Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Oath keepers: Orders we will not obey

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Oath keepers: Orders we will not obey

    First off, I’m not a very political person; in fact, I like to adhere to the tradition of avoiding matters of politics. My oath of office requires me to serve the elected leaders of the nation without regard to their political party and without regard to my own political beliefs or affiliations.

    According to the Army Officer’s Guide, “It could not and must never be otherwise. The armed forces are the final bulwark for the preservation of the Constitution and the security of the nation. … Loyalties go to the nation and to its form of government.”

    However, I’ve learned about some things within my life that have really disturbed me just to name a few. (Full disclosure: consider the sources of these videos)
    It appears that both parties are capable and willing to do things which could be considered unlawful.
    Gun confiscation during Katrina - [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-taU9d26wT4[/media]
    Obama Moves To Legalize Warrantless Wiretapping - [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jSUHVUgJFc[/media]
    Man harassed by TSA - [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-QKSmbXlic[/media]
    Think the rights granted by constitution could never be violated on our soil?
    A few examples I can think of: consider Katrina, consider the concentration camps set up for the Japanese, and consider Lincoln’s suspension of Habeas Corpus (I’m sure there are more).
    Just as the crisis of 9/11 was used to justify the patriotic act (which may be unconstitutional, I’m not an expert) and Katrina was used as justification to order law enforcement/military to do some dubious things, I fear what the economic crisis (or the next one) may bring upon my country.

    In December 2008, I took this oath of office.

    I (insert name), having been appointed a (insert rank) in the U.S. Army under the conditions indicated in this document, do accept such appointment and 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; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter, so help me God.

    Recently, I discovered an organization that seems to offer some good ideas about how to discharge my office.
    OATH KEEPERS: ORDERS WE WILL NOT OBEY [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zf2K4-BQYAI&feature=channel[/media]
    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.
    Explanation of orders: http://oath-keepers.blogspot.com/200...orders-we.html

    As a future military police officer, I hope I am never put in a situation where I may even have to consider disobeying an order. However, I feel that this issue is an important one and should be talked about.

    As asserted by the Army Officer’s Guide:
    “First, though, let us recognize what all American soldiers have in common. All must support and defend the Constitution against its enemies domestic and foreign and remain loyal to the American way of government and life. This requires courage, commitment, discipline, selflessness, and a regard for fellow citizens. The key difference in the oaths [of enlisted soldiers and officers]-the omission of the promise to obey in the officer’s oath-is what defines the differences between Army officers and enlisted soldiers. Officers are legally bound by the same UCMJ requirement to obey as are all other soldiers, but by their oath, they are not morally bound. Although it at first sounds like ‘doublethink,’ it most assuredly is not. Officers are trusted by the American people … of knowing when to not obey. […] Officers are expected to exercise sound judement, which sometimes-rarely, but sometimes-requires them to bend or break rules; to not obey.”

    Please let me know what you think.
    Please do not turn this topic into a political debate, stay on topic.
    Last edited by Igor; 04-10-2009, 02:55 PM. Reason: Added Stuff
    "Never forget that you are there to SERVE the soldiers. Listen to your NCOs and always do the right thing." -My Father
    "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGNxHMFjigA"
    "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ce0c6qVnJE4"
    "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2Lpc9vTnqU"
    "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEzc9fB8xPo"
    "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tdCTP_ae_8"
    "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrmoSZgYaFw"

  • #2
    Re: Oath keepers: Orders we will not obey

    Interesting. I like how the stated positions seem relatively apolitical in that they oppose both removing guns and warrentless tapping, at least that's a good sign.
    I can ADS using more than a 2x without significant stutter! This was a good patch.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Oath keepers: Orders we will not obey

      Originally posted by Igor View Post
      Please do not turn this topic into a political debate, stay on topic.
      From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics

      Politics is the process by which groups of people make decisions. The term is generally applied to behaviour within civil governments, but politics has been observed in all human group interactions, including corporate, academic, and religious institutions. It consists of "social relations involving authority or power"[1] and refers to the regulation of a political unit,[2] and to the methods and tactics used to formulate and apply policy.[3]
      Dude, seriously, WHAT handkerchief?

      snooggums' density principal: "The more dense a population, the more dense a population."

      Iliana: "You're a great friend but if we're ever chased by zombies I'm tripping you."

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Oath keepers: Orders we will not obey

        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.
        Being a soldier sucks. You fight and kill under the whims of the current leadership of the country, whatever political/ideological/economic 'cause' that may be. If some terrible event happens and martial law is declared in this country, I hope there are enough good men out there in our military that will follow their conscience even if its against an order. Although that discussion is pretty much mute when you have a gun pointed at your head if you don't, hopefully it never comes to that.


        “First, though, let us recognize what all American soldiers have in common. All must support and defend the Constitution against its enemies domestic and foreign and remain loyal to the American way of government and life.
        The military should ultimately fight for the well being of the American people, not for a corrupt government that is no longer answerable to the people. Or any other national gov't or international body for that matter. Can you imagine the ****storm there would be if there was U.N. troops policing U.S. cities?

