It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Oklahoma lawmakers and Tea party discuss forming a militia

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 04:54 PM

Originally posted by prionace glauca
reply to post by piddles

buncha rednecks disagree, immediately go to some sort of violence. This doesn't surprise me?

So what would certain extremist religious/leftist groups do when they don't agree?

Hint Hint, it goes "BooM"

yeah dude leftist groups have throwing bricks through windows and making death threats

and pretending to be patriots like making up some silly group that pretends to know what it's doing and has guns

mmmhmm, think about that. also religious and leftist are so not even comparable when most religious nuts are right wingers, and these middle eastern terrorists could give two craps about our two party system.

spoke out of something too soon?

it releases stinky gas sometimes hinthint

posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 05:03 PM
reply to post by okbmd

the only problem with your analogy is its nothing like the current situation.

first of all your paying your workers, your position and their position from the get go are reversed from the current situation of militia vs Government.

your looking at it from the authorities perspective, but you forget that the poeple are the authority, or in this case the militia(s). we(the poeple) are paying them(the government), not the other way around. in your analogy you were the 'boss' and the overall goal was to change how the workers perform, so rather than exert your authority and tell them how you want it (expect resistance) you manipulate their reality to make them think they want to perform that way, easy to pull off from a position of power(where u can probe specific workers with ideas and yada yada)

however for the poeple to use that same tactic to achieve what they want, would be rather difficult as its not very easy for Joe Shmoe to infiltrate the government and insert ideas, and its even less likely for the Government to at their own will, comply and tell the poeple they would be pleased to do it that way.

its when the poeple forget that they are the boss, that they will really be playing into TPTB's hands. if they convince you that THEY are the boss, then they have already won without fireing a shot.

but back to your original idea of them planning on useing the militias as police state puppets later on, why would a militia comply or help or work for the exact entity they were created to oppose? seems illogical and farfecthed, on top of that the Media demonizing pretty much shreds any future possibilities of cooperation due to the overall fear factor that they created.

i mean im with you on the super-diabolical tip. i just dont see how it specificly plays in with this issue.

[edit on 13-4-2010 by LurkerMan]

posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 06:55 PM
reply to post by LurkerMan

It is an expansion of and explanation of the Rule of Ten. If you present a new idea to 10 people, 3 will like it, 3 will not like it and 4 will be on the fence. The key is manipulate the middle 4 to your favor or to a stalemate so you get the deciding vote. And old but still very handy rule of thumb for business majors and businessmen alike. It works so still used heavily.

posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 07:42 PM
reply to post by hawkiye

Thank you, did not know that.. interesting indeed... disturbing as well..

posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 10:14 PM
If anyone rips this country apart I assure you it will be them.

This is becoming the antithesis of civilization.....

posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 10:30 PM

Originally posted by skunknuts
Can you please show me where in the almighty constitution there is an authority of the good ol' boy sheriff to arrests feds. of which to reinforce?? Didn't they try that when the big bad feds. had to forcefully integrate the schools?? You people hate this country.

You don't seem to understand how the 10th amendment works.

Anything the feds aren't explicitly granted in the Constitution itself, they can't just pass a law and enforce it on all the states. The states are supposed to have final say in what laws of theirs to enforce, and which not to, except for additional amendments which have to be ratified in a unique way. This is why DEA agents in California have been ordered by their supreme court not to arrest or raid people following California's marijuana laws rather than federal ones.

posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 10:55 PM
Texas and California maintain a recognized State Militia. Nearly every state has laws authorizing State Defense Forces, and 21 states, plus Puerto Rico, have active SDFs with different levels of activity, support, and strength. State Defense Forces generally operate with emergency management and homeland security missions. Most SDFs are organized as Army units, but Air and Naval units also exist State Defense Forces (SDF) (also known as State Guards, State Military Reserves, or State Militias) in the United States are military units that operate under the sole authority of a state government, they are not regulated by the National Guard Bureau nor are they part of the Army National Guard of the United States.State Defense Forces are authorized by state and federal law and are under the command of the governor of each state. State Defense Forces are distinct from their state's National Guard in that they cannot become federal entities (all National Guard units can be federalized under the Militia Act of 1903 with the creation of the National Guard of the United States). The federal government recognizes State Defense Forces under 32 U.S.C. § 109 which provides that State Defense Forces as a whole may not be called, ordered, or drafted into the Armed Forces of the United States, thus preserving their separation from the National Guard.

posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 11:00 PM
reply to post by Ahabstar

thanks.i understand.

im simply saying that in my opinion that is not the case with this particular issue.

posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 03:03 AM
Interesting what a little time will reveal.

Since this story has gone public and made national news, it would seem some people are starting to distance themselves away from the idea. It would seem that the pressure of being viewed as an extremist would hurt his bid for Governor since other Republicans and Democrats in the state are rebuking the idea.

