Posted on

US Army doctor who claims Barack Obama is a Kenyan-born President will choose jail over Afghanistan

Birther US army doctor Lt Colonel Terrence Lakin after the court martial. He faces up to three and a half years in prison. Photograph: Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images

A US army doctor faces up to three and a half years in jail after he was found guilty by a court martial yesterday of willfully missing a flight when deployed to Afghanistan because he doubts Barack Obama‘s right to be president. The trial of Lt Col Terrence Lakin was a rallying point for the “birther” movement, conspiracy theorists who believe Obama has fraudulently taken over the presidency and is not a “natural born citizen”. Lakin posted a video on YouTube saying he had no choice “but the distasteful one of inviting my own court martial”.

On Tuesday he pleaded guilty to one of the two charges – failing to follow an order to meet with a superior and failure to report for duty at Fort Campbell, Kentucky. He pleaded not guilty to the second count, relating to missing a flight to take him to the military base, but was convicted of that charge by the military jury.

Doubts about Obama’s legitimacy to be president have swirled around the further lunatic fringes of conservatism and the right-wing blogosphere since he became a serious contender for the White House in 2008. Prominent “birthers”, such as Orly Taitz, a California-based lawyer, claim that Obama was born in Kenya and that the birth certificate that Hawaiian officials possess showing that he was born in Honolulu on 4 August 1961 is a fake.

Lakin had hoped to turn his court martial into a trial over Obama’s legitimacy, but in September a military judge ruled that the president’s birth certificate was not an appropriate area for the court to consider.

At his hearing, Lakin told the jury that he had been “praying and soul searching. I believed there was a question that needs to be answered to ensure a valid chain of command. But I had asked every question, done everything else I could short of disobeying orders, without success.”

(http://www.guardian.co.uk)

Share
Posted on

Why should it Matter, in any Case?

The recent debate over the religion of President Barack Obama is not new to most readers. Some say he is Muslim,others ask how can he. Some even think he is agnostic. Obama says  he is a Christian, and I always thought that was good enough.

The President recently said he became a  “Christian by choice”. When I was put into Sunday as a toddler, I was taught that one  becomes a member of a particular faith or religion by choice. I’ve never been taught that once born to parents of particular religion, one is automatically of that faith. Simply put, religion is a choice. If its that simple, why will people not hold the President to the same standards.

Religion is determined by choice, not biology. If Obama was raised by Muslim father and a not-so-religious mother, does that really makes him a muslim? It’s my belief that it’s only politics and race that can make a person miss such a simple premise. Of course both can be very toxic.

I’ve listened to the President talk about religion more often than any President that I’ve seen. (Of course I’ve seen few Presidents.). What is undeniable is the fact that the Presidents shows admirable respect for people of other faith. This is called religious tolerance. Mr Obama does not look down on Islam,  Hinduism, Jainism, Shintoism and Atheism even if that will win him some political capital, as the do-to-please politicians like Newt Gingrich, and Michele Bachmann will do. In my opinion you cannot be a leader in the modern complex world and lack the religion tolerance demonstrated by Mr. Obama. Is such open mindedness not a respect to the principles upon which the American nation was founded?

In any case, what is wrong about one being a Muslim? Any politician who resorts to muslim bashing or ‘islamophobia’  for the reason that a few Muslims have hijacked the Islamic faith to unleash terrorism on humanity has no substance.  Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber, was reportedly raised Catholic and received the sacrament of confirmation (or course I’m not certain about whether he practiced the faith). Will it make sense to blame all Christians or Catholics for the terrible acts he committed? I’m yet to find a politician who will say ‘Yes’.

Share