the United States, then he would have only been 10 years old to have ridden as a dispatch rider in the American Revolution…..to young of an age to have served in this position. If he had been born at sea, then he would have been 13 years old and acceptable as a dispatch rider.
    The last curious fact is that he was a member of the Ancient Order of Hibernians….documented with his signature and certificate. You had to have been born on Irish soil or Irish possession (such as the ship his parents lwere on) to qualify for membership.
    No birth records, or newspaper announcements existed then, and birth was proven by family bibles and word of mouth.
    It was a charge never proven either way during those times.

36. # Gilbert Rayon 29 Jul 2009 at 3:53 pm

    After retiring from the Navy I worked for the NC Employment Security Commission working primarily with farm workers which included many legal and sometimes illegal workers. Whether legal or illegal any child born of these parents, regardless of the parents citizenship, born in the United States are United States citizens-period. End of Story. It doesn’t matter whether the parents take that child to Mexico, Honduras, or Egypt the next day the child is a US citizen. Frankly I’ve never seen more than a “front page” to my birth certificate so maybe since my soldier father (U.S. Army) took me to Japan when I was six makes me a Japanese citizen. I’m being silly but most of the arguments about the Presidents citizenship and election and well as the former Presidents term in office are more a “tempest in a teapot” than anything based in reality.

37. # Billon 29 Jul 2009 at 4:15 pm

    I am not a birther, and I don’t lay awake at night over this issue, but I don’t like what I see. Americans deserve a clear answer to the question of any persons “right” to run for any high public office. I have a right to hear clear questions asked and see the clear evidence presented (source documents) that supports either side. I have watched this controversy as someone interested in seeing one side or the other “prove” their case. It is a complex case: where was he born, did his parents meet their own constitutional qualification requirements, did he renounce any dual citizenship as required, did he take an oath of alligence when it was required, did he ever claim he was a citizen of another country…etc., etc. If it is so clear and easy to prove his status, why wouldn’t any rational, honest person (especially one with supreme authority) just produce the documents and stand and answer the questions directly. I become more suspicious, not less, when one side resorts to calling the other side racists, conspirators, or traitors, rather than just producing the clear proof (not just affidavits of second hand witnesses) and standing up to answer the questions. Even a President is not exempt from this obligation to “We the People”. Until this occurs, how can anyone judge Major Cooks actions?

38. # JAMES HOLLANDon 29 Jul 2009 at 4:22 pm

    For JEFFREY C. BERRY:

    The Panama Canal ZONE WAS a Territory of the USA and they actually had delegates to the respective Political Conventions. The Canal Zone was Terrritory, whether you whish to believe it or not. We just have a country full of ignorant people now due to the efforts by the left at distotring our history over the last 30-40 years. This is why my Daughter-in-law home Schooled my Grandkids. I have had a lot of time in Panama 13 trips and I know a lot of people. If you want to learn about Panama go for a visit and talk with the OLD FOLKS down there. They will tell you we stole it fair and square and they wish we wered stgill there for the Chinesed are runnning the Canal Zone now

39. # Eleanor Kutchoodonon 29 Jul 2009 at 4:42 pm

    I am a retired ANC 2 tour VietNam veteran. The only thing that matters, to me at least, is that President Obama was carried in the womb of and delivered to an American citizen. Good for her that she successfully pursued her high degree of education through hard work and a supportive American Mom and Dad. Also, however he obtained his own higher education required the desireable character traits shown in his hard work, perseverance and ingenuity. Sounds like the mother instilled those in her son. Those are traits that are desireable in any successful leader. Allow him to do the best job he can do for us as our duly elected President….Thank You….emk

40. # JAMES HOLLANDon 29 Jul 2009 at 4:56 pm

    TO: MOAA life member

    Said > i would love to have seen a continuing uproar such as this with the GWB election results in FL (both times). i was there and the election fraud and tampering was on a grand scale.

