Just Wright

Oath Keepers » Blog Archive » Pahrump Oath Keepers Issue Proclamation » Comment Page 1#comment-29725#comment-29725#comment-29725

Click here to read full length version. 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.

Click here to read full length version.

---

Founder Stewart Rhodes

Stewart is the founder and Director of Oath Keepers. He served as a U.S. Army paratrooper until disabled in a rough terrain parachuting accident during a night jump.

He is a former firearms instructor and former member of Rep. Ron Paul’s DC staff.

Stewart previously wrote the monthly Enemy at the Gates column for S.W.A.T. Magazine

Stewart graduated from Yale Law School in 2004, where his paper “Solving the Puzzle of Enemy Combatant Status” won Yale’s Miller prize for best paper on the Bill of Rights. He assisted teaching U.S. military history at Yale, was a Yale Research Scholar, and is writing a book on the dangers of applying the laws of war to the American people.

---

Board of Directors

Capt. Gregory Gooch (Ret), Merchant Marine, and Viet Nam Era Navy veteran.

Sgt. Rand Cardwell.  U.S.M.C. veteran (Desert Storm). Tennessee Chapter President.

Franklin Shook.  U.S.M.C. veteran (Vietnam).  Montana Chapter President.

Robert A. Gomez, MSgt, USAF (RET). Oklahoma Chapter President.

David T. Helms, U.S. Army (Vet), AR Chapter President

Maj. Rex H. McTyeire (Ret), U.S. Army Special Forces, SC Chapter President

David J. Rivers U.S.M.C. veteran (Vietnam) Oath Keepers General Counsel

Richard Mack, Former Sheriff of Graham County, Arizona

Terry Flink, 1LT U.S. Army veteran,Nevada Chapter President

via oathkeepers.org

This is a reblog from the Pahrump Oath Keepers Blog. How do YOU feel about this? With the Exception of #5, I don't see anything untoward about these items. I would have agreed with item #5 as well, had about a million Americans not unecessarily died settling this issue of States Rights.
Not since the Civil War has the political-ideological devide been so great in our country. It is alarming that Americans even feel the need to take an oath to such effect. But they do. With the one exeption noted do I feel that any of these points of pledge should be in any way unpatriotic, illegal, unconstitutional, or somehow subversive. What have I missed? Am I so vastly out of touch? Honestly, how do YOU feel about this?

Glenn Beck: We've Been Betrayed

Conservative talk radio host Glenn Beck leaves no doubt about how he feels about the deficit reduction bill that President Barack Obama and Congress finally agreed upon,

via www.newsmax.com

'No risk' the US will lose its top credit rating, says Treasury's Geithner - The Hill's On The Money

'No risk' the US will lose its top credit rating, says Treasury's Geithner

By Michael O'Brien - 04/19/11 10:33 AM ET

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said Tuesday there is "no risk" the U.S. will lose its top credit rating amid a new analysis that revised its outlook on American debt to "negative."

Geithner took to the airwaves of financial news networks to push back against a report Monday by Standard & Poor's that lowered its outlook on U.S. debt to "negative," reflecting political uncertainty over whether lawmakers will reach an agreement to address long-term debt. 

