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.
Sounds pretty evil, right? They model themselves after the 'Three percenters', the number of Colonists that stood up to the King during and before our revolution (Yes, there were a number of politicians, and people, who were opposed to our independence and freedom).
Well, here's Matthews and his shameless propagandizing in a truly O'Reilly fashion where he presents numerous logical fallacies and misstates the Oath Keeper's purpose numerous times. He then launches a lengthy personal attack/character assassination based on his own faulty understanding of the organization. The entire argument wreaks of the same type of confrontational and misstating of the facts and badgering that Bill O'Reilly constantly employs on his show, and Matthews is taking the page right from O'Reilly's playbook. Truly shameless conduct from 'a thrill up my leg, and my-employer-is-getting bailout-money-from-Barack-Obama' Matthews.
I bet if they were in the same studio together sitting at a table, Chris would have lowered his douche levels down a bit. What an *******. I like these 3 percenters. Not to be confused with the 5 percenters.
__________________
He chose to use his name, Barack, for a reason. To identify, not with America -- you don't take the name Barack to identify with America. You take the name Barack to identify with what? Your heritage? The heritage, maybe, of your father in Kenya, who is a radical? Really? Searching for something to give him any kind of meaning, just as he was searching later in life for religion. - Glenn Beck
So, are we supposed to believe that there's any coincidence behind this group forming after the election of Barack Obama? Where were they when the Patriot Act was formed, where were they when Bush signed the first stimulus package, hell, where were they when we invaded another sovereign country (without declaring war, something the constitution forebades past 60 days)? Is there also any coincidence that this group also has high ranking white supremacists and militia members in it's hierarchy? (Richard Mack ring any bells?)
Not saying that this is a bad movement by any means, but it seems a little too convenient for it to form in the wake of a presidential election. Especially an election that had dingbats running for the hills because Obama was going to sink us into a depression, force Communism down our throats, take our guns, and force us into concentration camps.
If you want to be a patriot and form such a group, that's fine, however it doesn't lend credence to your movement when you involve hate mongers and thinly veiled conspiracy theories.
__________________
looking for ebladed/raced cockers and LCD and IR3 Angels for a trade....
Maybe because it's an arguable fact that Bush instituted those policies, maybe naively, in order to defend America, not to use it against his political opponents.
When has a regime come into power and almost immediatley put it's political opponent's support's beliefs as a criteria for domestic terrorism, therefore expanding the "war on terrorism" onto simply those who have different political beliefs. See DHS's MIAC report.
The military will be going to multicam in a year or so.
custar
__________________
Are the Geisterjagers over the top?
Well, let's just say "The Top" is barely a speck in our rear view mirror.
"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United states who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms..."
Samuel Adams
Ave Caesar Obama! Tributituri ad moritus te salutant.
Maybe because it's an arguable fact that Bush instituted those policies, maybe naively, in order to defend America, not to use it against his political opponents.
When has a regime come into power and almost immediatley put it's political opponent's support's beliefs as a criteria for domestic terrorism, therefore expanding the "war on terrorism" onto simply those who have different political beliefs. See DHS's MIAC report.
When have right based extremist groups, supremacist groups, and militias NOT been on the watch list? Are you that ****ing naive? Pre-9/11, left leaning groups such as ALF were on the top of the list. Did we somehow forget about the Oklahoma City Bombing (radical right militia movement) or the Unibomber?
You're still a ****ing racist.
__________________
looking for ebladed/raced cockers and LCD and IR3 Angels for a trade....
So, are we supposed to believe that there's any coincidence behind this group forming after the election of Barack Obama? Where were they when the Patriot Act was formed, where were they when Bush signed the first stimulus package, hell, where were they when we invaded another sovereign country (without declaring war, something the constitution forebades past 60 days)? Is there also any coincidence that this group also has high ranking white supremacists and militia members in it's hierarchy? (Richard Mack ring any bells?)
Not saying that this is a bad movement by any means, but it seems a little too convenient for it to form in the wake of a presidential election. Especially an election that had dingbats running for the hills because Obama was going to sink us into a depression, force Communism down our throats, take our guns, and force us into concentration camps.
If you want to be a patriot and form such a group, that's fine, however it doesn't lend credence to your movement when you involve hate mongers and thinly veiled conspiracy theories.
This isn't about the group itself, it's about Matthew's treatment of the group. Also, it's kind of funny you label them as 'thinly veiled conspiracy theorists', and come up with a crackpot conspiracy theory yourself. Did it ever occur to you that not every person who loves and supports the Constitution is a racist conspiracy theorist?
__________________
“The several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government” - Thomas Jefferson
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him." – Robert Heinlein
Closed-bolt, because I can.
Repetition and Ridicule, the biggest tools of the Liberal.
