Monday, March 23, 2009

Soldiers Pledge to Refuse Orders from Rogue U.S. President

Bob Unruh over at WorldNetDaily has written a great story today about an exciting new group of soldiers and law enforcement officials who are dedicated to not becoming Obama's pawns or tin soldiers which he can point at the American public to squash dissent or continue to press his insane agendas.

This is real good news; very encouraging.

The group, called Oath Keepers, encourages military and law enforcement to prevent a rogue Commander in Chief from disarming the American people and violating their rights.

Noting that each soldier's sworn duty is to law and the Constitution, not one particular President or a rogue President's whims or agenda, Oath Keepers is gaining ground so rapidly that they haven't even had time to finish their website.

Here is Unruh's list of the orders which Obama might try to task soldiers or police with doing and which these soldiers and law enforcement officials have sworn to not obey:

Among the orders the soldiers are pledging NOT to obey:

  1. We will NOT obey any order to disarm the American people. … 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.

  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. … We expect that 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. … 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. … 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.

  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.

  6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps. … Such tactics … by the Nazis in the Warsaw Ghetto, and by the Imperial Japanese in Nanking, turn[ed] 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. … 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.

  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.

  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.

  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.

Read the entire story here and pass this on!

16 comments:

packerwatch said...

Obama has not nor has he indicated that he will try to violate any of the Constitutional principles being defended by this group. Also, you're not going to find many people who disagree with the principles they want to defend.

Although, if you agree with what this group stands for, I wonder why you weren't outraged back in 2006, when the Republican congress passed legislation allowing U.S. citizens to be detained as "enemy combatants," something the "Oath Keepers" deem an "act of treason."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6167856

One final point: leave it to you to find a site that makes basic Constitutional principles sound like a fringe idea...I quote from the Oath Keepers' shitty blog:

"When these CFR's, Trilaterals, Bilderbergs, Freemasons, Illumanti.....the whole international Banker Luciferian conspiracy tries to enforce their illegal martial law and officially change our country into a 4th Reich I WON'T STAND FOR IT!"

Don't forget Opus Dei, the Grassy Knoll Shooter, and the aliens from Area 51!

PackSmack said...

So, PW, at what point will Obama and his hoarding Dems be SATISFIED with the power they have and not continue to try to grab for more?

When will he/they stop trying to overturn/topple the American culture and society?

And whatever your answer is, how do you know this?

You cannot deny that his two-month power grab is not the most blatant in US history.

And he/they are just getting started.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it will continue to do the things ducks do.

And power-hungry megalomaniacs are NEVER satisfied with their current power status, they ALWAYS want more. What evidence do you have to say that Obama is anything but????

packerwatch said...

What power has Obama tried to grab?

PackSmack said...

PW, oh, you're not serious, right? Don't MAKE me have to write an entire post about it...

packerwatch said...

Just give me 3 or 4 of the most serious examples. you don't need to write a whole post.

Speaking of unbridled expansion of executive power:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-bush-memos_04mar04,0,2464157.story

Ema Nymton said...

.

Packerwatch,

"Speaking of unbridled expansion of executive power:..."

Now that is unfair Packerwatch. The big difference is shrub was white and Republicant.

For 'Oath Keepers' and their cheerleaders it is all about who Mr Obama is, not what he is doing.

>@:o?
.

PackSmack said...

Ema, you said, "For 'Oath Keepers' and their cheerleaders it is all about who Mr Obama is, not what he is doing."

Oh, and you know this how? Are you able to read the thoughts and intentions of such people's hearts so that YOU can declare what motivates them? That would make you omniscient like Michelle Obama who said that anyone who doesn't vote for Obama is a racist (or something like that.) On the other hand, if one voted for him other than on his policies, that would make THEM racist, wouldn't it?

Is it POSSIBLE that some people are dissatisfied with a shallow, manipulative, power-hungry little despot's EMPTY WORDS and un-AMERICAN ACTIONS? Is it possible to be dissatisfied with that or should everybody just excuse him on everything because he is black?

Don't go there, Ema. You will end up embarrassing yourself even further. I have zero tolerance for racist crap.

PW...3 or 4 examples of Obama's power grab? That equals a post. Coming up...

PackSmack said...

Oh, by the way, PW, Bush's actions were part of his duties as commander in chief to protect us from terrorists in the war on terror. Obama, on the other hand doesn't have to fight the war on terror for to him, it no longer exists. He has stopped prosecution of terrorists, is closing down gitmo and is performing homosexual activities on Achmadinejad. Big difference. Bush worked to help us. Obama works to help our enemy.

packerwatch said...

"Republicant"

proof that dumb, unfunny puns aren't confined to the right.

Ema Nymton said...

.

PackSmack,

You so loudly and vociferously supported shrub and Co. in the so-called war on terror. You supported shrub's actions saying he was not bound by any law passed by Congress, any treaty, or the protections of free speech, due process and the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. You supported shrub to order the military to operate in the U.S. and to operate without constitutional restrictions. They -- the military -- could pick you or me up in the U.S. for any reason and without any legal process. They would not have any restrictions on entering your house to search it, or to seize you. They could put you into a brig without any due process or going to court.

The military could disregard the Posse Comitatus law, which restricts the military from acting as police in the the United States. And the president could, in the name of wartime restrictions, limit free speech. We were looking at one-person rule without any checks and balances -- a lawless state. Law by fiat.

You supported all this and more when shrub was in power. If it is not because of whom Mr Obama is, then why do you not support these actions now? Why do you act as a cheerleader for the treasonous behavior of the 'Oath Takers?'

<@:o?
.

Ben said...

When Slick Willie took over, there was a sharp decline in re-enlistment. I expect that precedent to be repeated.

ThatGirlTasha said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ThatGirlTasha said...

Packer, did you even read #3?

The founder of Oath Keepers,(my husband) Stewart Rhodes, wrote for years and years about the abuse of the executive during Bush (a lot more than you did, I'm sure-where were you??). And as for that quote from a testimonial; People send in their stories and we post them.

We don't edit. We don't change anything. People come in from all sides of the political spectrum and if their oath meant something to them we post their story.

And we have hundreds of them waiting to go up.

The only thing we will not tolerate is racism.

And for Ema, not that you care, but my husband grew up in a family of Mexican migrant farm workers, his name comes from his white father who left when he was three. His Mexican/Apache mother spent her life going from camp to camp and experienced running water and a non dirt floor for the first time when she was twelve years old.

Having my husband publicly insulted as a racist after all his family has suffered is so upsetting I can't even see straight. I've never cried over a stupid internet comment before but I guess there is a first time for everything.



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.

PackSmack said...

Thanks, ThatGirlTasha,

Yea, Ema is a lib too...asleep at the wheel, no clue, blind following the blind over a cliff.

Thanks for you comments. We stand behind you.

Ema Nymton said...

.

ThatGirlTasha ,

Oh boy, a victimist.

"Having my husband publicly insulted as a racist after all his family has suffered is so upsetting I can't even see straight. I've never cried over a stupid internet comment before but I guess there is a first time for everything."

'Oath Keepers' advocates and supports those who say they will behave illegally. And now cries 'I am a victim.'

Wow.

~@:o?
.

PackSmack said...

Ema, So you made the soldier's wife cry, huh? Nothing makes a man more fearsome than when someone makes his wife or child cry...You'd better be careful or I will tell Tasha's husband where you live....