---

via thehill.com

I am not a so-called Tea-Partier. I am not, because the title is so vague that it really has no definition. What I am,is a fiscal conservative. By that ,I mean that it's not rocket-science to realize that the brand of economy and and recovery that our current administration has been following is false and delusional.
It's historical. It has never worked long-term. I don't know why so many Americans have allowed this to go on so long--led like lemmings off a cliff. The reason I mention the Tea-Party is that they have been so vilified for their general common sense approach to improving the economy just as me must at home.
The main precept for this approach is to stop the out-of-control governmental spending, reduce the need for so much individual taxation, and allow Capitalism and free-enterprise to happen without so many constraints. In other words--to live our means. Why is that so hard to understand? Remember that the Tea Party IS NOT A PARTY AT ALL. It's not a Republican thing. Neither is fiscal conservatism, unfortunately.
It is not merely a pie-in-the-sky ideal; it is the only course that can work. It will happen one way or another. It will happen it a planned way for whch we can prepare. Or it will happen from cause and effect regardless of what we do. This is why Communism has never worked.
Okay--maybe it IS human greed that makes this idea work. Call it that if it makes you feel better. Maybe it would sound better to call it work for rewards or something like that. Either way, it is what it is, or from a pessimists viewpoint, it ain't what it ain't. Better?
Whatever it is entitled, it just IS. By nature humans tend to do the things that personally reward them. No matter how idealistic a minority of people are, or even a majority, they will be the most productive and the most personally satisfied if the gain from being industrious. Even criminals work under this premise (possibly, especially criminals).
People tend to steal and rape and plunder and deal drugs or use drugs--because there is some "positive" payoff for them so doing. Remove the incentive and they'll likely stop. Too bad our justice system doesn't seem to provide such deterrence. This thought should be examined too.
Meanwhile, our personal ideals cannot be imposed upon everyone else just because we think they are the right ones. They HAVE to actually BE the correct ideals. The ones that work. The sky is not blue if it is black. It's just not--even if you are blind or in a cave.  
Now for all of the vilification of the TEA PARTY that has taken place in the media, among liberals, among status-quo (so-called progressive) Republicans, among most Democrats, and by the finger-pointing of President Obama's Administration--it should be dawning upon rational people that the downgrading of America's credit rating has happened BECAUSE OF THE HIGH-DEBT THAT HAS BEEN RUN UP! It Is not because during the past few weeks the freshmen Congressmen who were voted in last fall have at least tried to keep their promises to their constituents. so don't EVEN keep up that stupid line.
Not because taxes have not been high enough. It's real easy to cry fowl and demand taxes from people and classes who are not you. I suppose everyone does such things. But this approach is no better an approach than any other prejudiced finger-pointing. So it is prejudice toward a vast minority--the rich.
The rich are anyone who has more than we do. They are a moving target that's easy to assign blame to in order to deflect blame from being directed at us--and it is emotion-driven. It is the approach that has always been divisive. It is class distinction.
We don't have enough. They appear to. So it is their fault. It's not fair! We cry. When in reality what WE propose is not fair. Why should someone other than us have to pay for our existence? I have never got that. I have never been rich--except in the eyes of people poorer than I, and that's means poor. Maybe they DO need our help. They are mentally and/or physically handicapped.
This is why good and responsible people share their wealth charitably with the less-fortunate--voluntarily. Not by force. I am willing to bet that it is religion more than any other one factor that influences people to be altruistic. So stop damning those terrible and out of touch old time religionists who have worked hard enough to have a few more bucks that you. They are currently running interference for you with the tax man. They are also giving more to the truly unfortunates of the world way more than any government.
The amazing thing to me, and I've said it before but it is still amazing, is that what I grew up being taught and what most Americans believed some twenty, thirty, forty years ago--certainly less than an average lifetime ago--HAS NOW BEING CALLED THE RADICAL RIGHTWING BELIEF OF THE CRAZIES! To hear the above mentioned segments led by the decidedly left-leaning media tell it. But just that short time ago those RIGHTWINGERS were considered mainstream or even leftests. I am not kidding.
If you have lived long enough, then you know this is true. If you have not lived long enough--you can read it in archived newspapers. Or ask your parents and grandparents.
My parents nearly starved to death during their early lifetimes--during the Great Depression. They were Southern Democrats. But they espoused principals based upon history and common sense. What they believed--would now be considered solidly right--for the most part. What regular Democrats believed was what a few left-wing-nuts believed then. And what true lefties now believe was FREAKIN ILLEGAL. It was not politically correct to plot to overthrow your government--whether or not it was merely called fundamentally changing it. 
It was not politically correct, just that short lifetime ago, to want a handout from people richer than us. This was reserved for those having absolutely no hope left, no self-respect, no nothing. It was not considered fair, good, or deserved. It was the exception ot the rule. It was sad. It was not popular nor was it something to strive for. Maybe that was harsh, but it was that way then.
Guess which set of principles made America a world power? It was not the rhetoric we hear now coming out of the White House and the Senate. Sure, relatively blessed and rich brat that I was, I got in on the cool protests of the sixties and early seventies. But I out-grew that foolish little tangent. But by the eighties I had a family and a bunch of kids and needs and wants and desires. If anyone was giving such things away back then, I did not get them.
The only way for me and my family to survive was for me to be productive, work hard, use tried and proved principles of wealth, and try to catch up to where I could have been if I had not played liberally for a decade or so. In other words I woke up. I didn't sell out. I relearned age-old truths which--had I just listened to my parents, our parents, the previous generation--I would not have to learn for myself.
But it seems like so few do the smart thing. Those who do are blessed for it. Yeah, maybe we all gained a little from the mistakes we made. We were certainly sincere. Maybe we even made some corrections that needed to be made. But as with most corrections--we went overboard. Like a friend once said--peace and love, became drugs and sex. And other such things.
If I didn't once think there was a devil. I sure do now. I saw him obliterate the goodness of the ideals of my generation's best. Now I am watchning current generation's best run off the cliff following by watching following the rear-ends leading them. I am hoping that future generations of my children and grandchildren relearn the lost lessons. It is still within our power to correct our over-corrections. If not for us, for the kids 
I hope Americans wake up. But I really fear that it's too late for the country. I can only hope that some individuals will look after themselves and theirs. And survive to rebuild again. A country can crash without all of its citizens going down with it. If fact, we have an obligation to survive.

