Oath keepers under fire

[Guest 2HOW]

Turnabout is fair play--help protect the Oath Keepers

November 27, 8:42 AM St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner Kurt Hofmann

Recently, we looked at the possibility that the Pentagon, in order to allay misguided (if not deliberately fabricated) fears that the Oath Keepers are a dangerous "extremist" organization, would ban service members' participation in the group. The Constitution's staunchest defenders, in other words, would be treated in the same way as would a member of the KKK, or a supporter of Hezbollah.

Per the Associated Press:

The Pentagon may reconsider rules governing participation in extremist organizations that some lawmakers say appear outdated and too narrow in light of the shooting rampage at the Army base in Texas.

Lieberman said Congress may recommend such a review, and a Pentagon spokesman said Friday that the rules could be among the policies scrutinized by a wide-ranging inquiry aimed at preventing another similar attack.

Groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center would loudly applaud a broadening of the definition of "extemist organization," so as to include the Oath Keepers, as evidenced by this statement:

Oath Keepers, the military and police organization that was formed earlier this year and held its April muster on Lexington Green, may be a particularly worrisome example of the Patriot revival.

Leave it to the SPLC to find a revival of patriotism "worrisome."

The Oath Keepers have vowed to risk their careers, and perhaps their very freedom, in order to protect our liberty. If they face attack from the Pentagon, it is only right that we do what we can to protect them.

"But what," you may ask, "can we do to help them?" Glad you asked. There's something that the DoD fears more than the growing Chinese military, the resurgent Russian military, and a nuclear-armed Iran--combined: budget cuts. Get a few members of Congress--particularly defense budget committee members--involved, and the Pentagon becomes downright eager to please.

There's recent precedent for this. Back in the spring, the DoD suddenly changed its policy for disposal of used cartridge brass, which had been sold to ammunition makers for "remanufacture" into inexpensive ammunition. Under the changed policy, the cartridge brass would be shredded, and useful only as scrap. This would have exacerbated what at the time was a pretty dire shortage of ammunition (particularly in popular calibers--which also happen to be military calibers--like 9mm Parabellum and 5.56x45mm), adversely affecting both private citizens and police departments--and wasting taxpayers' money.

So gun rights organizations--and gun owners--got involved. We got in our Senators' and Representatives' ears--and we prevailed. Montana Senators Max Baucus and Jon Tester wrote a letter (pdf file) to the Defense Logistics Agency, and voilà--the policy was rescinded.

Congress members always claim to be loyal to the Constitution (well, except for Nancy "Are you serious?" Pelosi)--let's give them a chance to show some evidence of that loyalty, by supporting those who have sworn--repeatedly--to defend the Constitution. Tell them that you want them to demand that the Pentagon not allow the Ft. Hood atrocity to degenerate into a witch hunt that ends with the Oath Keepers as the "witch." If you live in a district represented by a member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, or the House version, your voice might make an even larger difference.

It's worth a call and/or an email, isn't it?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

About Oath Keepers

Oath Keepers is a non partisan association of currently serving military, peace officers, fire-fighters, and veterans who will fulfill our oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help us God.

Our oath is to the Constitution, not to the politicians, and not to any political party. In the long-standing tradition of the U.S. military, we are apolitical. We don’t care if unlawful orders come from a Democrat or a Republican, or if the violation is bi-partisan. We will not obey unconstitutional (and thus unlawful) and immoral orders, such as orders to disarm the American people or to place them under martial law. We won’t “just follow orders.†Our motto: “Not on Our Watch!†or to put it even more succinctly, in the words of 101st Airborne Commander General Anthony McAuliffe at the Battle of the Bulge, “NUTS!â€

There is at this time a debate within the ranks of the military regarding their oath. Some mistakenly believe they must follow any order the President issues. But many others do understand that their loyalty is to the Constitution and to the people, and understand what that means.

The mission of Oath Keepers is to vastly increase their numbers.

We are in a battle for the hearts and minds of our own troops.

Help us win it.

For those unfamiliar with The Oath Keepers <= click here.

[Guest redbarron06]

Do you have a link to the original story?

[Guest SUNTZU]

Turnabout is fair play--help protect the Oath Keepers

Google is your friend.

I don't understand. They want to ban people who want to follow their oath? Am I reading that right?

[Guest 2HOW]

Do you have a link to the original story?

Its at the top of the story. St louis gun rights examiner.

[Guest 2HOW]

Turnabout is fair play--help protect the Oath Keepers

Google is your friend.

I don't understand. They want to ban people who want to follow their oath? Am I reading that right?

