Ready To Revolt: Oath Keepers pledges to prevent dictatorship in United States

page: 10
79
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 05:36 PM
link   
It's simple folks, it's not about revolt, it's about protecting our rights, our countrymen (and women). To say no to an illegal order isn't exactly revolt is it?

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.

Tell me where it says anything about revolt? It's about keeping your oath to the Constitution and to the United States of America.




posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 06:43 PM
link   
I love it, and I support what their doing. I made a different oath, and anytime I see someone stand up for what's right, I commend and try to help them. At least a little encouragement, three cheers for the men and women who actually protect and serve the people, not just themselves. Hip, hip- hooray, hip, hip- hooray, hip, hip hooray!



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 06:55 PM
link   
The oathkeepers are the premier freedom activists America has. These are the best of the best,the cream of the crop,thats all there is to it. I can only hope they can recruit more because of this thread.

I'd be proud to stand with these Americans anyday.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 07:29 PM
link   
The government thinks they are a threat, and they think they are freedom fighters.

Sounds to me like a lot of the supposed terrorists that were interred in Iraq.

But then, anything that interferes with the flow of money is a threat...



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 01:04 AM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 


No the ten orders they will refuse to obey are simply orders that are unconstitutional, such as disarming the American public, conducting warrentless searches, etc. There are is nothing un-American about that, rather it's about as American as you can get. Perhaps you don't fully understand what this country was founded on.

As far as them saying that they'll stand with the American people if they decide it's time for a revolution, that is in no way shape or form un-American, it's as American as you can get. I will repeat what i have already posted on this matter, with emphasis on certain key points.



That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.



But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.


This government sems to have long ago forgotten that they derive their powers from the people, and it's long overdue for them to remember that fact. When a government chooses not to acknowledge that the people hold the power and slowly attempt to take the peoples power away from them, it is not only the right of the people to abolish said out of control government, but it is their duty. Any military and LEO personell that honor their oath to support and defend the constitution in the event that the people decide that they need a new government are indeed very pro- American.

Nobody in this country wants a revolution, but our wayward government is ultimately the one that will make that decision. If that day should ever come the fault will not lie at the feet of the American people, nor at the feet of the Oath Keepers, but rather at the feet of a power hungry, un-American government.


I've noticed that you seem to like to respond to my posts, but you have yet to respond to a question in one of my responses to you, on pg 6.



Edit for link www.ushistory.org...

[edit on 10/22/2009 by chise61]



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 04:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by chise61
reply to post by rnaa
 


Now here's one for you, is it constitutional for the federal government to bring in private miltary companies like Blackwater to police the area ? Why do such a thing after the Governor has already called in the National Guard ? Gee the feds can't send in the military so they send in mercanaries instead, and Oath Keepers are a problem ?


Sorry I missed this.

The States have agreements with the Feds that they can ask for assistance. There is nothing unconstitutional about that. It is one of the advantages of our Federal system.

However, while I personally agree with your distaste of bringing in mercenaries whether domestically or internationally, it is the extreme conservative, ultra capitalist view that even military services can be contracted out to private firms like Blackwater, KBR, and Haliburton, or which ever Hydra's head is popular.

I don't like States abrogating their responsibilities and turning over their penal system to private companies either, but again the extreme conservative, ultra capitalist view is that it is better for the State.

Yes, I agree with you that this is a sickening development, ripe with incompetence and corruption. The politicians love it because they can wash their hands of problems, while I just think it is cowardice, arranging contracts to ensure that no one is responsible when inevitable problems occur.

But I don't know if it is unconstitutional or not. The only way to find out is to ask the Supreme Court. It is not up to me or you or the Oath Keepers to decide that question. If you are going to defend the Constitution, then you can't ignore the parts you don't like, you have to embrace the whole thing.

So if you think using mercenaries in Iraq and Afganistan is unconstitutional, work up a case and take it to the SCOTUS. If you think communities hiring private law enforcement firms are unconstitutional, work up a case and take it to the SCOTUS. If you think contracting out State penal systems is unconstitutional, work up a case and take it to the SCOTUS.

Just don't vow to take up arms against the United States Government just because you lost an election and you think you are being dudded. That is unAmerican, bordering on sedition, and if you act on it, it is Treason.



posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 07:14 PM
link   
No doubt the government would love to discredit Oathkeepers but any public opposition would make themselves look very bad. The only weapon they can use against such a group is to infiltrate it and try to coerce others into jumping the gun (no pun intended) and committing a rash act. Perhaps the entire Hardin, Montana deal was nothing but bait for oathkeepers and militias to see if they would bite.
This will be very interesting to watch as the administration squirms their way through the coming years. I'm very, VERY glad such a group exists. It gives me real hope which was something Nobama never did.



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 


Well I don't see any connection between Hardin or mercenaries in general. Just past and present Patriots who's only desire is to protect the Constitution and this Country.



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by djusdjus
 


What's with all the name calling and vitriol? Is it because you don't have a logical argument that you resort to name calling?
I've noticed when liberals can't support their argument, they resort to vitriolic attacks that would have made Hitler squirm.

Maybe liberalism is a mental disorder...



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Chris Matthews had the Oathkeepers head guy on "Hardball" night before last, and chris would not let the man talk! Kept interrupting him when he tried to speak. Wish it were me on there, I could talk down Matthews any day. Here is their website:
www.oathkeepers.net...
These people deserve our respect and support.

Quote of the Year: “We swear an oath to the Constitution, not to a man, even if he makes a thrill run up your leg when he talks.” Stewart Rhodes


Friends, I have taken but one Oath in my entire life, and that was when I was in the military, the Oath was to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. I will always keep that Oath, and die for it is necessary. I often remind policemen of their Oath, some seem to have forgotten it.



posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 07:12 PM
link   
I'm ex-military. When I joined up, I took an oath to serve, protect and defend The Consticution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

There was no part in that oath that said I was released from my oath upon seperation from service. There was no part in that oath that indicated that I had the freedom to pick-and-choose my battles - to decide which ones I would fight and which I would slink away from for fear of (fill in the blank).