    Response:

    I take exception to the above statement; Florida happens to have had the most honest election in the entire United States and it is pretty darn hard tamper with a fool proof system that was implemented in 2004. The punch Card system was eliminated and the problems with it were mostly by the illegal aliens from Israel, Haiti, Cuba, Venezuela, Panama, Columbia, Guatemala, Dominican Republic, Bahamas, Honduras and Mexico not to mention the rest of the “WORLD” and Felons were allowed to vote in the lower 4 counties (Palm Beach, Miami – Dade, Broward, and Monroe). Ran by Democrats…

    In Central Florida, Brevard County it was discovered 4 years after the First Election, over 5,800 Canadians, New Yorkers and New Jersey Folks had also voted in our election. The ones from NJ and NY had also voted in their respective home sates and voted again here which is illegal for this is not their home except from November to February. Only 3 were even challenged after the fact and they said they had been voting like this for over 25 years. All voted Democrat believe it or not, “unfortunately” not a single Republican voted both places. This can be confirmed.

    So yes there was fraud – by the Democrats.

41. # Jim Daly, LCDR, USCGR (Ret.)on 29 Jul 2009 at 5:03 pm

    It has been noted that it’s better to be silent and thought a fool, than to open up your mouth and remove all doubt. There are a hell of a lot more fools contributing to mooablogs.org than I would have ever guessed.

42. # Christopher Thompsonon 29 Jul 2009 at 5:06 pm

    In any event, this president has 3 1/2 years left in office; his actions so far ensure even a weak Republican opponent will defeat his re-election bid with ease, so everyone calm down. The countdown has begun.

43. # Rick Roitmanon 29 Jul 2009 at 5:25 pm

    what really scares me is that there are members of this organization who buy what these nuts are selling…maybe moaa needs to find a vendor for tin foil hats…i think they would be a big seller.

44. # Matthew LoFiegoon 29 Jul 2009 at 5:29 pm

    I wouldn’t put the members of MOAA into that camp at all. This blog is open to all, as are comments. MOAA members will usually identify themselves but they don’t have to.

    In other words, this is an open discussion and comments are not all coming from MOAA members.

45. # Silason 29 Jul 2009 at 5:40 pm

    FactCheck.org is NOT non-partisan.

    FactCheck is supported by The Annenberg Foundation – yes, he same Annenberg Foundation who established the “Chicago Annenberg Challenge”, or CAC, a hundred-million-dollar education foundation, according to the group’s own archived records. And yes again, in 1995 Obama was appointed as the CAC’s first chairman. And yes again, Bill Ayers (the unrepentant Weathermen terrorist leader William (Bill) Ayers) (also remember Ayers and his cohorts bombed the Pentagon) who served as co-chairman of the Chicago School Reform Collaborative, one of the two operational arms of the CAC, from its formation in 1995 until 2000. “Ayers founded CAC and was its guiding spirit. No one would have been appointed the CAC chairman without his approval,” Kurtz writes in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122212856075765367.html.

    For more details see:
    Fact-checking FactCheck.org
    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=26122
    and
    Obama worked closely with terrorist Bill Ayers
    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=76022
    and
    The groups Obama kept off his résumé
    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78106

    Also, this from the article Fact-checking FactCheck.org:
    “Those attacking the credibility of the swiftboat vets are citing a supposedly impartial, unbiased, non-partisan report on the Annenberg Foundation-supported FactCheck.org site as evidence their claims are bogus.

    What I found there is a one-sided, biased report that seems to set out with one purpose – to undermine the legitimate assertions of some 250 sincere Vietnam veterans who believe with all their hearts John Kerry is a sinister fraud unworthy of being considered as a legitimate candidate for the presidency. …”

    In other words, when it comes to politics and especially Obama, FactCheck.org is completely biased and unreliable.

46. # Unreconstructedon 29 Jul 2009 at 6:08 pm

    Did Barack H. Obama ever register for the Draft?

47. # Jim Reidon 29 Jul 2009 at 7:58 pm

    Does anyone remember the subject?

48. # TKon 29 Jul 2009 at 8:56 pm

    Well, that’s 20 minutes of my life I’ll never get back. Look forward and not back, or you’ll step out into traffic and get hit by a truck.