Yup, this will be a tipping point. I cant even begin to comprehend how our elected officials have betrayed us.

[Guest redbarron06]

Thanks

[Guest Todd@CIS]

It's sad when an organization like this scares people...that and that crazy Constitution business.

[Steelharp]

The Constitution's staunchest defenders, in other words, would be treated in the same way as would a member of the KKK

They would be elected to the Senate from Virginia??

[Guest Todd@CIS]

They would be elected to the Senate from Virginia??

Nicely played, sir.

[Garufa]

If I'm not mistaken, the Oath Keepers have pledged to disobey direct orders. Please correct me if I'm wrong, really haven't kept up with it.

It's freakin' out the sheeple.

[Guest Todd@CIS]

Direct, unlawful orders.

AFAIK, going from the website.

[Oh Shoot]

If I'm not mistaken, the Oath Keepers have pledged to disobey direct orders. Please correct me if I'm wrong, really haven't kept up with it.

It's freakin' out the sheeple.

When Stewart spoke at the Knoxville Tea Party back in April, he had the crowd hooked all the way up through the "retake/take first time" oath bit, but once he basically suggested that armed resistance would almost certainly be needed, much of the crowd that I could see well became visibly uncomfortable. Was a little myself.

I knew right then that if it wasn't already, this org would soon be under some real fed scrutiny.

- OS

[Guest 2HOW]

The idea is that anyone who is on active duty or service of any kind will not follow unlawful orders and LEOs will not violate any rights of civilians. The mission statement is clear and does not instigate violence of any kind. The Government must be held accountable to follow the Constitution.

[rg65]

What is there to disagree with?

From: www.oathkeepers.org

OATH KEEPERS: ORDERS WE WILL NOT OBEY

Click here to read full length version.

1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people.

2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people

3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants†or to subject them to military tribunal.

4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency†on a state.

5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.

6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.

7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.

8. We will NOT obey 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. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.

10.We will NOT obey 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.

[strickj]

All I know is what I've read on the internets about them.

It seems their "mission" is to uphold the Constitution,while advocating its members not to obey unconstitutional orders.

Sounds great to me!

However,there are those,like OhShoot,who have heard them speak,or have joined,etc that will say it goes a bit deeper then that.

From reading some of these stories it sounds like they are an "extremist" group to me.

Methinks this group wants to take over the Government at some point in time,or at least that's what's its sounding like

Personally,I think they're a bad muju awaiting a boil...

[Guest tedbo]

Strickj, I have been to their web site and I have seen what RG65 has posted FROM THEIR SITE.

Every bit of what they are for is to follow the law of the land- the Constitution.

We are in the pickle we are in from a lot of unconstitutional laws. If these bad laws were struck down and our Constitution followed we would be the country were meant to be according to our founding fathers.

I believe we are bound by this Constitution,soldier and citizen alike if we are to enjoy the fruits of what our forefathers created with the power of the Almighty.

I have not seen or heard anything about taking over the government. I see them only wanting the traditional laws being followed.

Well, this is my take on it.

[Oh Shoot]

...

..We are in the pickle we are in from a lot of unconstitutional laws. If these bad laws were struck down and our Constitution followed we would be the country were meant to be according to our founding fathers....

If they are struck down by armed force, then you're back to where we were in 1776.

If you're on the winning side, you're a patriot and glorified; if the losing side, a traitor and shot.

Laws are orders, too.

You choose to obey them or not, just as in the military.

- OS

[macville]

When Stewart spoke at the Knoxville Tea Party back in April, he had the crowd hooked all the way up through the "retake/take first time" oath bit, but once he basically suggested that armed resistance would almost certainly be needed, much of the crowd that I could see well became visibly uncomfortable. Was a little myself.

I knew right then that if it wasn't already, this org would soon be under some real fed scrutiny.

But you know what, I've realize over the past few months that there is a VERY good chance in my lifetime that there will be another civil war. I just don't see how we can keep going down the path we are going without a war unless one side gives in before it gets to war (hopefully because the conservative side has more guns we will win without much of a fight...) I'm almost ready for the war to just go ahead and happen, and one side win instead of slowly going into bondage. You know...that whole "watering the tree of freedom" thing...hopefully not with blood, but is that's what freedom takes, then so be it. We already did it once and that turned out pretty well...