It was more than 20 years ago when I swore that oath. It was as if it were yesterday and my oath still stands as true as ever.




posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 01:25 AM
link   
Nice find

Nice to hear that there are still more people out there willing to do whats right.




posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 02:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Underworlds
I'm ex-military. When I joined up, I took an oath to serve, protect and defend The Consticution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

There was no part in that oath that said I was released from my oath upon seperation from service. There was no part in that oath that indicated that I had the freedom to pick-and-choose my battles - to decide which ones I would fight and which I would slink away from for fear of (fill in the blank).

It was more than 20 years ago when I swore that oath. It was as if it were yesterday and my oath still stands as true as ever.



You are absolutely right, your USAS Oath is a lifetime oath, by law. There is really no reason to think that you would need to renew it.

That said there is really no reason to renew your marriage vows either, but a lot of people do it. I have no problem with that, what ever floats your boat, so to speak.

But, I do object to these Oath Keeper folks claiming to be renewing their oath, and then Vow to violate that oath at their personal whim.

[edit on 24/10/2009 by rnaa]



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by autowrench
Chris Matthews had the Oathkeepers head guy on "Hardball" night before last, and chris would not let the man talk! Kept interrupting him when he tried to speak. Wish it were me on there, I could talk down Matthews any day. Here is their website:
www.oathkeepers.net...
These people deserve our respect and support.

Quote of the Year: “We swear an oath to the Constitution, not to a man, even if he makes a thrill run up your leg when he talks.” Stewart Rhodes


Friends, I have taken but one Oath in my entire life, and that was when I was in the military, the Oath was to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. I will always keep that Oath, and die for it is necessary. I often remind policemen of their Oath, some seem to have forgotten it.


Matthews gets owned, again. He reveals himself to be a total tool once off script and forced to think fast.

An oath is quite useless. I've taken two.. and at the time it was an ego message, but reciting words is a form of control... and sometimes a job requirement. It serves as a ritualistic reason to follow orders, and little more.

Seriously, if everyone who swore an oath to defend the constitution actually did so, we'd already have a civil war, citizen revolt... something.

IMO everyone, 100%, can agree the constitution has been under "attack" for generations.. If those who swore an oath to defend the constitution took it seriously, I mean seriously.. it's past time to muster and deploy. Our oath swearing military should have stepped up long ago to defend the first minor infraction upon the constitution.

Whats it going to take for oath takers to actually start?, from my perspective the constitution has been screaming bloody murder, and it's not like obama will order constitutional defenders to defend against himself, the DNC, GOP, CFR and all the assclown elite.



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grayelf2009
Well I hope someone does something quick while there is still a America. Im ready mentaly and phyically, I hope. Im just ready to fight.

Your fight is likely coming, but they are ready for you and it won't
go quite as you expect.

They will be put down hard with advanced weapons.

They already deployed sonic weapons against just protesters.

The political parasites have their underground facilities ready
as do the money men behind them.

Your best bet is to hide well away from the cities.

Only at the very end will most ppl wake up likely when it is too late.

As a native american I will not be fighting over dirt, and just trying not
to get wiped out like last time.

Out of sight and out of mind is my plan.

Good Luck to you all !



posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 11:39 PM
link   





posted on Oct, 26 2009 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 




If you are going to defend the Constitution, then you can't ignore the parts you don't like, you have to embrace the whole thing.



That's the thing, they're not ignoring the parts they don't like, they are vowing to uphold it.

I'm not going to list all of the the orders they will not follow, two should be sufficient.



1. We will NOT obey any order to disarm the American people.


That would be upholding the constitution, not ignoring it.......


A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


BTW the SCOTUS has already ruled on this one, and they say that the 2nd amendment pertains to every American citizen.



2. We will NOT obey any order to conduct warrantless searches of the American people, their homes, vehicles, papers, or effects -- such as warrantless house-to house searches for weapons or persons.


This also would be upholding the constitution......


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.



oathkeepers.org...

www.usconstitution.net...


The SCOTUS could not possibly keep up with all the cases of unconstitutional things being done by this government, it has gotten so far out of control that it would be a complete waste of time.



Just don't vow to take up arms against the United States Government just because you lost an election and you think you are being dudded. That is unAmerican, bordering on sedition, and if you act on it, it is Treason.


I can't speak for the Oath Keepers, but i haven't vowed to take up arms against anyone. On my part it has nothing to do with losing an election, I haven't had an election end with the candidate i voted for win in over twelve years. This is Not about Obama, it's about an out of control government. Obama didn't pass the damn patriot act, but he hasn't gotten rid of it either, he didn't bail out the banks against the people's wishes, but he hasn' t done anything about that either, he's added to it, he hasn't brought our troops home, etc. He's not responsible for all that has gone wrong with this country, but he's catching flack because instead of changing it, he's adding to it.

Many people don't think it un- American to get rid of an out of control government, they think it's their right and duty. It's only sedition if the government is acting lawfully, anything they do in direct violation of the constitution is unlawful. I guess if there ever was a revolt (which i highly doubt) the act of treason would be determined by the victor.


Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.


www.usconstitution.net...

Emphasis mine. There are many that do not view the act of outing an unjust and out of control government as waging war against the United States.

We could continue to go back and forth like this, but it's pointless as neither one of us seem likely to agree on this subject, so let's just agree to disagree.



posted on Oct, 27 2009 @ 12:48 AM
link   







top topics
 
79
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join