Obama Changes Oath of Allegiance for New Americans

a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Why?

What does saying the words change...

"Sorry guys, I can't carry out this attack, remember that oath we took?!"

Please, this doesn't change a think and looks like it isn't even recent.

America isn't for them, it would seem. Move on to another place.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Sremmos80

The word "may" might be subject to verification?

but still, why *NOW* ?

how 'bout last year or 5 years ago ?

there *must* be a hidden meaning to this.

what recent events made this "correct" all-of-a-sudden?

Nah, like every president before him, Obama is using the last year prior to the election cycle do things that have been on his agenda, but didn't want to do when it could cause him major issues. America, Congress, and pretty much everyone else has come to expect this type of stuff from this administration at this point, so nothing seems to surprise anyone anymore. I don't think there's hidden anything in this move, just another attempt at bowing to the politically correct who probably think that it's utterly abhorrent that we have a stipulation to becoming a citizen being that you are willing to serve in the military if needed.

It's just dumb crap overall anyhow, because we are an all-volunteer military, and if that changes, it won't matter what they pledge.

Hmmm indeed.

The oath includes the clauses to bear arms on behalf of the United States and to perform noncombatant service in the U.S. armed forces when required by law. 1

Guess the potus hates guns so much he took that one out for the newbies.

Once us old folks who believe in the RIGHT to bear arms dies off.

Only the newbie brainwashed will be left.

Sure is one hell of a machination by the anti gunners, and you can bet that 'policy' change came down from the White House.

Wondering about the last shooting had anything to do with it.

He was a 'naturalized' citizen too.

a reply to: neo96

Did you just make the argument that only old people like guns? I mean I've seen some ridiculous comments in my days here on ATS, but I think that one may take the taco. I mean, I'M 30 and -I- like guns. I don't consider 30 to be THAT old...

a reply to: xuenchen

Been scraping the barrel again, eh, xuenchen? My computer said your link was "malicious".

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Are we blaming Obama but also trying to blame somebody else?

I'm not sure who we're supposed to blame yet.

Obama. Always Obama. If anyone has done anything "bad" in the past 6.5 years, it's Obama's doing. Clear?

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
a reply to: xuenchen

Been scraping the barrel again, eh, xuenchen? My computer said your link was "malicious".

was it the "RightWingNews" or the U.S. Government site?



No alarms here and I have all kinds of realtime malware scanners.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Did you just make the argument that only old people like guns? I

Well that was a pretty ridiculous comment.

I mean, I'M 30 and -I- like guns.

For REALZ ?

Or just the guns government says you can own?

Because ALL the guns I like have been deemed to be ILLEGAL.

a reply to: neo96

Which guns are they exactly? Anti-tank weapons, 50 caliber machine guns, Howitzer cannons? Because everything up to automatic weapons are all legal. They may have certain restrictions on them that make them harder to obtain, but they certainly aren't illegal.

It's funny, you think I'm against the 2nd Amendment because you've convinced yourself that I'm a Democrat. It just makes you look really silly though since I am a PROUD supporter of the 2nd.

a reply to: neo96

Anytime Obama is messing around with something to do with "bearing arms" your radar should go up. He loves nudges, little by little nudges. Never hurts to keep a sharp eye on that man and his agenda.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Which guns are they exactly? Anti-tank weapons, 50 caliber machine guns, Howitzer cannons? Because everything up to automatic weapons are all legal.

Right! like the average John or Jane Doe can afford to pay $5 to $10 for an automatic weapon.

When the state gets to by NEW for less than a grand.

It's funny, you think I'm against the 2nd Amendment because you've convinced yourself that I'm a Democrat. It just makes you look really silly now since I am a PROUD supporter of the 2nd.

To be a 'proud' support of the 2nd is to have the belief in how it was written many,many years ago.

The right to keep, and bear arms was unconditional.

Not for what a 'democrat' thinks it should mean.

Funny how so often the 9th is left out there. Because DENY,and DISPARAGE means the same thing as SHALL NOT INFRINGE.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: xuenchen


Strange how RightWing News left that out.

Who would have ever thought that a right wing organization would heavily edit something to misrepresent what was actually said? Wait...

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Why?

What does saying the words change...

"Sorry guys, I can't carry out this attack, remember that oath we took?!"

Please, this doesn't change a think and looks like it isn't even recent.

If someone takes an oath, of course, they can break it, but then there is legal recourse if they do. That someone would refuse, yet claim they want to be treated the same as everyone else, shows they are less than honest, I believe.

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: xuenchen


Strange how RightWing News left that out.

Who would have ever thought that a right wing organization would heavily edit something to misrepresent what was actually said? Wait...

Kinda like how the ACA was 'represented'.

Funny how people think that only pertains to the 'right.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: xuenchen

Who cares? Oaths are just words anyways. What really matters is actions anyways.

i have always thought that oaths matter. i took an oath. i will never rescind that oath. unlike you i guess that makes me a man of my word.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Sremmos80

there *must* be a hidden meaning to this.

This says everything anyone needs to know.

a reply to: neo96

Funny how you managed to bring the ACA into this.

No both sides spin, and should be called out when do so.

a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

I don't think it does carry legal recourse.

What kind of recourse were you thinking.

Plenty of natural born citizens refuse as well, so seems they want to be like every one else in that matter.

Not everyone in the states would agree to that 'oath'

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: neo96

Funny how you managed to bring the ACA into this.

No both sides spin, and should be called out when do so.

Oh but taking pot shot's at the 'right' is perfectly acceptable.

Funny how some people are clearly defending, an assault on the second.

Albeit in a round about way.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: queenofswords



Crazy right?

Hey I see what you did there