Oath Keepers "Organize a neighborhood Militia NOW"

In light of government corruption, this seems like a logical solution.

reply to post by beezzer


Beez,
You are very much one of my favorite posters here on ATS because of your consistently well founded logic and your abundant courtesy to those who do not agree with you.
I'd very much like to buy you a beer.

On topic...
I wish that people could, for a moment even, stop letting their media driven ideals guide their decisions..
There has never been a time where we have been so consistently and blatently lied to by our "leaders".
I do not care by what means (Oath Keepers, etc..), but we 'The People' must start to take precautions to keep ourselves informed and protected...

Happy Friday everyone.

beezzer
Good you know ALL the members and pay attention to their skin colour. Personally, the rest of us could give a damn.

To prove this specific point? yes I do, and it's nice to see you do too

And what will this prove?

It won't prove anything, but is great evidence that points towards the vast majority of members being white.

OK.

Now you've managed to scare the living hell out of me.

Yeah I can imagine it was a bit of a shock to the system.

Not all white folk will defend their brother whites to the death like some others will....

reply to post by Prezbo369


Still stuck on the pigment of an individual.

Can't get past that, can you.

Misskat1, thank you for a very stimulating and enjoyable thread.

It is indeed unfortunate that some folks just can't get by the race issue or the political affiliation issue. It is not about skin color. My God, that horse has been pummeled into mush. And politics, equally crazy. Our system has been past the post for sometime now. The difference between R and D is ......difficult to discern. Since the Kennedy Assassination, our presidents seem to have been working to strengthen the central government and dilute the authority of the Constitution. One can not ignore the Patriot Act, the NDAA, NSA, Benghazi, IRS....ad infinitum, or so it seems. Even the great conservative Mr. Reagan allowed the formation of Jimmy Carter's Dept of Education rather than fight it tooth and nail as he should have. And one need only recall the Boston Marathon Bombing and that debacle while thousands of militarized police and federal agents trampled all over the 4th Amendment rights of the citizens of Watertown in their quest to capture one injured terrorist. Epic FAIL and the bogey was fingered by a citizen. And we should surrender our arms to these schmucks? They will save us, oh hell yeah.

Some of the posters on this thread are fixated on race to the virtual exclusion of rationality. Either that or they are shills, trolls or whatever. In any case, while annoying, they are irrelevant. If they have served in some capacity I would be surprised. There are no racists in foxholes just like there are no atheists. People who have served may dissent for a myriad of other reasons, but rarely has it been racial, at least in my experience.

Nor is it about guns. I haven't owned a firearm since I left law enforcement because I don't choose to. I do not need some turd in DC telling me I CAN'T have one. I will care for and defend my family by whatever means I, and I alone, determine to be prudent. This issue is non negotiable.

It is WHOLLY about the right of every American to be free to pursue those things he or she finds fulfilling. It is wholly about every American to be free to call Him God, Jesus,Yahweh,Bhudda,Vishnu, Tonka Wakan or......Allah.......or whatever. It is wholly about the right of every American to live, love and thrive without fear of oppression or censure. It is about FREEDOM.

Since, apparently, you are among the elders, I must be among the ancient ones, the Grandfathers. I shall exercise due caution as I step down from my soapbox and dodder off to bed.

Thanks again. I enjoyed this but have no knowledge of how to star or flag you.......hell.....come to think of it, my vcr is still blinking 12:00.....wonder where I left that thing......hmmm.
Good Night

reply to post by spock51


Age, Ive had about 40 yrs longer to live than my cousins that died in Viet Nam. If your 51, Im older, just don't tell anyone. I almost broke my neck getting off my soap box, so be careful. K

beezzer
reply to post by Prezbo369

 

Still stuck on the pigment of an individual.

Can't get past that, can you.

You're not capable of being honest on this point, are you.

reply to post by Prezbo369

It won't prove anything, but is great evidence that points towards the vast majority of members being white.

I’m not sure why you’re making a point of the percentage of whites in OathKeepers. If it is predominately “white” then that would coincide with the makeup of the country. According to the 2012 US Census the country is roughly 63% white. If you count white-looking Hispanics like George Zimmerman that number jumps to @78%.

What relevance does any of this have to OathKeepers’ mission? OathKeepers doesn’t care what race it’s members are….they don’t even ask about race. Seems like your grasping at straws for a way to discredit this organization. Why is that? What about it's mission or message offends you?

seabag

I’m not sure why you’re making a point of the percentage of whites in OathKeepers. If it is predominately “white” then that would coincide with the makeup of the country.

Hmm no it wouldn't automatically coincide with the makeup of the country, I guess that means that you think the members of any organisation would coincide with the makeup of the country.....?

What relevance does any of this have to OathKeepers’ mission? OathKeepers doesn’t care what race it’s members are….they don’t even ask about race. Seems like your grasping at straws for a way to discredit this organization. Why is that? What about it's mission or message offends you?

As ive said before the organisation and its 'orders' are perhaps the most un-patriotic things Ive ever come across. But the fact that its leadership and its members are predominately white men seems to be a point no-one in this thread seems to want to admit.

