Today begins the court martial of Lieutenant Colonel Dr. Terry Lakin.

#1

gsvol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2008
Messages
14,179
Likes
9
#1
ScottFactor.com Conservative Blog

"The Constitution matters. The truth matters. For the first time in all my years of service to our great nation, and at great peril to my career and future, I am choosing to disobey what I believe are illegal orders, including an order to deploy to Afghanistan for my second tour of duty there. I will disobey my orders to deploy because I – and I believe all servicemen and women and the American people – deserve the truth about President Obama's constitutional eligibility to the office of the presidency and the commander in chief.

"If he is ineligible, then my orders – and indeed all orders – are illegal because all orders have their origin with the commander in chief as handed down through the chain of command."

“Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney predicts the incoming Republican-controlled House of Representatives will launch an investigation if Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin is convicted in next week's court martial.

… ‘It looks like he's not being treated fairly,’ said McInerney…

‘It's important that he gets a fair trial, which means discovery. Since the Army will not allow that I believe in the final analysis that this will be overturned, but he may have to go to the slammer in Ft. Leavenworth.’"


“I told [Dr. Lakin] that I probably would have advised him differently, but he really had a very important point. He is not a birther. He is a constitutionalist. Now, it shouldn’t be the job of a lieutenant colonel flight surgeon in the U.S. Army to be the constitutionalist. It’s the job of the Congress and the executive agency to do that. But, we’ve had 44 presidents of the United States, Peter, and only one, the current president, has not shown a valid birth certificate.”


“McInerney suggested Lakin is certain to be convicted if the court martial proceeds.

‘The outcome is evident to me that this is a slam dunk,’ said McInerney. ‘They're not going to let him really talk about it. They're avoiding the issue.

‘The way they conduct themselves is going to be extremely important for the follow-on investigation for the House of Representatives,’ added McInerney, who said the House Armed Services Committee could hold hearings to determine whether the military handled the case properly.

‘The smartest thing the Army could do is not to have [the trial],’ said McInerney, who suggested the court should let the case go ‘low profile.’

‘I don't think they're going to do that. They're going to make the mistake of trying him, and then you're going to have a court of record that will condemn them for the way they conducted it.’”

“McInerney held up his own treatment by the trial judge to illustrate the unfairness of the proceedings thus far. Lind has refused to allow McInerney or any other expert witness requested by the defense to testify at Lakin's court martial. She has also refused to permit Lakin to present any evidence or arguments in his own defense that might justify his decision to disobey orders.

‘The judge in this particular case said I do not know enough about the Army to be able to understand the Army's position on the Uniform Code of Military Justice,’ said McInerney, who added he once commanded an army division in Alaska as part of a joint Army-Air Force command.

‘I am intimately familiar with the Uniform Code of Military Justice,’ said McInerney. ‘But you get a judge ... who says that I as a three-star general who had general court martial authority do not know enough about the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Dr. Terry Lakin is not going to get a fair trial in this particular proceeding.’
 
#3
#3
I read the post, but can I get a TL;DR? What did he do to be court marshalled??
 
Last edited:
#6
#6
I read the post, but can I get a TL;DR? What did he do to be court marshalled??

He didn't deploy. It is a missed movement. Would be the same as refusing to deploy on the grounds that the Iraq war was illegal (Lt. Watada) or because one is a "conscientious objector."

Most COs get General Under Other than Honorable conditions discharges.

I don't remember what Watada got, but his trial was not quick.
 
#7
#7
He didn't deploy. It is a missed movement. Would be the same as refusing to deploy on the grounds that the Iraq war was illegal (Lt. Watada) or because one is a "conscientious objector."

Most COs get General Under Other than Honorable conditions discharges.

I don't remember what Watada got, but his trial was not quick.

Thanks. :thumbsup:
 
#9
#9
Doesn't seem to be a good way to end a distinguished career.

Better to break large stones into small ones in the wilderness than to be a slave in the halls of a tyrant.

Hell, he may even be president someday himself.
 
#10
#10
The guy is catering to right wing whack jobs. He is "highly decorated" in the way most REMF officers are.

Anyone who stands by this charade is a whacko.
 
#12
#12
The guy is catering to right wing whack jobs. He is "highly decorated" in the way most REMF officers are.

Anyone who stands by this charade is a whacko.

What do you think of those who stand by the charade in White House??

Benny-Hill.jpg





Guy is in the same classification as the guy who shot up the clinic at Hood. It is what it is.

Or he could be a man with the courage to stand by his convictions.