This isn't about the group itself, it's about Matthew's treatment of the group. Also, it's kind of funny you label them as 'thinly veiled conspiracy theorists', and come up with a crackpot conspiracy theory yourself. Did it ever occur to you that not every person who loves and supports the Constitution is a racist conspiracy theorist?
Did I state anywhere that I think they're racist or wrong in any fashion? It's more to do with the fact that their movement clearly implements some of the more egregious claims from the militia movement, such as "Turn Cities into concentration camps!!!". As if any major city could be contained without all out war, let alone a nation of 375 million people. I merely state that the group puts on a bad face when they allow and support known radicals within their support structure, seems kind of two sided doesn't it?
Oh, and yes, I do think that Matthew's was in the wrong for his attack, however it's nothing new.
__________________
looking for ebladed/raced cockers and LCD and IR3 Angels for a trade....
The 'concentration camp' bit is obvious hyperbole, what he is referencing is the plan for continuity in Government that Bush signed, in the often reactionary attitudes of politicians. I don't think they believe in the Alex Jones concentration camps, but whatever, that's their prerogative.
The 'concentration camp' bit is obvious hyperbole, what he is referencing is the plan for continuity in Government that Bush signed, in the often reactionary attitudes of politicians. I don't think they believe in the Alex Jones concentration camps, but whatever, that's their prerogative.
Sure it's hyperbole, but it's an obvious appeal to emotions, especially those emotions that are played out by the conspiracy theorists and the militia movement. And before you get all bent out of shape, i'm not fighting with you, I just think that there are a myriad of other routes this group could have taken to achieve the same goals, without including radicalist theories and people.
__________________
looking for ebladed/raced cockers and LCD and IR3 Angels for a trade....
The military will be going to multicam in a year or so.
custar
Wow you just made my night. Multicam rocks.
__________________
He chose to use his name, Barack, for a reason. To identify, not with America -- you don't take the name Barack to identify with America. You take the name Barack to identify with what? Your heritage? The heritage, maybe, of your father in Kenya, who is a radical? Really? Searching for something to give him any kind of meaning, just as he was searching later in life for religion. - Glenn Beck
The Oath Keepers remind me to a great degree of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. They looked good at first glance but eventually were found to be a group funded by far rightwing Republicans. IMO just a political tool. Same goes here for the oath keepers. I'd like to see the percentage of all minority groups represented in the organization. Here's a bit of political science for you. In the declaration of independance the term "all men" is used and in the constitution it's "We the People" Using 18th century common law these terms mean Land owning MEN only. It's later interpretations by the Judicial branch that broadens the understanding of what constitutes being a citizen. You might think this is off topic but under the original legal concept of the constitution I'm guessing better than 50 % of you here would have had no constitutional rights what so ever.
The military will be going to multicam in a year or so.
custar
Tell the whole story.
They are not getting rid of the ACUs.
__________________
“The several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government” - Thomas Jefferson
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him." – Robert Heinlein
Closed-bolt, because I can.
Repetition and Ridicule, the biggest tools of the Liberal.
The Oath Keepers remind me to a great degree of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. They looked good at first glance but eventually were found to be a group funded by far rightwing Republicans. IMO just a political tool. Same goes here for the oath keepers. I'd like to see the percentage of all minority groups represented in the organization. Here's a bit of political science for you. In the declaration of independance the term "all men" is used and in the constitution it's "We the People" Using 18th century common law these terms mean Land owning MEN only. It's later interpretations by the Judicial branch that broadens the understanding of what constitutes being a citizen. You might think this is off topic but under the original legal concept of the constitution I'm guessing better than 50 % of you here would have had no constitutional rights what so ever.
That is why there is an amendment process.
The Supreme Court has become warped, and certain political schools of thought have made it more important than it was supposed to be.
Don't forget, the US's founding documents were written for the common man to understand (not the lawyer).
__________________
“The several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government” - Thomas Jefferson
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him." – Robert Heinlein
Closed-bolt, because I can.
Repetition and Ridicule, the biggest tools of the Liberal.
Common man to the 17th century founding fathers was an educated landowner. The Supreme court is supposed to be one third of a power group that was supposedly above everyday politics. Unfortunately we know thats not the case. While having a liberal tilt for the last few decades it now has a conservative feel. Any way the constitution is a document for the "people" empowering the federal government to represent them first and foremost above states rights which would seem to be in conflict with the oath keepers refusal to engage a State asserting its sovereign powers. Mattews had a good point in the question of how the Oath keepers would react to a state saying it was seceding from the Union.
__________________
Maxpow
"The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy."
— Thomas Jefferson
“A turbo: exhaust gasses go into the turbocharger and spin it, witchcraft happens and you go faster.”
— Jeremy Clarkson
1987 Nissan 200SX SE
Multicam rocks.
to the oath keepers.