Why is this?

reply to post by Prezbo369

Hmm no it wouldn't automatically coincide with the makeup of the country,

I just showed you that it does coincide….read the census numbers. Is 78% a majority?

I guess that means that you think the members of any organisation would coincide with the makeup of the country.....?

I have no idea how you came to that conclusion. I was taking about OathKeeps. There are plenty of groups that organize around race, such as New Black Panther, Black Congressional Caucus, KKK, etc. OathKeepers doesn’t fall into that category.

As ive said before the organisation and its 'orders' are perhaps the most un-patriotic things Ive ever come across.

Is prepping and organizing a militia unpatriotic? Isn’t that what our founding fathers did? Aren't we instructed to maintain a well-regulated militia according to the second amendment?

But the fact that its leadership and its members are predominately white men seems to be a point no-one in this thread seems to want to admit.

Why is this?

Because you haven’t shown that assertion to be true and nobody can explain why race matters in this case. None of OathKeepers agenda has any racial component.

reply to post by seabag


Seabag, he isn't here to add meaningful discourse. He is here to derail it from other positive trails this discussion could have followed. You did notice that he has 1.26 stars for each of his posts. I think that means, what he contributes, isn't even worth a gold star.

Also, our friend here, has made 4 threads in over 2 years, with an average of 2 and 1/2 flags each. I think that speaks for itself.

You can check my previous posts, I do not go out of my way to argue, or humiliate anyone. I will try to loose sleep over all the lightening bolts I will lose for not being so nice.

seabag
I just showed you that it does coincide….read the census numbers. Is 78% a majority?

No, you linked to the 2012 consensus, not to the OT'ers membership makeup....(I believe the percentage would be much higher than 78%)

I have no idea how you came to that conclusion. I was taking about OathKeeps. There are plenty of groups that organize around race, such as New Black Panther, Black Congressional Caucus, KKK, etc. OathKeepers doesn’t fall into that category.

Ive not said that the OT'ers organise around race......you guys seem to become irrational merely because I'm stating that the vast majority of members and leaders of the OT'ers are white men. You also seem to be obsessed with the Black Panthers....

Is prepping and organizing a militia unpatriotic? Isn’t that what our founding fathers did? Aren't we instructed to maintain a well-regulated militia according to the second amendment?

Whenever any part of the constitution is hyjacked by a nefarious group such as the OT'ers (who are only interested in keeping their gunz at any cost), yes it's unpatriotic.

Because you haven’t shown that assertion to be true and nobody can explain why race matters in this case.

Ive given evidence that supports my claim, why don't you have a look on the OT'ers website yourself.

Aww speaking about me in the third person?

You stay classy misskat1

reply to post by Prezbo369

Whenever any part of the constitution is hyjacked by a nefarious group such as the OT'ers (who are only interested in keeping their gunz at any cost), yes it's unpatriotic.

Please explain how asking its members to adhere to the oath they once took (the oath the US government asked them to take) is hijacking the constitution? LOL

I'm still trying to figure out what specifically they're doing that you take exception to.

I'm done with the circular argument over race so please stop brining it up. Thanks.

Seems like the thread derailers are getting more and more out of hand lately on ATS. I hope the mods are paying attention...there's quite a few people very active lately that seem to be here just to cause trouble rather than add to the discussions.

I listened to that entire C2C session and I thank the OP for posting it; I probably wouldn't have paid attention otherwise. The Oathkeepers founder was very calm, rational and thoughtful and he made a very good case for himself. I especially was interested in his remarks that for every one person who joins publically, there are dozens more who agree in principle but for various reasons are afraid or hesitant to join but nevertheless support his cause, implying that they'll come forward when the time comes.

Just one question: Are they going to wait for overt fascism such as another false flag and then military appearing on US streets, detaining and otherwise harassing the citizenry, or are they going to go up against the Secret Service that is now protecting Obama and George W. Bush and others guilty of mass murder (in our name and with our money) and bring them to justice? Because from what I can see, the Republic is lost and only some real action will get it back. There's no use talking about what you'll do 'when if'; the time for action is long past.

These are the only guys who are going to do anything about it, obviously. They're armed and they're well trained and that's all we've got. When Vincent Bugliosi wrote his book about trying George W. Bush for murder, he couldn't get one single district attorney in any county in the country to press charges and form a grand jury. Not one. Nor could he get one mass media outlet to discuss his book. No one would touch it and it's either because the mass media is controlled fully by these ghouls, or out of fear; not a strange reaction considering those going up against the Bush Crime Family and it's successor, the Obama Crime Convention, seem to die young with alarming frequency.

So, Oathkeepers; what's it gonna be? All talk and no action? Waiting for just what to happen, exactly? How many more months are we going to see the Constitution used for less than toilet paper?

Misskat,

I've been following the things churned out by a group of veterans that would fall much under the same mindset of the Oath Keepers. In fact, I'm pretty sure that, at least some of them, are Oath Keepers. I've been following them for two years now.