You comparison is absurd.
 
#14
#14
The guy is catering to right wing whack jobs. He is "highly decorated" in the way most REMF officers are.

He's a doc man, he can't be out there hooking and jabbin'. That said, he's probably got a few achievement medals and an Army comm, a few sea service deployments with an OEF and a GWOT S/E.

If he has a CAB, it wasn't from pulling a trigger. More likely from a mortar landing in his FOB.

I don't see how he doesn't get railroaded, I mean, what did he think was going to happen?

He purposely missed a movement, dictated by his CoC based on authorization from Congress from a previous President.

He is willfully disobeying a lawful order, based solely on the above and unless the court makes a mistake, he won't be using VA benefits in the future.
 
#16
#16
Guy is in the same classification as the guy who shot up the clinic at Hood. It is what it is.

Being that he was a DR. After that the similarities dwindle considerably.

Both should get the punishment they deserve. And both punishments should be very different according to what info is out.
 
#18
#18
I see people like this all the time in my job. They want to keep weird animals, like wild pigs or llamas, in their front yard. They claim to be a sovereign nation unto themselves and so they don't recognize the jurisdiction of the courts (or, of course, the IRS). They live in a nice neighborhood and then go off the deep end and start collecting rusty cans, piling them 30 feet in the air like a fence around their weeded property and when the code enforcement people come out they start babbling at them about all sort of odd theories justifying their refusal to obey the law.

This fellow is welcome to his opinion about Obama. But, the problem is that it is not up to him to decide whether Obama is legitimate. The next thing you know, you'll have people refusing to go where they are assigned because they claim that only Congress can declare war. Or they will argue some technicality in the way that an order is issued, or the way that the chain of command is set up.

They'll claim that since the POTUS can't be POTUS, then all bills signed into law can't be law.

And on and on.

The guy is destined to lose his trial, as he should. And as he must for an ordered society to exist.
 
#19
#19
He's a doc man, he can't be out there hooking and jabbin'. That said, he's probably got a few achievement medals and an Army comm, a few sea service deployments with an OEF and a GWOT S/E.

If he has a CAB, it wasn't from pulling a trigger. More likely from a mortar landing in his FOB.

I don't see how he doesn't get railroaded, I mean, what did he think was going to happen?

He purposely missed a movement, dictated by his CoC based on authorization from Congress from a previous President.

He is willfully disobeying a lawful order, based solely on the above and unless the court makes a mistake, he won't be using VA benefits in the future.

So we should throw the constitutional question out the window??

After all 'following orders' was no defense at Nuremburg and we have odballs like volatile calling for the prosecution of US war crimes, people like that are disappointed that Bush and Cheney havn't been brought up on charges which was discussed at the highest levels of our government and in the lamestream media.
 
#20
#20
I see people like this all the time in my job. They want to keep weird animals, like wild pigs or llamas, in their front yard. They claim to be a sovereign nation unto themselves and so they don't recognize the jurisdiction of the courts (or, of course, the IRS). They live in a nice neighborhood and then go off the deep end and start collecting rusty cans, piling them 30 feet in the air like a fence around their weeded property and when the code enforcement people come out they start babbling at them about all sort of odd theories justifying their refusal to obey the law.

This fellow is welcome to his opinion about Obama. But, the problem is that it is not up to him to decide whether Obama is legitimate. The next thing you know, you'll have people refusing to go where they are assigned because they claim that only Congress can declare war. Or they will argue some technicality in the way that an order is issued, or the way that the chain of command is set up.

They'll claim that since the POTUS can't be POTUS, then all bills signed into law can't be law.

And on and on.

The guy is destined to lose his trial, as he should. And as he must for an ordered society to exist.

Well heck, you left out that they are all teabagging racists!!

I'll bet you've never read Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience?"

My generation did make one advance, we now have an all volunteer military, the federal geovernment can no longer draft citizens to serve under arms, if the next generation can force the federal government to adhere more closely to the constitution then they will indeed be a great generation also.

It's going to be a tall order but I believe they can do it.

As Orwell said; "Telling the truth in a world of universal deceipt is a revolutionary act."

The sum total of your message (characterizaions aside) seems to be:

obama-obey-poster.png


History has shown us that this sort of thinking can be dangerous to any society.

Pajamas Media Where Do Leftists Come From?

How is it possible that sentient human beings, endowed with reason, memory, and foresight by their Creator, or by the evolutionary demiurge, can zealously adopt a political position so contrary to both good sense and common sense — and what is more, remain glued to its premises in the face of all contradictory evidence?