Does Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and his boss know what they are doing? I rest my case.

China Flays US Over Credit Rating Downgrade

By calling the outlook "negative," S&P signalled another downgrade is possible in the next 12 to 18 months.

Worries that the United States was slipping into recession and the euro zone debt crisis was spreading drove a week-long rout in which $2.5 trillion was wiped off global markets.

Better-than-expected U.S. jobs growth in July helped support Wall Street on Friday but stocks slipped back into the red in late trading.

China roundly condemned the United States for its "debt addiction" and "short sighted" political wrangling and said the world needed a new stable global reserve currency.

"China, the largest creditor of the world's sole superpower, has every right now to demand the United States address its structural debt problems and ensure the safety of China's dollar assets," the Xinhua commentary said.

It urged the United States to cut military and social welfare expenditure. It also said further credit downgrades would very likely undermine the world economic recovery and trigger new rounds of financial turmoil.

"International supervision over the issue of U.S. dollars should be introduced and a new, stable and secured global reserve currency may also be an option to avert a catastrophe caused by any single country," Xinhua said.

via www.newsmax.com

Now tell me, does the excessive debt incurred over the past two decades still appear to be a GOOD thing? Can we spend out way of of this crisis? To think that we can is counter-intuitive at best. Why can't the best minds in america figure this out? They can.

Democrats deride new TSA behavior-detection program as 'chat downs' - The Hill's Transportation Report

In a message posted on his Twitter stream Monday, Thompson pointed to the letter, saying "TSA 'chat downs' program will begin today @ Boston Logan - see our concerns here."

Pistole has said a "known-traveler" program would improveTSA's ability to get passengers quickly to their flights.

"These improvements will enable our officers to focus their efforts on higher-risk areas," Pistole said on a conference call with aviation officials last month when the program was announced. "Enhancing identity-based screening is another common-sense step in the right direction as we continue to strengthen overall security, and improve the passenger experience whenever possible."

