Founded in 2009, the Southern Poverty Law Center counts the organization as part of the widespread anti-government “patriot” movement sparked by the election of President Obama, the national economic downturn, and the rise in demographic-altering immigration. According to the SPLC, there were 1,274 active anti-government patriot groups in the U.S. in 2011. What has always separated the Oath Keepers from the rest of these groups is that their core membership is made up of cops, firefighters, EMTs, police officers, and members of the military—both active duty and retired. These members vow to protect the constitution but also to disobey any governmental orders that they deem “unconstitutional.”
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
My actual view: "Marines are required to disobey an order that they KNOW to be illegal."
Big difference huh? If youre going to quote me, then at least be accurate. I don't think that Cicero made a mistake or a misquote... Cicero's only tool in his toolbox is a Straw Man... with out it he has no argument at all.
Ok, fine, that is more accurate. It still doesn't change anything. If a marine was walking in NYC and was asked randomly to stop and get frisked by a cop - does he obey the order? Is that an illegal search per the 4th Amendment, or a legal order because it was made a legal by NYC? Or what if the marine becomes a NYC cop, and is required to conduct random stop and frisks, must he obey his order? Or can he decide for himself that it violates the 4th Amendment?
Ok, fine, that is more accurate. It still doesn't change anything. If a marine was walking in NYC and was asked randomly to stop and get frisked by a cop - does he obey the order? Is that an illegal search per the 4th Amendment, or a legal order because it was made a legal by NYC? Or what if the marine becomes a NYC cop, and is required to conduct random stop and frisks, must he obey his order? Or can he decide for himself that it violates the 4th Amendment?
If he knows the order to be ILLEGAL, not questionable, not suspicious, not undecided... but he knows it to be actually ILLEGAL, then if "ordered by the US President" or by "officers appointed over me" then by his oath he is required to disobey.
You are really trying to make something out of nothing cissy. Give it up!
Here read it for yourself, and see how it differs from the OathCreapers version:
Enlistment Oath.
Quoted Text
"I, CICERO, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
There Cissy... I hope this helps. By the way... In the MARINES OATH where it says that Marines will "Defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC" The Domestic enemies (IMO) are groups like the Domestic Terrorists OathCreapers.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
These Oathkeepers sound like those crazy abolitionists of the 1800's. Defying the rules and order of the time, subverting slave laws, violently in many cases.
There Cissy... I hope this helps. By the way... In the MARINES OATH where it says that Marines will "Defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC" The Domestic enemies (IMO) are groups like the Domestic Terrorists OathCreapers.
Would they have defended the contstitution against the domestic enemies during the 1800's and the abolition movement and Underground Railroad? Based what I'm reading, apparently so, since slavery was found constitutional, anybody participating in the stealing of property would be a domestic threat to the order and constitution.
These Oathkeepers sound like those crazy abolitionists of the 1800's. Defying the rules and order of the time, subverting slave laws, violently in many cases.
Quoted Text
The Constitution of the United States was drafted in 1787, and included several provisions regarding slavery. Section 9 of Article I allowed the continued "importation" of slaves. By prohibiting changes for two decades to regulation of the slave trade, Article V effectively protected the trade until 1808, giving the States 20 years to resolve this issue. During that time, planters in states of the Lower South imported tens of thousands of slaves, more than during any previous two decades in colonial history.
As further protection for slavery, the delegates approved Section 2 of Article IV, which prohibited citizens from providing assistance to escaping slaves and required the return of chattel property to owners.
What abolitionists were working for and succeeded at enacting was an amendment to the US constitution... Not "rule by militia" as the OathCreapers propose.
The 13 Amendment abolished slavery in the USA... The OathCreapers want to subvert the US constitution, not amend it. Big Difference!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Does anyone here have a problem with what they stand for?