For despite the miserable failure of socialist experiments the world over and from time immemorial, the determined leftist does not budge from his ideological sanctum and will invent every conceivable, or rather inconceivable, excuse to validate the soundness of his principles and justify every subsequent social and political miscarriage these principles bring about.

Substitute 'values' for 'principles' in the last paragraph for accuracy since that seems to be the current buzz word in vogue with leftists and to me seems very apropos since they have no discernable principles that I can perceive.
 
Last edited:
#21
#21
I'll bet you've never read Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience?"

My generation did make one advance, we now have an all volunteer military, the federal geovernment can no longer draft citizens to serve under arms, if the next generation can force the federal government to adhere more closely to the constitution then they will indeed be a great generation also.

It's going to be a tall order but I believe they can do it.

As Orwell said; "Telling the truth in a world of universal deceipt is a revolutionary act."



This is pretty much what every nut out there says when he loses his mind and thinks he's the only one who is right and so he's going to draw a line in the sand, make a point, martyr himself, if need be.

Its a romantic ideal, but in the end its just run away ego.
 
#22
#22
What do you think of those who stand by the charade in White House??

Benny-Hill.jpg







Or he could be a man with the courage to stand by his convictions.You comparison is absurd.

You're kidding, right? This guy is nothing but a ignorant coward
 
#23
#23
This is pretty much what every nut out there says when he loses his mind and thinks he's the only one who is right and so he's going to draw a line in the sand, make a point, martyr himself, if need be.

Its a romantic ideal, but in the end its just run away ego.

That's what the Tories said about the declaration of independence which eventually led to the constitution and the bill of rights and one of, if not the most free and prosperous society in the history of the world.

Socialism is a romantic ideal also but the thing is that it has been a failure each and every time it has been tried yet the constitution (when followed) has been successfurl for well over two hundred years.

Even though socialists will call anyone who mentions the constitution as being a nut, this whole Lakin episode boils down to a constitutional question and even though the sitting judge in this case sidesteps the issue and won't allow any mention of that aspect (even denying expert testimony on the UCMJ), this will eventually find it's way to the halls of congress as well as the supreme court, we can only hope that justice will be done, as spelled out in the US constituion.




You're kidding, right? This guy is nothing but a ignorant coward

Easy for you to say.

Obviously Lakin is neither ignorant nor a coward.

BTW, someone who says 'a ignorant' anything, instead of 'an ignorant' is not qualified to call anyone ignorant.

Is English your native language??

What is your own claim to being a man of courage??
 
Last edited:
#24
#24
That's what the Tories said about the declaration of independence which eventually led to the constitution and the bill of rights and one of, if not the most free and prosperous society in the history of the world.

Socialism is a romantic ideal also but the thing is that it has been a failure each and every time it has been tried yet the constitution (when followed) has been successfurl for well over two hundred years.

Even though socialists will call anyone who mentions the constitution as being a nut, this whole Lakin episode boils down to a constitutional question and even though the sitting judge in this case sidesteps the issue and won't allow any mention of that aspect (even denying expert testimony on the UCMJ), this will eventually find it's way to the halls of congress as well as the supreme court, we can only hope that justice will be done, as spelled out in the US constituion.






Easy for you to say.
Obviously Lakin is neither ignorant nor a coward.

Yes, it is extremely easy for me to say considering my father was a decorated vet of WWII, Korea and Vietnam and served his country for over 25 years.
 
#25
#25
So we should throw the constitutional question out the window??

Deployment to Afghanistan was not an order handed down from Obama. We can get into a discussion on CoC and how it originates with the CiC via the Constitution all we want, but it doesn't alter the fact that Congress has granted approval of this police action to the President.

It is a conundrum, unless you consider that the Constitution says the President shall be CiC. Obama is the President, period. If you think his presidency is unconstitutional, so be it, but it doesn't alter the fact that he was sworn in as President and thusly his order, as President is constitutional until, and only until, his Presidency is determined to be unconstitutional. This has not occurred.

If dude was displeased, he could have resigned his commission. After 17 years, I am quite certain he has exhausted his obligation. Even if he did 4 years at West Point (+8) and 4 years at USUHS (+8) he would still be one year over his obligation.

He did not resign his commission, he instead wanted to make a point in the most inappropriate and irresponsible way possible.

You are also being a bit of a hypocrite here, but as it serves your agenda, I'm sure you don't mind.
 

VN Store



Back
Top