via thehill.com

I have never been a fan of the TSA security program as it now exists. It is far too ineffective, as evidenced by frequent failed security tests as governmental testers stroll back and forth through checkpoints carrying everything from simulated bombs to guns and knives without detection.
I also feel that the invasive procedures is more about dumbing people down in order to increase their tolerance to governmental intrusion. We are being made to give up individual rights without any benefit--not even improved security. It is impossible to prevent all crime in any society, much less a free society. There will always be dangers, but the odds are in our favor, if we continue to enjoy individual rights. Government will never replace God, regardless of how hard it tries.
And lastly, I detest the class of over-paid minimum-wage pseudo-law-enforcement idiots being empowered with the ability to affect life or death situations on a whim. Enough of these security people are evidently wanabe whatever-something-powerfuls that they puff up and make a personal pride-fest at every opportunity. As a wise American religionist and philosopher once said, "As soon as a man gets a little authority, he immediately begins to abuse it", [paraphrased to shorten]. I have seldom found any greater insight into the nature of man.
I had the unfortunate experience of being the firsthand object of just such abuse when I traveled this weekend. I had to carry life-necessary medicines which require refrigeration. I followed the TSA website in using a frozen gel-pac while flying. While I had no problem until a return leg of the trip, just such an above-mentioned wannabe chose to incorrectly disallow my gel-pac due to his misinformation.
Long story short, even though I sought the opinion of a supervisor twice, and quoted verse and paragraph of the law, the entire TSA staff immediately on location refused to yield and insisted on showing solidarity with the misinformed agent, even though it was clear to me that it was clear to several of them that he was in mistaken. They wouldn't back down.
I was stalled from seeing a supervisor, not that I have much confidence that it would have helped. I was treated rudely, disrespectfully, I was threatened with "missing" my plane and having to submit to an invasive pat-down, and in out of consideration for my flustered traveling companion, I was forced to give up frozen gel-pac--even though it could have resulted in sickness or even death. What it for sure resulted in is the very costly ruination of my meds.
Had I been traveling alone, and had I not been so beat down with sickness and the unnecessary Resistance that I encountered I would have stayed until this rule could have been clarified in my favor--or have rented a car and driven home, or have flown from another airport. But I was shamed and bullied into compliance--to deal with the matter as an after-the-fact complaint--hardly a good solution under the life-threatening circumstances.
There is nothing worse than unthinking, proud, stupid, misinformed, overpaid, self-important people who have power over you, and who insist on causing you grief merely because they can.
I didn't die, but lost expensive meds and my own dignity and self-respect for capitulating--even if it was for the benefit of my companion's comfort--and I could have died. I think I would have liked to have, on their watch, just to make my point.
But it is my experience that most often such blundering and ill-conceived ideas such as the entire TSA--usually perpetuate themselves--rather than doing ANYTHING to solve the real security problems. No one wins in such situations, not even the mindless agents who think they did. They re giving away their own individual rights along with mine and yours.
I have filed my complaint. It will be interesting to see if I receive so much as an apology. I would bet that I won't--much less be compensated for my financial loss.
I plan to do my civic duty and write my Congressman and Senator who represent me. You know, I even fear that I may be placed on the notorious no-fly list, which you are never told if, when, or why you are on it, and can never get off of it. One bad policy compliments another--that is in their badness.
And it is all in the name of Patriot That or Security This. Sort of like the previously so-called Fairness Doctrine of the FCC, which was finally nixed by Congress, now being proposed for reinstatement. I have no problem with the stated intent of such laws. Unfortunately, such laws, which are often enacted via policies and regulations without ever being legally passed by Congress, were it not for that one necessary requirement.
Yep, it requires the one thing that is so obvious, but which has never existed--honest people, sane people, neutral people, smart people, fair people, incorruptible people, people who lack personal prejudices--opinions, or views, or, well, people who are inhuman, without human natures. As a sharp old man once told me when I was young, things would be perfect if it were not for people. Oh, well, may I suggest that in lieu of such a conclusion that we may merely reduce government and be left to govern ourselves where possible.

 

ATF promotes "Fast and Furious" supervisors - CBS News Investigates - CBS News

As CBS News first reported, that program allowed thousands of high caliber weapons to be sold to "straw purchasers" despite the fact that ATF allegedly realized the guns were bound for Mexico. Two of those guns turned up at the murder scene of U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.

Despite an ongoing Congressional inquiry and Inspector General investigation into the gunwalker scandal, the ATF moved to promote Deputy Director William McMahon as well as field supervisors William Newell and David Voth. All three men will work out of ATF headquarters in Washington. In Congressional hearings this summer, both McMahon and Newell acknowledged having made mistakes with "Fast and Furious."

The timing of the promotions has drawn questions from some agents, and fire from some members of Congress. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) today issued a statement saying, "Until Attorney General Holder and Justice Department officials come clean on all alleged gun-walking operations, including a detailed response to allegations of a Texas-based scheme, it is inconceivable to reward those who spearheaded this disastrous operation with cushy desks in Washington."

via www.cbsnews.com

What possibly could the motivation be for rewarding these hacks? They should be fired or criminally prosecuted. Unless, they were merely following orders. Or unless they are being rewarded for taking the fall.
This just absolutely galls me. The true stats show that most illegal military guns, espceically so with true automatic AK's and M16's, come up from South and Central America as contraband from failed govenmental armories that the USA, Soviets, China and others supplied to them during the cold war and end up in the hands of criminals both in Mexico and the US.
However, inconvenient truth that this is to gun-banners, who are also facing considerable evidence thatprivate gun ownership is radically reducing crime as more and more states adopt easier private carry laws for individuals, have turned to out and out fabrications in order to "substantiate" their agenda for disarming Americans. These tend to be liberals/Democrats.
anyone who believes that the ill-fated Project Fast and Furious was anything but and attempt to do the same for an administration intent on curbing and banning private gun ownershipin America is simply not facing reality.
Now these guys are getting promotions. I am sorry that I am so cynical, but I have to ask several questions. 1) In view of the absolute and positively overwhelming evidence that private gun ownership and easier to obtain carry permits is driving violent crime down in those cities and states where the forces are allowed to thrive, why would such anti-gun people continue their agendas? Why would the administration want to continue a drive to ban guns? 2) Why would these ATF provem thugs be so blatantly rewarded with cush promtions in Washington? Wouldn't the administration leadership have to approve such politically charged actions?
These guys are obviously being rewarded for SOMETHING. It is certainly not be for their proper behavior.
Could the promotional rewards be for keeping their mouths shut and not further implicating "higher-ups"? It only goes two rungs higher--The AG, and the President. Just asking, but it sure stinks to me.