Quoted Text
Orders We Will Not Obey
“The time is now near at hand which must probably determine, whether Americans are to be, Freemen, or Slaves; whether they are to have any property they can call their own; whether their Houses, and Farms, are to be pillaged and destroyed, and they consigned to a State of Wretchedness from which no human efforts will probably deliver them. The fate of unborn Millions will now depend, under God, on the Courage and Conduct of this army” – Gen. George Washington, to his troops before the battle of Long Island
Such a time is near at hand again. The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the Courage and Conduct of this Army – and this Marine Corps, This Air Force, This Navy and the National Guard and police units of these sovereign states.
Oath Keepers is a non-partisan association of currently serving military, reserves, National Guard, peace officers, fire-fighters, and veterans who swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic … and meant it. We won’t “just follow orders.”
Below is our declaration of orders we will NOT obey because we will consider them unconstitutional (and thus unlawful) and immoral violations of the natural rights of the people. Such orders would be acts of war against the American people by their own government, and thus acts of treason. We will not make war against our own people. We will not commit treason. We will defend the Republic.
Declaration of Orders We Will NOT Obey
Recognizing that we each swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and affirming that we are guardians of the Republic, of the principles in our Declaration of Independence, and of the rights of our people, we affirm and declare the following:
1. We will NOT obey any order to disarm the American people.
The attempt to disarm the people on April 19, 1775 was the spark of open conflict in the American Revolution. That vile attempt was an act of war, and the American people fought back in justified, righteous self-defense of their natural rights. Any such order today would also be an act of war against the American people, and thus an act of treason. We will not make war on our own people, and we will not commit treason by obeying any such treasonous order.
Nor will we assist, or support any such attempt to disarm the people by other government entities, either state or federal.
Washington at Valley Forge
In addition, we affirm that the purpose of the Second Amendment is to preserve the military power of the people so that they will, in the last resort, have effective final recourse to arms and to the God of Hosts in the face of tyranny. Accordingly, we oppose any and all further infringements on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. In particular we oppose a renewal of the misnamed “assault-weapons” ban or the enactment of H.R. 45 (which would register and track gun owners like convicted pedophiles).
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.
One of the causes of the American Revolution was the use of “writs of assistance,” which were essentially warrantless searches because there was no requirement of a showing of probable cause to a judge, and the first fiery embers of American resistance were born in opposition to those infamous writs. The Founders considered all warrantless searches to be unreasonable and egregious. It was to prevent a repeat of such violations of the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects that the Fourth Amendment was written.
We expect that sweeping warrantless searches of homes and vehicles, under some pretext, will be the means used to attempt to disarm the people.
3. We will NOT obey any order to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to trial by military tribunal.
One of the causes of the American Revolution was the denial of the right to jury trial, the use of admiralty courts (military tribunals) instead, and the application of the laws of war to the colonists. After that experience, and being well aware of the infamous Star Chamber in English history, the Founders ensured that the international laws of war would apply only to foreign enemies, not to the American people. Thus, the Article III Treason Clause establishes the only constitutional form of trial for an American, not serving in the military, who is accused of making war on his own nation. Such a trial for treason must be before a civilian jury, not a tribunal.
The international laws of war do not trump our Bill of Rights. We reject as illegitimate any such claimed power, as did the Supreme Court in Ex Parte Milligan (1865). Any attempt to apply the laws of war to American civilians, under any pretext, such as against domestic “militia” groups the government brands “domestic terrorists,” is an act of war and an act of treason.
4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state, or to enter with force into a state, without the express consent and invitation of that state’s legislature and governor.
One of the causes of the American Revolution was the attempt “to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power” by disbanding the Massachusetts legislature and appointing General Gage as “military governor.” The attempt to disarm the people of Massachusetts during that martial law sparked our Revolution. Accordingly, the power to impose martial law – the absolute rule over the people by a military officer with his will alone being law – is nowhere enumerated in our Constitution.
Further, it is the militia of a state and of the several states that the Constitution contemplates being used in any context, during any emergency within a state, not the standing army.