And there we have it. When it comes right down to it, politicians will only do or say what they think is in their best interest but what is not in the best interest of others. It doesn't mean that he won't change his stance if elected Governor and return as defying the Federal Government. But it does prove, he will roll over and behave according to his audience.

And that, I think, is part of the root of the problem of politics in the US today.

State Sen. Randy Brogdon said he envisions a state militia being used as an auxiliary state force during times of emergency because the Oklahoma National Guard falls under federal control. Brogdon was among some conservative members of the Oklahoma Legislature and tea party leaders who previously said creating a new volunteer militia could help defend against what they believe are improper federal infringements on state sovereignty.


posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 06:28 AM

Originally posted by VintageEnvy
People from the Oklahoma LEGISLATURE are wanting to start up a militia??
They feel it's that big of an emergency, they think 'their rights are being taken away'. Where were they when gay people were paying (and still are) their taxes to their state but weren't able to get married. They don't share the same rights as 'normal straight people'. Oh, thats right,they were fighting making sure they were denied those rights. The hypocrisy is maddening.

Here's a fun quote:

Tea party leader J.W. Berry of the Tulsa-based OKforTea began soliciting interest in a state militia through his newsletter under the subject "Buy more guns, more bullets."

The one good thing I read was:

They say the unit would not resemble militia groups that have been raided for allegedly plotting attacks on law enforcement officers.

But honestly, whenever I hear the word 'militia' I just picture a gang without their colors, that level of violence and hate. Not saying that is what they're doing at all. Just saying what images that word triggers to me.

very good point. I totally agree it's hypocritical however is it better tonot fight for their rights in the name of not being a hypocrite? As much as they are inconsistent 2 wrongs don't make a right

posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 06:44 AM
I wonder if the Federal government is at all worried about talk of militias? Is it a dangerous situation to have ready made military units waiting in the wings which any opportunistic politician might manipulate?

I'm not saying the Federal government is right in everything it does, just that it does seem extraordinary that they would tolerate this situation.

posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 06:55 AM

Originally posted by bootsnspurs33
reply to post by SaturnFX
First of all texas isn't big enough for all the "righties", second and more importantly, PULL YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS, do you honestly think that repeating the extremist liberal leftwing lies makes them true? The teapartyers are average everday people, Me & my kind, WE'RE the rightwingers, our idea is to put all of you guys out on the left coast where you belong (it's already financially & morally bankrupt, you'll fit right in),nuke the san andreas fault & wave bye bye as you slide off into the sunset.You couldn't stop it because you let the government take your right to bear arms & form militias. We'll even divide your little country into seperate large islands queer males & only queer males on one island and lesbians & only lesbians on the other seperated by a few hundred miles of shark infested water. We'll see how natuaral that is by how well nature takes care of that little debate,we'll wait a couple of hundred years & check back up on them.

I have to question whether the post I am quoting is acceptable by ats rules? An island for gay men after nuking the sa fault...

I don't expect much to get deleted on ats but I draw the line here.

and why do I read so much about extremist liberals in America when compared with half the world even supposedly liberal presidents like obama are positively right wing lol. Only in America could he ever be used as a stick to beat liberals with. He's not very liberal... he resigned the patriot act for gods sake!

As a liberal myself I agree that the government needs a major overhaul. I don't know how effective these militias could be, but I am interested to watch.

posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 07:00 AM
of course you know, that the very rednecks that are mad as hell at having their guns taken away

are the very same rednecks thats gonna cause the loss of their guns, buy doing crazy # like this

posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 09:07 AM
Just a thought experiment:

If the CNN Poll holds valid nationwide, then it could be reasoned that out of OK's population of 3,687,050 that some 368,000 have either attended a Tea Party function or contributed funding. But let's say just 1 in 15, that would be roughly 245,800. If only 1% of those would form a standing militia, it would be 2458 people.

2458 doesn't sound like much but it is the size of two and half full battalions. Or a typical regiment or a light brigade, depending on how they organized. Given the need for support and logistics for a prolonged engagement in order to capture or eliminate all of them, the US would just about have to send a whole division in order to have enough willing men to follow orders on engaging Americans.

