Author Topic: Oathkeepers - Extremists?  (Read 1578 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MWDabbs

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 217
  • -Receive: 285
  • Posts: 1270
  • Gender: Male
    • Opera Mobile Store Blog
Oathkeepers - Extremists?
« on: 03:22 01-Jun-2012 »
This makes for interesting discussion today (or any day).  This is an organization that is considered "extreme" in the United States. 
Watching the first video is strongly recommended, the second is lengthy, but also worth the time.

First, an explanation of the Oathkeepers.  For those in a rush - Oathkeepers are non-profit organization comprised of military, police and first responders, active duty, reserve and retired, reaffirming the oath they took as a soldier, as a police officer, to respect the law - even to the extent of refusing to follow an unlawful order.   

This is placed within the context of the US Constitution, what it would mean under a "democracy" and what it does mean under a "republic".   It is also based on the simple fact that while you can be charged for refusing to obey a lawful order, you can also be charged for obeying an unlawful order.  The Nuremberg Trials serve as examples of what can happen when critical thinking is not exercised and one simply "follows orders". 


Second, elaboration citing specific examples.


One thing, I would like to expound upon -- relative to Nazi Germany, is that even under Hitler - peak of power, the wives of Jewish husbands staged a public protest about their husbands being taken.  Think there were about 150-175 women - they won their fight.


We cannot afford governments that cannot afford to take care of our veterans.

Offline Tnic

  • Rogue Moderator at large
  • Global Moderator
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 4042
  • -Receive: 1742
  • Posts: 3885
  • Gender: Male
  • Gainfully unemployed
Re: Oathkeepers - Extremists?
« Reply #1 on: 14:49 01-Jun-2012 »
WOW!  Thanks for posting this Mark.  I've been watching videos and reading articles and blog posts all day at their site. 

I also signed on as a Lifetime member.  So I guess I'm an extremist now too.   :D
Recent science has shown that saliva causes cancer, but only swallowed in small amounts over a long period of time.

Offline Claus

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 2616
  • -Receive: 801
  • Posts: 2069
Re: Oathkeepers - Extremists?
« Reply #2 on: 15:25 01-Jun-2012 »
MSNBC's political commentator, Patrick J. Buchanan, quoted Alan Maimon in the Las Vegas Review-Journal, as saying "Oath Keepers, depending on where one stands, are either strident defenders of liberty or dangerous peddlers of paranoia.? Mr. Buchanan explained their existence on the alienation of white America, concluding that "America was once their country. They sense they are losing it. And they are right."

j'y suis, j'y reste!

Offline Tnic

  • Rogue Moderator at large
  • Global Moderator
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 4042
  • -Receive: 1742
  • Posts: 3885
  • Gender: Male
  • Gainfully unemployed
Re: Oathkeepers - Extremists?
« Reply #3 on: 17:01 01-Jun-2012 »
Not just whites, but all Americans are losing, Claus.

I remember during the last Presidential election camaign, telling my mother that though I didn't know much about any of the candidates, I didn't think I liked the direction I felt Obama was going to take our country.  Now I'm sure I don't like it.

To be fair I don't think he started it as its been heading this way for years, many years in fact, but Obama sure has "put the pedal to the metal" during his term in office and accelerated the process considerably.
Recent science has shown that saliva causes cancer, but only swallowed in small amounts over a long period of time.

Offline David Rochlin

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1001
  • -Receive: 1317
  • Posts: 6714
  • Gender: Male
  • Statue of the Motherland
Re: Oathkeepers - Extremists?
« Reply #4 on: 22:29 01-Jun-2012 »
It is one thing to stand against corruption and cowardice, and protect the weak from the wolves.  It is quite another when some officer who volunteered to serve in the military, and swore to obey the commander and chief, decides for himself that an election or a birth certificate or a war,  he doesn't like, entitles him to foreswear his oath.

Offline kyivkpic

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1605
  • -Receive: 1502
  • Posts: 2346
  • Gender: Male
Re: Oathkeepers - Extremists?
« Reply #5 on: 23:51 01-Jun-2012 »
Well when you're losing more soldiers to suicide than enemy fire, something is surely FUBAR.

I wouldn't worry about disgruntled grunts. The depleted uranium will take care of them.
Твоя голова всегда в ответе за то, куда сядет твой зад.