49. # HBon 29 Jul 2009 at 9:27 pm

    Thank you, TK. That sums up my feelings after having read this string. Birthers are as bad as those who are spreading the word that healthcare reform is to kill old people.

50. # JACK ADAMSon 29 Jul 2009 at 10:13 pm

    Well, I don’t know the Major or whether his challenge is sincere or not–but it certainly appears to me that he just needs either an excuse not to be deployed or he wants publicity or both. By the way, while he is arguing over whether he should be deployed while thousands of courageous military personnel are giving their all in current conflicts , which were started by another administration for which he obviously does have a problem with the legitimacy of their presidency.

51. # Mary Hares Franklinon 30 Jul 2009 at 12:36 am

    It is distressing to me to see so many military people and associated people who believe the arrant nonsense about the President’s legitimacy based on made-up stuff about his birth and birthplace.

    I am convinced that a goodly portion of this is spiteful, and based on a dismay that a non-white person became the President.

    It is such a betrayal of American core values.

52. # DogFoxon 30 Jul 2009 at 1:07 am

    That you have chosen to give this matter the status of “controversy” and include it as a topic of “News Exchange” equivalent to Defense spending and the G.I. Bill will likely give me pause when it’s time to renew my MOAA subscription of 30-odd years duration.

53. # MAJ GSon 30 Jul 2009 at 3:08 am

    Quote “So he volunteered to go on active duty AFTER agreeing to be part of Dr. Orly’s lawsuit. This smells a lot like a setup to me.”

    That doesn’t invalidate the root point: BHO is not a documented citizen. BHO doesn’t qualify for security clearance in any way excpet by election. Facts and emotion never reconcile, and the argument on behalf of BHO is emotional, not backed by facts.

    I am a Regular Army Officer and I dispute his legal status as POTUS… I just have not received any orders that I can challenge, yet. I will not blindly go along with the left wing hyper-conspiracy to change this country by deciet and polictical lies. They never win when they run on what they believe, so they must manipulate and decieve.

    I am disappointed at this MOAA weak BHO political ad.

54. # Harold Estepon 30 Jul 2009 at 7:58 am

    Maj GS: I believe that should be ‘right wing hyper-conspiracy’. And the word ‘deciet’ is misspelled. And as far as you challenging orders, I hope you do. Then your military superiors can court-marial you for sedition. An action they should take against the coward to which MOAA refers.

55. # R. Phillipson 30 Jul 2009 at 8:11 am

    What is truly frightening is that people so gullible as to swallow these conspiracy theories, so misguided as to undermine their own units and their own country, and so stupid and lazy that they cannot do a little research to determine the truth for themselves, are actually getting promoted into the field grades.

    Here are the requirements for being BORN as a US citizen. Obama makes the grade.

    1) You are born in the US, including Puerto Rico, Guam, and the US Virgin Islands. It does not matter who your parents are. Ever heard of anchor babies? (Obama meets this test – born in the US State of Hawaii)

    2) You were born abroad to two US citizens, and at least ONE of them lived in the US at some point in his/her life.

    3) You were born abroad to ONE US citizen, who lived in the US at least 10 years previously, 5 of which were after age 14. (Even if Obama were not born inside the US, he would meet this test of citizenship, through his Kansas-born and US-raised mother… she had lived ALL her life in the US at the time he was born… and was IN the US when he was born… go back to item #1).

    Birthers, you have no case. Go back to trying to prove the earth is flat, or rides on the back of a giant turtle, or the other worthy theories that deserve your attention.

56. # MOAA Mbron 30 Jul 2009 at 9:07 am

    Just a few question for my own edification. Would appreciate hearing from anyone that wants to clear this up for me.

    It is my understanding that Obama’s mother, at the age of 16, was to young to confer Hawaiian citizenship to her son. Secondly, his passport to travel to Iran had to be Indonesian which would certainly have relevant information on it as would his Columbia school records which would show that he got funded as a foreign student and would showl his religion. Since we can’t hold dual citizenship, somewhere along his myisterious trail there must be proof of his giving up his Indonesion citizenship. Whose paying to muzzle all this info?