Somehow I don't think the public would swallow the use of a whole division used on American soil against Americans unless they were exceptionally violent and reckless. 2400-2500 armed men standing at the ready to defend their rights doesn't sound overly reckless to me. Now, I know what I could do with 2400 men that would make the country sit up and take serious notice, but that is an entirely different discussion and best not made publicly. Don't want the wrong people to get the wrong ideas.

posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 09:10 AM
nuke san andreas fault and say bye bye to your internetz.

and the other half of the economy.

good luck with that.

but of course you wont be effected!!! youve got canned food for a month!!!

posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 01:49 PM
It should be noted that I saw on the local news last night thatthe senator/congressman in question has since recanted his statement about forming a militia and that his words were taken out of context.

posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 05:50 PM
Ahabster, the MOAB was made in Britain in WW 2 and dropped on the German battleship 'Tirpitz' it actually missed, but the ship turned turtle anyway. The MOAB was also dropped on a railway viaduct, but missed, however, the 'earthquake' shook the viaduct so much it collapsed. ( the bomb weighed 22,000 pounds) only the British Lancaster bomber could carry it)

posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 06:01 PM
Dragonrdr is correct, Oklahoma is trying to create a state defense force. Currently 49 out of 50 states and all 6 insular areas have legislation authorizing a state defense force (the names vary ranging from New York State Guard to Texas State Militia to New Jersey State Defense Force to Guam Insular Guard). As you can guess, Oklahoma is the exception. '

Only about 20 states plus Puerto Rico currently have an active state defense force and none of them are combat capable. Most do not even undergo basic military training and none are issued weapons. New York has both a State Guard (ground & aviation element) and a State Naval Militia (maritime element) and both are pretty much pathetic jokes. They can barely be trusted to handle traffic control at the State Special Olympics much less do any actual defending.

posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 07:56 PM
A question for the Revolutionaries....
1.Does splitting the nation and creating a civil war pay off your deficit?

2.Or is the idea that war somehow makes your nations deficit magicly vanish?

3.So having a democraticly elected government replaced by millitia chosen government is your aim? Just a quick explanation of this ideal..e.g Communism

A wounded animal in a field of predators is history........A nation in the throws of civil war with nuclear weapons will have to be stabilised for the worlds security...think of a few countries chomping on the bit of that UN Resolution.

posted on Apr, 14 2010 @ 10:58 PM
WOW! Where do I start?

Oklahoman here...Conservative, Tea Party supporter as well. I like to think I have a finger on the pulse of these kinds of things in my state...but this is the first I've heard about it.

The article is interesting. Its provacative and purely subjective at best. Militias are so en vogue to hand wring and speculate on in the MSM these days.

Granted, Oklahoma is the reddest state in the union...not one county went blue in the last presidential election. We also have a state legislature that is bucking against the Feds and have pursued state sovereignty legislation....if not for our Democrat Governor and Democrat Attorney General, we'd be in on the lawsuit against the Feds on Healthcare....but thats coming. So, needless to say we're a pretty easy target to paint a picture of "radicalism" on.

Brogdon is a constitutional conservative and a Tea Party favorite who has come out of nowhere to contest the Republican Governors race that is heating up against the career politician Congresswoman, Mary Fallin. Plus we've just kicked off 2 days of Tea Partying, in which Brogdon is a speaker..... So the timing of this article is a little suspect as well.

Now then, Most Oklahomans are unhappy with the state of politics in the beltway and dont like big government intrusion BUT Oklahomans are not looking to fight off the Feds with a Militia. ALOT of Okies excercise their 2nd amendment rights BUT we're not militia men (I think having a highly armed citizenry speaks for itself). We are counting on our state government to be strong and protect us from the Feds and any extreme Federal intrusion in our lives...which someone like Brogdon will do as Governor. THATS what we need. What we dont need is some kind of armed militia. We also dont need another career politician in the state we've had too many times in the past.

But I digress....Brogdon spoke about this article today. Basically it took some things that he's said in the past, which were pro state rights and pro 2nd amendment rights, and plugged them into the article to fit the adgenda of the article....completely out of context.

There might be some fringe element in Okla that likes to bring this stuff up about an armed militia..but its just a fringe, its NOT, NOT, NOT mainstream in Oklahoma.

I'm not saying there will never be ANOTHER state recognized militia in Oklahoma...but it will not be an armed militia. We've had a state recognized militia as recently as 1991. It was put in place by then Democrat Gov, David Walters. They had their own unique little uniforms, they had meetings and they even drilled a little. Walters even put a highly decorated, retired colonel in charge of the "militia" They WERE NOT armed. Their role was to be a reserve, reserve unit. They were to back up the National Guard in an unarmed capacity in extreme circumstances such as a major natural disaster or in an instance that our National Guard was depleted due to deployment, etc. It has since been disbanded.
So, if anything, we might see something like that at some point.....but thats it.

So anyway, for those of you who support something like a state recognized armed militia...sorry, its not gonna happen in Okla.
For those of you who like to bust blood veins and rail against these kinds of ideas...sorry, its not gonna happen in Okla.

Move along, theres nothing to see here......

[edit on 14-4-2010 by Daytomann]

[edit on 14-4-2010 by Daytomann]

[edit on 14-4-2010 by Daytomann]

[edit on 14-4-2010 by Daytomann]

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in