The imposition of martial law by the national government over a state and its people, treating them as an occupied enemy nation, is an act of war. Such an attempted suspension of the Constitution and Bill of Rights voids the compact with the states and with the people.
5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty and declares the national government to be in violation of the compact by which that state entered the Union.
In response to the obscene growth of federal power and to the absurdly totalitarian claimed powers of the Executive, upwards of 20 states are considering, have considered, or have passed courageous resolutions affirming states rights and sovereignty.
Those resolutions follow in the honored and revered footsteps of Jefferson and Madison in their Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, and likewise seek to enforce the Constitution by affirming the very same principles of our Declaration, Constitution, and Bill of Rights that we Oath Keepers recognize and affirm.
Chief among those principles is that ours is a dual sovereignty system, with the people of each state retaining all powers not granted to the national government they created, and thus the people of each state reserved to themselves the right to judge when the national government they created has voided the compact between the states by asserting powers never granted.
Upon the declaration by a state that such a breach has occurred, we will not obey orders to force that state to submit to the national government.
6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.
One of the causes of the American Revolution was the blockade of Boston, and the occupying of that city by the British military, under martial law. Once hostilities began, the people of Boston were tricked into turning in their arms in exchange for safe passage, but were then forbidden to leave. That confinement of the residents of an entire city was an act of war.
Such tactics were repeated by the Nazis in the Warsaw Ghetto, and by the Imperial Japanese in Nanking, turning entire cities into death camps. Any such order to disarm and confine the people of an American city will be an act of war and thus an act of treason.
7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.
Mass, forced internment into concentration camps was a hallmark of every fascist and communist dictatorship in the 20th Century. Such internment was unfortunately even used against American citizens of Japanese descent during World War II. Whenever a government interns its own people, it treats them like an occupied enemy population. Oppressive governments often use the internment of women and children to break the will of the men fighting for their liberty – as was done to the Boers, to the Jewish resisters in the Warsaw Ghetto, and to the Chechens, for example.
mass execution Such a vile order to forcibly intern Americans without charges or trial would be an act of war against the American people, and thus an act of treason, regardless of the pretext used. We will not commit treason, nor will we facilitate or support it.”NOT on Our Watch!”
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” during any emergency, or under any other pretext. We will consider such use of foreign troops against our people to be an invasion and an act of war.
During the American Revolution, the British government enlisted the aid of Hessian mercenaries in an attempt to subjugate the rebellious American people. Throughout history, repressive regimes have enlisted the aid of foreign troops and mercenaries who have no bonds with the people.
Accordingly, as the militia of the several states are the only military force contemplated by the Constitution, in Article I, Section 8, for domestic keeping of the peace, and as the use of even our own standing army for such purposes is without such constitutional support, the use of foreign troops and mercenaries against the people is wildly unconstitutional, egregious, and an act of war.
We will oppose such troops as enemies of the people and we will treat all who request, invite, and aid those foreign troops as the traitors they are.
9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies, under any emergency pretext whatsoever.
One of the causes of the American Revolution was the seizure and forfeiture of American ships, goods, and supplies, along with the seizure of American timber for the Royal Navy, all in violation of the people’s natural right to their property and to the fruits of their labor. The final spark of the Revolution was the attempt by the government to seize powder and cannon stores at Concord.
Deprivation of food has long been a weapon of war and oppression, with millions intentionally starved to death by fascist and communist governments in the 20th Century alone.
Accordingly, we will not obey or facilitate orders to confiscate food and other essential supplies from the people, and we will consider all those who issue or carry out such orders to be the enemies of the people.
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.
There would have been no American Revolution without fiery speakers and writers such as James Otis, Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, and Sam Adams “setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.”
henry
Patrick Henry: “Give me Liberty, or Give me DEATH!”