Over the last few years, many veterans have been returning home from the Iraq War. To say that some of them are disenfranchised is probably the understatement of the year. The high number of suicides among veterans is phenomenal. The number that ended up on the streets as homeless is also just as sobering. Part of the issue with what has occurred with veterans of wars such as Iraq and Vietnam is that what you had, on the most basic level, was a whole lot of idealistic young men entering into service to defend our nation and being sent instead to fight in wars, viewing and engaging in the atrocities of war, and a discovery, either in the midst or upon return, that the cause of the war was not as it was reported to be. I cannot blame them one bit for being upset.

This article by Crooks and Liars,: Oath Keepers: Potentially one of the most dangerous and lethal of all the new "Patriot" groups , comes complete with a link to a FBI document from 2008 discussing the recruitment of military personnel into White Supremacy groups. However, the links to any sort of racial group, from what I have seen in the various articles that have written on the subject of the Oath Keepers, the association seems to be tenuous at best. In the Crooks and Liars article, Neiwert references readers to an article in Mother Jones on the subject of the Oath Keepers but curiously enough, Stewart Rhodes, the founder of Oath Keepers, mentions the struggle with having to keep their forums clean of racist remarks and calls for violence:

IN VEGAS, Rhodes took me aside repeatedly to explain that many of those in attendance—including featured speakers like "Patriot Pastor" Garrett Lear ("When a government doesn't obey God, we must reform it")—might not represent Oath Keepers' official message. He and his Web staff have been overwhelmed, he told me, by the amount of policing required to keep people from posting "off message" commentary encouraging violence or racism. Last December, they shut down one forum because too many posters were using it to recruit for militias.

www.motherjones.com...

In terms of racism, I do not think that the core of the Oath Keepers would fall under the idea of a "white supremacist" group. What is likely happening within it, however, is that you cannot always control who joins your group. Like the example of Dyers, they may seem like an ideal member until you find out that they are not. To label them entirely as a white supremacy terrorist patriot group like Neiwert's article is like saying that every member of the Catholic church is a pedophile. That's not necessarily true. Curiously enough, the forum rules on the Oath Keeper's official site includes this rule that tends to negate the accusation, at least at the leadership level:

By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will agree to abide by our statement of non-discrimination and non-violence.

Religion Bashing will not be permitted

I somehow doubt Stormfront has that forum rule.

Overall, the Oath Keepers' core seems like their intention is to uphold the Constitution and not to overthrow the government. From what I've seen come through on the similar group of veterans that I follow, they primarily would like to see the government clean itself up. The issue is that the idea of disenfranchised veterans banding together would be incredibly scary to a government. Furthermore, when you have injections of the specter of Timothy McVeigh, a well known instance of a veteran who became a terrorist as in the Crooks and Liars article does, then it comes off as even scarier because McVeigh didn't just kill governmental employees. He killed children, too. However, so far, the Oath Keepers' most recent official activity that has been reported in the media has been their placement of Orwellian billboards at transit hubs for DoD workers. This shift to creating localized militias is interesting.

That said, here's the Oath Keepers' blog: oathkeepers.org...

If you chose to watch the video via youtube directly, I'd advise turning off the annotations at the beginning as the video pauses and asks you to answer a question that could be incriminating. Although the author of the Oath Keeper's blog doesn't directly comment on the contents of the video, the remark about the book could construe some interest in what it contains. There are a lot of groups that have been working for several years to attempt to change perceived issues with the government. There are others working in an attempt to foment a revolution. Considering the reception that they get via the media, it may be only a matter of time before some of them do become radicalized but the key is that they haven't yet. No group should be convicted via the media of a crime that they have not yet committed and that includes terrorism.

reply to post by WhiteAlice


Extremely well written. If there isn't a thread, regarding the misinformation about racism within the militia factions, you should start one. Not all Militias are created equal. Not all are racist. My involvement will probably be like organizing my neighborhood in an emergency, But Im thinking its best not to be a part of anything called Militia. Neighborhood watch is more my speed.
Thank you again, for sharing your info. K

reply to post by misskat1


Thanks. If I did, it'd probably end up looking like this one though. It gets aired out enough. The thing that definitely shifts the Oath Keepers out of their unhappiness being related to a "black president" is actually Rhode's own personal blog. He clearly states, over and over again, that Bush began the erosion of civil liberties and more and voices his thoughts on how the two parties are complicit in this erosion. Kind of kills the "oh they're just complaining because the president is black" argument when he's pointing the first finger at Bush. The affiliation of Patriot groups and racism was just recently reinforced a few weeks or so ago on MSNBC. Should explain the fervor in this thread a bit.

I think that talking with your neighbors is a great idea, regardless of what happens. One never knows what could happen in an area whether it be a natural disaster such as an earthquake, hurricane, flooding, or a revolution. Knowing who can do what is a great thing to know ahead of time instead of scrambling around blindly.

reply to post by WhiteAlice


Wow, where did you get all those fun filled facts?

Maybe you work for mother jones or the southern poverty law center, OR you just consider everything you read on the Internet as fact.

reply to post by spock51

Amen. I think a big area of improvement should be communication.

Communications systems are lacking big time. Gotta setup networks where cell phones can jump onto private networks.