Offline Tnic

  • Rogue Moderator at large
  • Global Moderator
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 4042
  • -Receive: 1742
  • Posts: 3885
  • Gender: Male
  • Gainfully unemployed
Re: Oathkeepers - Extremists?
« Reply #6 on: 01:18 02-Jun-2012 »
No Dave (respectfully) you're wrong.

The call is to do one thing only.  Refuse to obey an UNLAWFUL order.  An order that would violate the Constitution of the United States of America, the highest law of the Republic.

Oath Keepers is not telling anyone to forswear or ignore their solemn oath to support & defend the Constitution, to do so would make them worse than those they fight.  They are simply asking the Oath Takers to be Oath Keepers.

Its not about the Officer or elected official, its about our Constitution and keeping our oath to it.  When I enlisted and subsequently re-enlisted several times over 30 years, I never swore an oath to any person.  I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution.


It is one thing to stand against corruption and cowardice, and protect the weak from the wolves.  It is quite another when some officer who volunteered to serve in the military, and swore to obey the commander and chief, decides for himself that an election or a birth certificate or a war,  he doesn't like, entitles him to foreswear his oath.
Recent science has shown that saliva causes cancer, but only swallowed in small amounts over a long period of time.

Offline MWDabbs

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 217
  • -Receive: 285
  • Posts: 1270
  • Gender: Male
    • Opera Mobile Store Blog
Re: Oathkeepers - Extremists?
« Reply #7 on: 02:40 02-Jun-2012 »
This has been building up for a longtime - hard to pinpoint "exactly" when it started, but easy to define certain stages of it - like layers to an onion.  Obama didn't start it, but he crystallized it for more people to easily see.

There are ten orders they state outright they will not obey, but they also emphasize learning the Constitution and being able to critically evaluate situations in accordance thereto. 

1    Orders to disarm the American people.
2    Orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people.
3   Orders to detain American citizens as ?unlawful enemy combatants? or to subject them to military tribunal.
4    Orders to impose martial law or a ?state of emergency? on a state.
5    Orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.
6   Any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.
7    Any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.
8    Orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to ?keep the peace? or to ?maintain control."
9    Any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.
10   Any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.

Now, to single out an officer or a handful of soldiers for questioning Obama's presidential eligibility is a different case.   Some people think the president has Papal Infallibility... some think calling him the Antichrist is showing disrespect for the Devil.   

But regardless of that, his mere backing of the NDAA is good enough reason to raise both eyebrows at 90' angles.  Indefinite detention of civilians?  Barbarian cultures have been more civilized than this. 

A large portion of the US military is Black and Hispanic.  When TSHTF -- it's not going to be just whites out there protesting, everyone will be.  Spin it as racial all you like, but it is not about race - it's not even really about class.  IT IS ABOUT THE RULE OF LAW.  Some people think they are beyond it.  That's all this is about.  If the Rule of Law was applied TODAY, 90% of the tension would be gone Tomorrow.  Literally.  Gone like a GREAT BIG ZIT.

Not to read that "Rule of Law" as some perverse corruption of it - like 10 years in jail and a $500k fine for a marine biologist filming whales feeding.... or Hitler's armed coup in Bavaria leading to a five year sentence and only having to serve a whole year - for exemplary behavior... and writing Mein Kampf.

Pray-tell... why would the US Department of Homeland Security order 300,000,000 rounds of hollow point ammo - above and beyond that ordered by the Department of Defense?   Are we expecting an invasion?   

There is all that which "America used to be" and there is that which "America has become" - but the REAL AMERICA IS defined by the US Constitution.  It is possible to Amend the Constitution.  But until that is done, it, as it exists IS the Supreme Law of the Land.

To undermine the Supreme Law of the Land undermines everything that has been made possible and exists based upon it - from the Office of POTUS to the Supreme Court and Congress.  I don't think that is a recommended course of action... 

It's a pretty strange world to be living in when there is a debate about where those who support and abide by the law are extremists.  I'd sure hate to see what would happen if all of us who stand on this side of that line decided... "Eh, WTF... being a cannibal can't be all that bad..."

We cannot afford governments that cannot afford to take care of our veterans.

Online Fraucha

  • Administrator
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 3116
  • -Receive: 4846
  • Posts: 7356
  • Gender: Male
  • What's the future ever done for me?
Re: Oathkeepers - Extremists?
« Reply #8 on: 06:18 02-Jun-2012 »
"Eh, WTF... being a cannibal can't be all that bad..."