Tyrants know that the pen of a man such as Thomas Paine can cause them more damage than entire armies, and thus they always seek to suppress the natural rights of speech, association, and assembly. Without freedom of speech, the people will have no recourse but to arms. Without freedom of speech and conscience, there is no freedom. Therefore, we will not obey or support any orders to suppress or violate the right of the people to speak, associate, worship, assemble, communicate, or petition government for the redress of grievances.
— And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually affirm our oath and pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor. Oath Keepers
The above list is not exhaustive but we do consider them to be clear tripwires – they form our “line in the sand,” and if we receive such orders, we will not obey them. Further, we will know that the time for another American Revolution is nigh. If you the people decide that you have no recourse, and such a revolution comes, at that time, not only will we NOT fire upon our fellow Americans who righteously resist such egregious violations of their God given rights, we will join them in fighting against those who dare attempt to enslave them.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
What abolitionists were working for and succeeded at enacting was an amendment to the US constitution... Not "rule by militia" as the OathCreapers propose.
The 13 Amendment abolished slavery in the USA... The OathCreapers want to subvert the US constitution, not amend it. Big Difference!
What about John Brown's invasion of Harpers Ferry? Was John Brown a "domestic terrorist" aimed at subverting the "law of the land"? John Brown would be in Gitmo today based on your theory that Constitutional laws are to only be interpreted by those in power. Just like what happened then when he was captured by marines, and tried for treason. Good job marines.
Does anyone here have a problem with what they stand for?
ME I DO!!!
Again, they decide what is constitutional or not unconstitutional.
If a member of their group is apprehended by the police and is in the process of being charged with a crime... say the crime is an Illegal sawed off shotgun. Your local sheriff who is an oathcreaper can say... Um... NOPE... I know this guy... He's an OatyCreaper and a friend of mine, even though he just used this gun in a possible crime... I won't disarm him.
Now a NORMAL Sheriff (non OathCreaper) would see a crime suspect, disarm him and if appropriate, arrest him.
How many more examples do you need because I have hundreds of em.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
What about John Brown's invasion of Harpers Ferry? Was John Brown a "domestic terrorist" aimed at subverting the "law of the land"? John Brown would be in Gitmo today based on your theory that Constitutional laws are to only be interpreted by those in power. Just like what happened then when he was captured by marines, and tried for treason. Good job marines.
When you promote and use civil disobedience, you are subject to the laws that are in the US Constitution.
Slavery was legal... no problem. The 13 amendment was passed and now... Slavery is Illegal.
It's not a difficult concept.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Again, they decide what is constitutional or not unconstitutional.
If a member of their group is apprehended by the police and is in the process of being charged with a crime... say the crime is an Illegal sawed off shotgun. Your local sheriff who is an oathcreaper can say... Um... NOPE... I know this guy... He's an OatyCreaper and a friend of mine, even though he just used this gun in a possible crime... I won't disarm him.
Now a NORMAL Sheriff (non OathCreaper) would see a crime suspect, disarm him and if appropriate, arrest him.
How many more examples do you need because I have hundreds of em.
So who is the victim of this short shotgun?
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
So a short shotgun is deadlier then a long barreled shotgun? Does this short shotgun somehow kill people on its own due to it being sawed down? Please explain, this should be good.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
So a short shotgun is deadlier then a long barreled shotgun? Does this short shotgun somehow kill people on its own due to it being sawed down? Please explain, this should be good.
A stop sign, like your sawed off shotgun are just metal... they do nothing. (But you already knew that.)
Traffic regulations and gun regulations can save lives... maybe YOUR LIFE, or your loved ones.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
When you promote and use civil disobedience, you are subject to the laws that are in the US Constitution.
Slavery was legal... no problem. The 13 amendment was passed and now... Slavery is Illegal.
It's not a difficult concept.
OHHH...So subject the underclass to tyranny and whippings for a few generations until a civil war and the 13th Amendment is passed. Got it! After all, you wouldn't want to disrupt the order by defending an abused underclass, because the abuse was deemed constitutional by 9 justices. And that's all that matters, the opinion of 9 justices.
Logged