        It has been suggested that as our country becomes increasingly militaristic, it will erode and destroy the foundations our republic was built upon. There are many forces that are working to undermine our constitution (the U.N., international corporatism, expanding government policing powers, the war on drugs just to name a few). The American people and ultimately the military have the duty to uphold the rights and principles laid out in our founding documents.
        Last edited by aeroripper; 04-11-2009, 04:33 PM.
        Like the server? Become a regular! TGNS Required Reading
        Answers to every server question? Yes! TGNS FAQ

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Oath keepers: Orders we will not obey

          Originally posted by aeroripper View Post
          The military should ultimately fight for the well being of the American people, not for a corrupt government that is no longer answerable to the people.
          That's why the founders didn't want a standing army, and wanted the citizens to be able to use the same weapons that professional armies of the day held. (Like the Red Coats, the greatest army of the greatest superpower of the time.) Armies always work for the government. Militias work for the people, because they are the people. Militias are the military equivalent of your volunteer fire department. It's all the people in the neighborhood/town who are willing to defend it.
          Dude, seriously, WHAT handkerchief?

          snooggums' density principal: "The more dense a population, the more dense a population."

          Iliana: "You're a great friend but if we're ever chased by zombies I'm tripping you."

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Oath keepers: Orders we will not obey

            Many oaths are based at least in part on Christianity which is interesting considering James 5:12

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Oath keepers: Orders we will not obey

              The military fights for the Constitution. Not the president or government...
              Skud


              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Oath keepers: Orders we will not obey

                Originally posted by ScratchMonkey View Post
                Politics is the process by which groups of people make decisions. The term is generally applied to behaviour within civil governments, but politics has been observed in all human group interactions, including corporate, academic, and religious institutions. It consists of "social relations involving authority or power"[1] and refers to the regulation of a political unit,[2] and to the methods and tactics used to formulate and apply policy.[3]
                Ha, good point.
                What I meant was I didn't want this topic to degrade into placing blame on one side or the other.

                Originally posted by aeroripper View Post
                If some terrible event happens and martial law is declared in this country, I hope there are enough good men out there in our military that will follow their conscience even if its against an order.
                I think the most vital time to have rights is during a terrible event. Imagine if people of middle eastern descent were rounded up on 9/11. However, sometimes martial law is necessary; for example, EXTREME civil unrest like in some Mexican cities (murders, violent riots, etc.; don't really see a good alternative). However, a fine line needs to be walked where just enough force is used and it shouldn't be used to justify limiting the rights from then on out (Ex: seizing firearms and not giving them back, ever, or imposing a permanent curfew).

                Originally posted by aeroripper View Post
                Can you imagine the ****storm there would be if there was U.N. troops policing U.S. cities?
                I think a few Americans may have a problem with that... :)

                Originally posted by aeroripper View Post
                There are many forces that are working to undermine our constitution (the U.N., international corporatism, expanding government policing powers, the war on drugs just to name a few). The American people and ultimately the military have the duty to uphold the rights and principles laid out in our founding documents.
                Excellent point

                Originally posted by ScratchMonkey View Post
                That's why the founders didn't want a standing army, and wanted the citizens to be able to use the same weapons that professional armies of the day held. (Like the Red Coats, the greatest army of the greatest superpower of the time.) Armies always work for the government. Militias work for the people, because they are the people. Militias are the military equivalent of your volunteer fire department. It's all the people in the neighborhood/town who are willing to defend it.
                Well, you kind of have that with the National Guard since it is technically under the Governor's command, and I would make the argument Police Departments are sort of the local form of the Nat. Guard.

                I found this, "What the Founding Fathers Meant by the 'Militia'"
                http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/rkba/ff_militia.htm
                Reading some of those quotations, the intent of the founders seems pretty clear to me...

                George Washington: "A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government."
                "Never forget that you are there to SERVE the soldiers. Listen to your NCOs and always do the right thing." -My Father
                "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGNxHMFjigA"
                "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ce0c6qVnJE4"
                "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2Lpc9vTnqU"
                "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEzc9fB8xPo"
                "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tdCTP_ae_8"
                "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrmoSZgYaFw"

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Oath keepers: Orders we will not obey

                  Surely you should be defending the constitution, right? That's what makes america and it needs to be defended. Anyone going against that is surely an enemy of the state on any point.

                  Therefore, any deviation of the constitution must require all serving soldiers, etc to take action to go against such deviations. If the oathes listed above are constitutional and they have been broken, you have sworn an oath to do something about it, along with every other serving member. The oath seems pretty clear cut to me.

                  Since I am not a US citizen I can only talk from where I see things but to me it seems that the reality is that constituional breaches are acceptable when it isn't affecting the self because at the end of the day, people don't want to stand up for what they believe. That leaves a few people who are willing to do so but society seems to label them "trouble makers".

                  I would think that if one was to take matters into their own hands on constitutional breaches, they would be labelled as some kind of Rambo - a nutter who took the law into his own hands.

                  One thing I've learned about life - there are a few people that give a **** about justice and the rights of people and the rest are selfish and just dont give a ****.

                  So where does that leave us?
                  Jex.

                  Comment

                  Connect

                  Collapse

                  TeamSpeak 3 Server

                  Collapse

                  Advertisement

                  Collapse

                  Twitter Feed

                  Collapse

                  Working...
                  X