57. # lee asadoorianon 30 Jul 2009 at 10:29 am

    WestPoint78 said it best. This Cook is a grandstanding clown who isn’t anymore of a American patriot than Putin. He has an agenda and will use any means, even pretending to volunteer to deploy to a war zone, to further his cause.

58. # James Mellema, Life Memberon 30 Jul 2009 at 11:08 am

    I have to agree with DogFox. This isn’t a controversy its a wild fantasy. To legitimize it also makes me question whether I should continue as a member. This is an subject best relegated to the same dustbin that contains the GWB discharge from the Texas Air Guard, or the swiftboating of Senator Kerry.

    It reflects badly that this organization should even mention it, and even worse that Officers with a mandate to support the Constitution should be involved. President Obama’s election has been finalized and legitimized by the Congress and an oath was administered (twice, by the way) by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Like it or not its true. Any argument at this stage are political garbage and should be relegated to the heap.

    Color me embarrassed and distressed that fellow officers should get involved in this subject. Its no wonder we as a society are in so much difficulty.

59. # Stephen Purvineon 30 Jul 2009 at 11:46 am

    In the e-mail shown at the beginning of this page – CALL TO THE MILITARY the writer says “In case you haven’t figured it out yet, it WILL be the MILITARY that comes to the rescue of our country. Only YOU can stand up against this monster.” This sounds like a call for a coup d’etat by the military. Dangerous statements and not a direction we should go.

60. # Matthew LoFiegoon 30 Jul 2009 at 11:52 am

    James, DogFox, this blog is ancillary to the real work MOAA does on your behalf on the hill to work for benefits and is a product of our Member Service Center, not MOAA leadership. I had my doubts (serious doubts) about even broaching the subject, but once it went viral and we started receiving inquiries about Major Cook, I looked into the case to see what the facts are. The email received and referenced in the article is of a particularly dangerous variety because it asks others to join a cause and pass the word along without giving the full information of the case.

    Wild fantasy it is, I agree, but it is one that is, unfortunately, catching the attention of a lot of people. To present additional information does not legitimize the cause, it points out the insanity of it. And you can see in the replies that no amount of evidence can suffice. They ignore the evidence or move the goalposts.

    Having subjects like this discussed on this blog allows our lobbyists to focus on more important items like health care and pay. This is simply an information and discussion platform.

61. # DogFoxon 30 Jul 2009 at 1:02 pm

    While I concede your point, Matthew, I’m convinced that the “birther” insanities are in fact orchestrated as distractions from discussion of things that matter. Moreover, they would not likely have become “viral” were President Obama a white man, and I say that as a white 74-year-old male.

    As for orchestration, consider the statement by Representative Trent Franks, [R-AZ] near the end [3:23] of the following YouTube clip:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gN-rxJFvJ8&feature=related

    Rep Franks is no admirer of the President, but to his credit, he was forthright in appraising his birth record. In part Rep Franks said that “…when the information came to us to put this in question…” he had his staff research the facts and dismissed the notion that they were questionable.

    None of the pundits I saw replay this clip on TV seem to have picked up on the fact that the birther business was apparently distributed — presumably to Republicans in congress — as a matter to be “put in question.”

62. # Jim Reidon 30 Jul 2009 at 2:54 pm

    MOAA Mbr,

    Nothing in the definition of citizenship relates to the individual’s mother’s age. She would not, at any rate, conferred “Hawaiian” citizenship, but U. S. citizenship

    The suggestion that it was illegal to travel to Iran on a U. S. passport is made up. Last I heard, btw, it was supposedly Pakistan to which he travelled “illegally.”

    President Obama was never funded as a foreign student.

    Mr. Obama has never been proven to have any allegiance to Indonesia; therefore, there was nothing to give up.

    Who said anyone was muzzling anything?

    Please check every piece of email you receive against the on-line databases. And no, they don’t work for Obama.

63. # Matthew LoFiegoon 30 Jul 2009 at 6:29 pm

    Very interesting DogFox. Interesting enough to update the article and reprint it. Thank you.

