Yesterday we noted the odd case of Major Stefan Cook, an Army reservist ordered to Afghanistan. He had brought suit claiming his orders were unlawful because Obama did not meet the Constitutional requirement for the Presidency, namely, being a natural-born citizen.
Today, the always interesting World Net Daily breathlessly describes an odd development:
A U.S. Army Reserve major from Florida scheduled to report for to Afghanistan within days has had his military orders revoked after arguing he should not be required to serve under a president who has not proven his eligibility for office.
His attorney, Orly Taitz, confirmed to WND the military has rescinded his impending deployment orders.
"We won! We won before we even arrived," she said with excitement. "It means that the military has nothing to show for Obama. It means that the military has directly responded by saying Obama is illegitimate – and they cannot fight it. Therefore, they are revoking the order!"
The Confederate Yankee has an idea:
I have no ready explanation for why the military would rescind his deployment orders, unless they plan to keep him stateside to begin a disciplinary investigation against him. Frankly, for the sake of our nation, I hope this is the case.
Because if the Pentagon allows soldiers to simply declare Obama an an illegitimate Command in Chief—as the article would have you believe—it would seem to set a precedent that would lead to chaos in the military, allowing service members to question all orders for the executive branch. It would be anarchy.
Maybe. The Ledger-Enquirer of Georgia has a more prosaic yet puzzling take:
U.S. Army Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook, the reserve soldier who says he shouldn't have to go to Afghanistan because he believes Barack Obama was never eligible to be president, has had his deployment orders revoked, Army officials said.
Lt. Col. Maria Quon, U.S. Army Public Affairs Officer, U.S. Army Human Resources Command-St. Louis, said Tuesday evening, Cook was no longer expected to report Wednesday to MacDill Air Force Base in Florida for mobilization to active duty.
Earlier today, Quon said Cook submitted a formal written request to Human Resources Command-St. Louis on May 8, 2009 volunteering to serve one year in Afghanistan with Special Operations Command, U.S. Army Central Command, beginning July 15, 2009. The soldier's orders were issued on June 9, Quon said.
"A reserve soldier who volunteers for an active duty tour may ask for a revocation of orders up until the day he is scheduled to report for active duty," Quon said.
She added that there is an administrative process to request revocation of orders. As of this afternoon, Cook had not asked for his orders to be revoked, Quon said. She could not say why the soldier's orders were pulled today by 3 p.m. CDT.
"Because of the Privacy Act I couldn't go into it," Quon said.
Hmm - Cook apparently did not follow the standard procedure for un-volunteering, but it looks as if someone figured a lawsuit was a reasonable substitute for a formal request to have one's orders revoked.
MORE: Apparently Keith Olbermann trumpeted the emerging lefty screaming point that Cook is a coward for refusing to go to Afghanistan. The obvious alternative - that he has deliberately created this situation in order to embarrass Obama - seems to have eluded them. [Greyhawk at Mudville Gazette essentially pins down this angle.]
AS TO THE BIRTHER CONSPIRACIES: I have no idea what the current state of play with the birther conspiracies might be (and I am not sure I want to find out), but the I will reiterate the one idea I might be able to pass off as original - Obama's mother and maternal grandparents would not have been cooking the paperwork on Obama's citizenship status in 1961 in order to preserve his Presidential viability in 2008; they would have been doing so in order to enhance their own chances in a custody scuffle with the Kenyan father. In the event of a nasty split, how might the white Ms. Dunham have expected to fare battling a Kenyan family in a Kenyan court for her right to raise a black Kenyan baby back in America? Would she have better chances if the baby were a US citizen?
Obviously, I don't know what actually happened. But it is screamingly obvious to me (but not Dave Weigel!) that the family had immediate and practical incentives to take the necessary steps to nail down Baby Barack's citizenship in 1961, truthfully or otherwise.
To which I should add - regular commenter Thomas Collins opines that, since the Congress accepted the results of the Electoral College, any Constitutional impediment has been waived. Hmm, but what about in 2012?
And Cecil Turner sets us to thinking:
That said, I can't imagine what could possibly be on the birth certificate that would be germane to the case. If he was in fact born in Hawaii (as seems nearly certain), then AFAICT he's a natural-born citizen. The reluctance to produce the document seems very odd, but irrelevant to that case. If I were forced to speculate, I'd guess there's something else embarassing there (e.g., father "unknown").
Hmm - if the Dunhams were plotting to strengthen their own custody claim and diminish that of Barack Sr., asking the registrar to record "father unknown" might be a logical step. Years later it would look bad, following the success of Dreams From My Father, but we are all being exhorted to Move On.
MODEST PROGRESS: In his comments section Dave Weigel implicitly accedes to the notion that the Dunhams had a powerful motive to fudge Obama's citizenship back in 1961 and tries to change both the subject and the burden of proof. My follow-up comment is being blocked there, at least for now. [Now I am getting through.}