A New Problem By Jeffrey J. Jackson (12/24/04)

Books of Interest

Former United States Army Specialist Michael New is STILL in trouble. He is in trouble for refusing a direct order when on October 10, 1995, he refused to dawn the garb of the United Nations. When soldiers disobey direct orders lawfully given everyone knows that I am the first to stand up and call for the firing squad such as when a group of Army Reservists several months ago refused to go on a delivery mission for reasons that are still clouded in vagaries and contradictions by themselves and family members they contacted.

Everyone that has come here and read what I write knows full well that it takes extraordinary circumstances for me to even consider sparing a soldier that would willful refuse to carry out a direct order death by bullet. It takes proof that the order itself was unlawful such as being ordered to kill a child before his/her parent as an interrogation tactic or some other such barbarism. It takes an order so repulsive to make me second guess the firing squad as punishment that rarely will you ever hear me call for anything else.

But, as fate would have it, Michael New comes along and is put up for court marshal for disobeying a direct order which warrants a second look. It warrants a second look because this man is being put up for court marshal for refusing to wear a baby blue barrette and submit to the control of the United Nations. I stand back and take notice of this case because there are two very good arguments that can be made. The first is why he deserves to be court marshaled for disobeying a direct order and the second is why he does not deserve such a punishment because the order was unlawful.

The first rule of joining the military is that you follow orders. No ifs. No ands. No buts. The ONLY exception to this is, as previously stated, that the order is so abhorrent that the order is in effect unlawful. The military is not a group of people operating under their own free will 99.99% of the time. They are like the Borg from Star Trek. They WILL assimilate you. And you WILL follow orders.

Some will cite, and correctly so, that we also have treaties with the United Nations and their member nations. And these treaties enable us to conduct joint military operations under the banner of the United Nations just like we would with NATO. Americans that dislike the United Nations will cry foul at this because they claim that no United States soldier should ever, ever, ever report to anyone other than an American military officer and ultimately the President of these United States. However, the concept of a “Supreme Commander” is not a new one. During World War II, for example, and leading up to the invasion of Normandy forces from other nations were brought together under General Dwight D. Eisenhower for the assault.

Many complained. But it was necessary to conduct such a massive military operation, cut down on the chain of command and get mobilized and make decisions. I do not have a problem with United States soldiers serving temporarily under the command of commander who flies a different flag so long as, and here is my qualification, their goals are the same as ours. Such as in World War II when we all wanted to see Hitler thrown from power in Europe.

The concept that Michael New should be court marshaled is valid.

However, the other side to this story is where the fly really gets stuck in the ointment. Every soldier that servers this nation takes an oath. The words may change from branch to branch but the oath binds them to defend this nation, these United States, against all enemies be they foreign or domestic.

When we look at the United Nations we see an organizational corruptness that has lead the leadership and member states to be caught dealing with the enemies of our nation. The Secretary General, France, Russia, and others have been caught in bed with Saddam Hussein and taking bribes in exchange for looking the other way and pressuring the United States to agree to lift sanctions. While genocide rages in Africa and Muslims slaughter Christians, the United Nations stood idly by for too long. Years ago in Somalia the United Nations could not even get the proper vehicles to rescue United States Army Rangers doing a job none other of the world’s militaries except maybe the British, Aussies, Italians, Israelis or Spanish special forces could have done.

And the results have been clear. The results have been dead American Soldiers, Christians killed because of their religion, and thousands slaughtered under the hands of dictators who have no respect for the unalienable rights of man.

The case is then that the United Nations is a “foreign” enemy of these United States and her principles. And as a foreign enemy, some will say that the soldier did his duty be refusing to wear the baby blue of an incompetent body politic where human rights are dismissed at a whim for convenience.

But we come back to the Constitution and treaties that we have. Our leaders have the right to make treaties with entities. Although there is a strong case to be made that this only applies to nations and not to unelected bureaucratic bodies, the fact remains that the United States is a signatory not only to the United Nations but many of the treaties created by the United Nations. And many of these treaties attempt to usurp the sovereign powers of the United States which, again, can lead to the belief that any United Nations treaties are unconstitutional simply because the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and cannot be usurped or altered except by specific methods of amendment. And last time I looked, that method did not include making treaties.

The web is indeed tangled. We, the people, can see the enemy but without a recognition formally from our elected officials the enemy is still officially our friend. We have the Supreme Court often saying that no one is bound to follow an unconstitutional law (or treaty) because of the strict way in which our government is formed. But we still come back to the fact that we have the treaties and that a direct order was given.

The trouble is that without a federal court or our elected officials willing to find the United Nations a “foreign” enemy of the United States you are brought back to the fact that Mr. New disobeyed a direct order. And you have only two choices at this point. First, you have to prove before a military court that the United Nations is a “foreign” enemy and that your actions as a soldier were indeed consistent with your oath to protect this nation. If you cannot do that then you have to accept the consequences of your actions and take your beating.

The second and less likely option is to have the President, who has the sole ability to create treaties with the consent of two thirds of the Senate (Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution) to revoke our membership in the United Nations and nullify all treaties relating to it.

And that is it.

Now, some will ask where I stand on this issue especially after I have taking such great lengths to consider both sides and present them here. And the answer is simple. Michael New is a patriot, truly and unconditionally for refusing to wear the colors of a foreign enemy of these United States. My position is that the United Nations is, has been for some time, and will in all likelihood continue to be such an enemy. And as it is such an enemy, any soldier that willfully serves under the banner of the baby blue and white commits an act of treason against this nation and the principles thereof. It is my reasoned opinion that any soldier that does not refuse to serve under a corrupted body politic is truly deserving of death by firing squad and that President George W. Bush must, as the leader of this nation, dissolve our membership in the United Nations and close up the New York based headquarters and send them packing to Europe or some other place.

And after that, Michael New should be awarded the highest medals of honor that we have to give and maybe even have a few new ones created for him and other patriots that stand up for America and what it means to be American.

What will probably happen? Michael New’s court marshaled will be upheld because of spineless leaders. God Bless America right? Not in this day and age. It has rather become kneel before the power of unelected world bureaucrats that know better than you because they are elite and can write away your rights as Americans with the stroke of a pen.

It is now “One World, Under Our Thumb” rather than “One Nation, Under God.”

The Land of the Free - A Conservative Politics Web Site

Return to Land of the Free Op/Ed & Discussion