64. # Daveon 30 Jul 2009 at 6:52 pm

    It’s over, you nutty birthers. Congress unanimously passed a resolution that acknowledged Hawaii as the President’s birthplace.
    Find a new conspiracy.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203609204574316472642745120.html

65. # Chaplain Z (MOAA Life Member)on 30 Jul 2009 at 7:03 pm

    Good heavens. I hope that the majority of the ‘Birthers’ writing in are not actually MOAA members, as it would say something frightening about the state of our military. The most conservative men and women I knew while on active duty (and I’m a retiree) weren’t wing-nuts… some of these folk I wouldn’t trust with loaded weapons, and even less in leadership positions.

    Major Cook had a moral obligation to the men and women of his command. Whether or not the CinC was born in Hawaii or on Mars (I shouldn’t say that– it’ll be on talk radio in a week), Major Cook’s moral obligation remained unchanged. He volunteered to deploy, he was placed in the billet, and the men and women of his command depended upon him, upon his honor and respect for duty.

    The person signing the Major’s orders to deploy was not the CinC. Major Cook received his orders from some deployment officer, ranking well below CinC. The person issuing the legal orders was, so far as we all know, a “natural-born citizen” (although, as one writer points out, there may not have been any DNA tests to prove that the deployment officer was really who he said he was!). As a reservist, Major Cook’s had the legal right to decline those orders up until deploying; however, since he had volunteered for the orders, and his unit depended on him, his moral duty was to obey the orders of his superior officer.

    Given what appears to be Major Cook’s feelings about morals, duty, and his responsibility to the troops he would command, I suppose that we should all be grateful that he chose not to go… for their sake. I sincerely hope, for our nation’s sake, that this man never again puts on the uniform of the United States military. I would not trust him to lead American sodiers in harm’s way.

    Note to James Holland: Based on your letter, I hope your daughter-in-law didn’t allow you to help home-school your grandchildren in spelling or grammar.

66. # Cdr G.J.Pounds(USCG-Ret)on 30 Jul 2009 at 8:32 pm

    ” (Our) Legislative System – The Supreme Court Judges” – should (while putting their political party appointments aside) rapidly direct themselves to the issue of -

    IS OR IS NOT OBAMA A LEGAL PRESIDENT.

67. # Matthew LoFiegoon 30 Jul 2009 at 9:24 pm

    Chaplain, if I’m reading the supplied emails correctly, not many MOAA members would be classified as pro-birther, at least in this thread.

68. # Wile E. Quixoteon 30 Jul 2009 at 10:04 pm

    I really wish that all of the people who are questioning Barack Obama’s birth certificate would just come out and say [modedit]:”He’s an African American and we don’t want one as president”[end edit] Really, just come out and say that you’re a bunch of pig-ignorant racists who are angry about the fact that the president is a Democrat and is black. It’s not that this would make me have any less contempt for your stupidity and racism, but at least you’d be honest.

    As far as the supposed “long form” birth certificate could someone tell me what this is? My birth certificate, issued by the State of Texas, looks pretty much like the one that Barack Obama was issued by the State of Hawaii, a scanned copy of which is posted online at snopes.com. It contains my name, the names of my parents and the place and time of my birth. This birth certificate, or at least a notarized copy of it, was sufficient for me to enlist in the Army, be cleared for officer training, get two security clearances and get a US passport without anyone questioning it or demanding that I produce some super duper, long form director’s cut edition of my birth certificate. I can only assume that this is because

    a) I’m white
    b) I was born in Texas
    c) all of the above.

69. # Wallace Hoffmanon 30 Jul 2009 at 11:16 pm

    I do not know where President Obama was born. Neither does anyone else, so far his long-form birth certificate with signature of attending physician and hospital of birth is concerned. He certainly shows gross disrespect to all American citizens and to the United States Constitution in failing to make public his place of birth. The United States Supreme Court has been cowed to utter silence in its failure to consider the case(s) presented. It was the Supreme Court’s duty to require certification under the Constitution before the President could be inaugurated. My long-form birth certificate was required before I could be commissioned an officer in the U. S. Air Force, before I could receive a Top Secret security clearance, before some driver’s licenses could be issued, and before I could receive Social Security beneits.