Yeah, we got Hawaii. It's not such a bad place.

I took that oath, and followed my orders, good or bad (subjective), but I think I abandoned that oath when I moved here.
Peace is the failure of the military to convince the government that it can and should kick its enemies ass.

Offline David Rochlin

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1001
  • -Receive: 1317
  • Posts: 6714
  • Gender: Male
  • Statue of the Motherland
Re: Oathkeepers - Extremists?
« Reply #9 on: 11:33 02-Jun-2012 »
GW Bush cracks up his audience, at the unveiling of his White House portrait, with the Obamas, but suggests the serious issue that perhaps your hollow points are intended to prevent a repeat of the torching of the 1814 torching nation's capital, by loyal, oathkeeping (presumably,) soldiers of the crown.
  It actually is a rather funny speech, once you get past the intro.
George W. Bush Is Back In White House For Portrait Unveiling

Offline MWDabbs

  • Subscriber
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 217
  • -Receive: 285
  • Posts: 1270
  • Gender: Male
    • Opera Mobile Store Blog
Re: Oathkeepers - Extremists?
« Reply #10 on: 18:00 02-Jun-2012 »
The discussion unto itself is good enough.  These are all things worth thinking about.  It could be that we'll have a dramatic economic recovery and the world will come to its senses; or maybe god will come down and take some people to heaven; aliens might intervene; or we might elevate our consciousness into a supremely tranquil state of being where none of this matters.  In the event none of these happen and things continue on the present trajectory - it is useful for you to know where you stand.  Whether others do or not is largely inconsequential. 

Whatever the case, there may or may not come a time where the most vocal amongst us fall silent - if we do, that would be a good time to think over these things again. 

In the interim, at worst we are perhaps over reacting to law enforcement tazing young girls and beating the crap out of someone having an epileptic seizure.  Conversely, if things continue like some think will - then we will have failed to create an environment wherein those who feel they are above the law have no hesitation in crossing a line.  Ironically, and absolutely sickening to read, a lot of what is taking place in the United States today is spelled out clearly in Chapter 15 - Right to Self-Defence of Mein Kampf, which starts.... 

"AFTER WE had laid down our arms, in November 1918, a policy was adopted which in all human probability was bound to lead gradually to our complete subjugation. Analogous examples from history show that those nations which lay down their arms without being absolutely forced to do so subsequently prefer to submit to the greatest humiliations and exactions rather than try to change their fate by resorting to arms again.

That is intelligible on purely human grounds. A shrewd conqueror will always enforce his exactions on the conquered only by stages, as far as that is possible. Then he may expect that a people who have lost all strength of character--which is always the case with every nation that voluntarily submits to the threats of an opponent--will not find in any of these acts of oppression, if one be enforced apart from the other, sufficient grounds for taking up arms again. The more numerous the extortions thus passively accepted so much the less will resistance appear justified in the eyes of other people, if the vanquished nation should end by revolting against the last act of oppression in a long series. And that is specially so if the nation has already patiently and silently accepted impositions which were much more exacting."

We cannot afford governments that cannot afford to take care of our veterans.

Offline Tnic

  • Rogue Moderator at large
  • Global Moderator
  • I live here
  • *
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 4042
  • -Receive: 1742
  • Posts: 3885
  • Gender: Male
  • Gainfully unemployed
Re: Oathkeepers - Extremists?
« Reply #11 on: 18:20 02-Jun-2012 »
Quote
...the 1814 torching nation's capital, by loyal, oathkeeping (presumably,) soldiers of the crown.

But we're not discussing how foreign troops obey or disobey their oaths.  British troops of that day swore an oath to the Crown (a person) btw.  Our troops swear an oath to defend our Constitution (The Law) not an office or person.  All OK is asking anyone to do is to know the Constitution (The Law) so they can recognize an unlawful order and to stand up and refuse to obey unlawful orders that violate that Constitution and US Citizens' rights provided in the same.

We declared our independence from the British Crown because of tyrannical acts like that 1814 torching.  Its why our forefathers designed the Constitution the way they did.

Great video of Gee Dubya!  Never knew he could be so funny.  I never saw him so relaxed either.
Recent science has shown that saliva causes cancer, but only swallowed in small amounts over a long period of time.