Matthew

[Oh Shoot]

But you know what, I've realize over the past few months that there is a VERY good chance in my lifetime that there will be another civil war. I just don't see how we can keep going down the path we are going without a war unless one side gives in before it gets to war (hopefully because the conservative side has more guns we will win without much of a fight...) I'm almost ready for the war to just go ahead and happen, and one side win instead of slowly going into bondage. You know...that whole "watering the tree of freedom" thing...hopefully not with blood, but is that's what freedom takes, then so be it. We already did it once and that turned out pretty well...

Matthew

Well, while both mean lots of death, a revolution and civil war are quite different. Not exactly sure what the sides would be right now in a civil war.

Methinks the odds of having total economic and hence, social breakdown ranks much higher on the scenario list - in which case the disputes will for a good while likely be much smaller and personal in scale.

If the thread of society does crumble, that will certainly be as effective as a revolution as far as tearing down existing institutions, but won't be very effective in rebuilding new ones of a type which founded the states - indeed, after a great kill off, the likelihood of pure junta/fascism type power would increase greatly, seems to me.

- OS

[Guest tedbo]

Laws are orders, too.

You choose to obey them or not, just as in the military.

- OS

But it goes back to the laws being Constitutional or not.

That is the whole gist of it,right?

[Guest 2HOW]

All I know is what I've read on the internets about them.

It seems their "mission" is to uphold the Constitution,while advocating its members not to obey unconstitutional orders.

Sounds great to me!

However,there are those,like OhShoot,who have heard them speak,or have joined,etc that will say it goes a bit deeper then that.

From reading some of these stories it sounds like they are an "extremist" group to me.

Methinks this group wants to take over the Government at some point in time,or at least that's what's its sounding like

Personally,I think they're a bad muju awaiting a boil...

Im a member and they are NOT an extremist group. Far from that. They regulate the forum strickly to the mission statement and no BS is allowed. No political crap or anything that will bring disgrace upon the members or the site. OBTW tennessee has the 3rd largest membership in the country. We dont want to take over , we want to take back. TOUJOURS PRET

[Magiccarpetrides]

But you know what, I've realize over the past few months that there is a VERY good chance in my lifetime that there will be another civil war. I just don't see how we can keep going down the path we are going without a war unless one side gives in before it gets to war (hopefully because the conservative side has more guns we will win without much of a fight...) I'm almost ready for the war to just go ahead and happen, and one side win instead of slowly going into bondage. You know...that whole "watering the tree of freedom" thing...hopefully not with blood, but is that's what freedom takes, then so be it. We already did it once and that turned out pretty well...

Matthew

We have way more pressing things to worry about overseas. Cleaning house will happen like it has the last 100 years...slowly and through elections, trial and error. You really believe in weakening America while a country like Iran pursues nuclear capabilities?

[Guest bkelm18]

Vince here brings up a rather good point. There is never a good time to have a revolution or a civil war. A war on our soil will be one of two things, really quick and bloody, or really long and bloody. Do I want either? Nope. Will I think it will ever happen? Nope. We, and by we, I really mean they, and by they, I really mean those who are actually willing (not just being an internet commando) to take up arms, are minuscule in number. To think otherwise is lying to yourself. Hate to tell ya folks, but using the system against itself is really the only option. Fight with your votes.

[rg65]

Vince here brings up a rather good point. There is never a good time to have a revolution or a civil war. A war on our soil will be one of two things, really quick and bloody, or really long and bloody. Do I want either? Nope. Will I think it will ever happen? Nope. We, and by we, I really mean they, and by they, I really mean those who are actually willing (not just being an internet commando) to take up arms, are minuscule in number. To think otherwise is lying to yourself. Hate to tell ya folks, but using the system against itself is really the only option. Fight with your votes.

The problem as I see it is that the electorate are (as a group) too ignorant to do anything about it! There are more and more people who depend on the government for their well being, food, healthcare, cell phones, jobs, and internet. Why would they vote AGAINST the system since the rest of us are paying their way? Think about how much money could be saved if the US would just go to a flat tax. There would be no need for a government agency to to process tax returns. That would save untold billions of dollars!

Remember...the goverment cannot hand out money without taking it from us first!

[Guest bkelm18]

The problem as I see it is that the electorate are (as a group) too ignorant to do anything about it! There are more and more people who depend on the government for their well being, food, healthcare, cell phones, jobs, and internet. Why would they vote AGAINST the system since the rest of us are paying their way? Think about how much money could be saved if the US would just go to a flat tax. There would be no need for a government agency to to process tax returns. That would save untold billions of dollars!

Remember...the goverment cannot hand out money without taking it from us first!

You sir, have hit the proverbial nail on the head. People are too dependent on the gov't to fight it. Why bite the hand that feeds when giving power is easier than taking power? Plain and simple. We're f*****.