70. # Paul Stokholmon 31 Jul 2009 at 12:47 am

    MOAA,
    You stated “While conspiracy theorists have been attempting to prove that President Obama is not eligible to be president since he announced his candidacy, the issue of his place of birth has been repeatedly debunked.
    Then you said “As always, the commentary is not meant to represent any official position of MOAA.
    That is doubletalk! You should be ashamed of yourself. If you don’t have a position, don’t say the issue of his birth has been debunked!
    It has not been debunked! Obama is a Fraud and a liar. Why do you think he will not release any of his records — he obviously is trying to hide something that he believes will blow his cover.
    Maj Cook is a Patriot! The sooner this fake POTUS is found out the better!

71. # Matthew LoFiegoon 31 Jul 2009 at 6:34 am

    MOAA, as a non-profit entity, can not take official positions on certain topics outside of our charter. Challenging the authority of our Commander in Chief would certainly fall outside of our scope. This blog, however, is dedicated to reporting on the facts and the issues based on all evidence available in an attempt to answer frequent member questions.
    
    We welcome all comments and points of view here, but the evidence shows that President Obama is a US citizen and eligible for the office he holds. If you disagree with that assessment, that is your right as an American.

72. # Fred Weberon 31 Jul 2009 at 9:23 am

    I look at it this way: The State Department is the ultimate arbiter of who is and is not a U.S. citizen — they’re in charge of issuing passports and looking at birth certificates and processing immigrants for naturalization, etc. And Obama appointed Hilary Clinton as the Secretary of State. And she got to pick her own staff. And, regardless of her personal feelings about Obama, her people hate his guts from back in the Democratic primary campaign. So if there were anything to all this “birther” stuff, they would have gleefully found and exposed it. But nothing has appeared. Conclusion: there’s nothing to find.

73. # Paul Stokholmon 31 Jul 2009 at 2:50 pm

    Matthew, you are wrong! MOAA took a position on the Obama eligibility issue when they stated “the issue of his place of birth has been repeatedly debunked” With this statement they have labeled those of us who question why he has refused all requests for any of his records including his birth certificate, school records, immigration records, etc. and thereby making it obvious that he has something to hide. There are many military members (both active duty and retired) who are questioning Obama’s eligibility including myself, a retired AF LtCol. All the name calling and ridicule aside, I say “Produce the records!”.

74. # Paul Stokholmon 31 Jul 2009 at 3:03 pm

    If anyone is interested in seeing all the documentation on Obama which he is hiding and not allowing to be released go to this website: http://www.obamanotqualified.com/

    Any Obama supporters should honestly ask “Why is Obama unwilling to release these records if he is not trying to hide something!”

75. # Matthew LoFiegoon 01 Aug 2009 at 10:19 am

    Paul, I don’t know how I can explain it beyond what the disclaimer and my comments have say. Battle of the Bilge is a blog that we created to answer as many email questions as possible by having a source members can check forwarded emails before sending them to us for verification. Since I’ve been investigating and responding to these types of questions from MOAA members for a decade, we tried something new.
    
    The analysis and statements made on this blog are the product of MSC research, not MOAA leadership positions on issues. All I care about is the truth, and the truth is that this issue has been debunked several times.

76. # Silason 01 Aug 2009 at 4:05 pm

    Many seem to be poorly informed on the constitutional issue involved with Obama’s eligibility to be President. The primary issue is whether Obama is an Article II “natural born Citizen,” not whether he was born in the U.S. When drafting the eligibility requirements for the President, the Founding Fathers distinguished between “Citizen” and “natural born Citizen” in Article II, sec. 1, cl. 5 and in Articles I, III, and IV of the Constitution. Per the Founders, while Senators and Representatives can be just “citizens,” after 1789 the President must be a “natural born Citizen.” The Founders wanted to assure that the Office of President and Commander in Chief of the Military, a non-collegial and unique and powerful civil and military position, was free of all foreign influence and that its holder have sole and absolute allegiance, loyalty, and attachment to the U.S. The “natural born Citizen” clause was the best way for them to assure this.

    The distinction between “citizen” and “natural born Citizen” is based on the law of nations which became part of our national common law. According to that law as explained by Vattel in his, The Law of Nations, a “citizen” is simply a member of the civil society. To become a “citizen” is to enter into society as a member thereof. On the other hand, a “natural born Citizen” is a child born in the country of two citizen parents who have already entered into and become members of the society. Vattel also tells us that it is the “natural born Citizen” who will best preserve and perpetuate the society. This definition of the two distinct terms has been adopted by many United States Supreme Court decisions. Neither the 14th Amendment (which covers only “citizens” who are permitted to gain membership in and enter American society by either birth on U.S. soil or by naturalization and being subject to the jurisdiction of the United States), nor Congressional Acts, nor any case law has ever changed the original common law definition of a “natural born Citizen.” Congressional Acts and case law, like the 14th Amendment, have all dealt with the sole question of whether a particular person was going to be allowed to enter into and be a member of American society and thereby be declared a “citizen.” Never having been changed, the original constitutional meaning of a “natural born Citizen” prevails today. It is this definition of “natural born Citizen” which gives the Constitutional Republic the best chance of having a President and Commander in Chief of the Military who has sole and absolute allegiance, loyalty, and attachment to the United States. By satisfying all conditions of this definition, all other avenues of acquiring other citizenships and allegiances (jus soli or by the soil and jus sanguinis or by descent) are cut off. I call this state of having all other means of acquiring other citizenships or allegiances cut off unity of citizenship which is what the President must have at the time of birth.

    Obama’s father was born in Kenya when it was a British colony. When he came to America, he was probably here on a student visa and he never became a legal resident of the U.S. or an immigrant. He had no attachment to the U.S. other than to study in its prestigious educational institutions which he did for the sole purpose of returning to Kenya and applying his learning there for the best interests of that nation. In fact, when he completed his studies, he did return to Kenya and worked for its government.

    If Obama was born in Hawaii, at best, he is a U.S. “citizen” under the 14th Amendment and federal statute. But he is not a “natural born Citizen” under the Constitution, for at the time of his birth under the British Nationality Act 1948 his father was a British subject and Obama himself through descent was also a British subject. Obama has himself admitted to the controlling effect of the British Nationality Act 1948 on his birth. Additionally, in 1963, both his father and Obama also became Kenyan citizens when Kenya obtained its independence from Great Britain.

    Obama was born with multiple allegiances (at birth both U.S., if born in the U.S., and British, and also acquired Kenyan citizenship at age 2). Obama also obtained Indonesian citizenship when he was adopted by his step-father in Indonesia at age 6. The Founders would not have allowed such a person who was not born with sole allegiance, loyalty, and attachment to the United States to be President and most importantly, Commander in Chief of the Military. We the People have too many “natural born Citizens” in our country, the largest group of citizens by far, from whom to pick to risk jeopardizing the best interests of the United States by allowing a person born with conflicting allegiances and loyalties to be President and Commander in Chief of our Military. There simply is no sound reason for risking America’s national security, welfare, and ultimate preservation by allowing a non-”natural born Citizen” to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military. To permit it is a violation of Article II of our Constitution, the supreme law of our land.

    For more information see:
    http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/07/what-to-tell-birthers-bashers.html

77. # Linda Allenon 02 Aug 2009 at 6:08 am

    I am appalled at what I’ve been reading here. What has happened to the honest, patriotic, level-headed (i.e., sane) officer corps I used to serve with? That MOAA would give these treasonous nutballs a forum in which to spout off is very disappointing. I will not be renewing my membership.

78. # Matthew LoFiegoon 03 Aug 2009 at 8:20 am

    Honestly, I think the honest, patriotic, sane officer corps has shone through in this debate. Major Cook has been chastised vehemently by his fellow officers and the MOAA members that have posted here have treated the movement with the respect it deserves – derision. That we gave the ‘Bither’ movement a platform to say what they will has only really become a spotlight for how ridiculous their arguments are. Especially the one right above you. Silas, that website is just sad and reminds me of other sites that teach people who believe in things they know are wrong to try and justify reasonable and valid criticism.