Radical overhaul of military retirement eyed - CBS News

Play CBS News Video

(CBS News) 

WASHINGTON - The military retirement system has long been considered untouchable - along with Social Security and Medicare. But in these days of soaring deficits, it seems everything is a potential target for budget cutters. A Pentagon-sponsored study says military pensions are no longer untouchable - they're unaffordable.

CBS News investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson reports high-level, closely-held meetings are taking place at the Pentagon regarding a radical proposal to overhaul retirement for the nation's 1.4 million service members - a bedrock guarantee of military service.

via www.cbsnews.com

Maybe this DOES need to be looked at, but I can think of about a thousand other areas that should be addressed first. This smacks of political rubbing-it-in-the-face of those who want to rein in spending.

(btw, I am certainly not giving Congress a free pass, but there are at least two sides to the issue, so why is the less-fiscally responsible group blaming the most-fiscally responisble group in Congress. The credit-rating entities, economists, and stock market are all blaming EXCESSIVE GOVERNMENTAL DEBT for the downgrades, NOT, THOSE WHO FAVOR BALANCING THE BUDGET.
OUR PRESIDENT IS ENGAGING IN THE MOST SHAMEFUL KIND FLASE BLAMING. HOW CAN HE CORRECT A PROBLEM THAT HE DOESN'T EVEN ACKNOWLEDGE THAT HE HELPED CAUSE?
A good friend of mine sent me an email that I feel is especially appropos to insert here. Thanks J

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." -

Benjamin Franklin

Did you notice who Obama threatened when he wasn't getting his way on raising the debt ceiling?

He threatened to not pay: Social Security Retirees, Military Retirees, Social Security disability and Federal Retirees.
• He did not threaten to stop payments to illegal aliens
• He did not threatened to take frivolous benefits such as Internet access away from violent inmates
• He did not offer to fire some of the thousands of unnecessary federal employees that he hired
• He did not offer to cut down on his or his wife's frivolous gallivanting around
• He did not threaten to not pay the senators and representatives or any of their staff
• He did not threaten to take benefits away from welfare recipients
• He did not threaten the food stamp programs
• He did not threaten to not pay foreign aid
• He did not threaten to cut back on anything that involves his base voters

The list could go on and on. He is in full political re-election mode! Why are we allowing this person to destroy this wonderful country with his selfishness and his lies? His type of change is killing our country. He needs to be stopped and only our votes can stop him.

Do not forget about his tactics when it's election time. Vote Obama out of the Presidency in 2012.

“2012: THE END OF AN ERROR”

New DHS rules cancel deportations - Washington Times

** Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano

Text Size: +-

• Click-2-Listen

Story Topics

• Politics
• Social Issues
• Congress
• Janet Napolitano
• Barack Obama

via www.washingtontimes.com

I agree that these criteria are good benchmarks for allowing illegals to stay in the US. But it distrubs me deeply that on this and so many other issues, our administration feels that it has the right to wave a wand or gavel and circumvent Congress on so many issues. Shouldn't the rule of law be observed? Shouldn't the immigration laws be ammended before such controversial actions are undertaken? Federal responsibilities notwithstanding?
And few if any who CAN call him on it, are doing so. My gosh. Is this is beginning to resemble just another totalitarian country, with just another vain leader at the head. Just asking.
Someone please tell me I am wrong--and why?

Putin Denounces American Parasite While Russia Increases Treasuries 1,600% - Bloomberg

For Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, the U.S. is a “parasite” because its rising debt weighs on the global economy. For his government, the same debt is the safest possible investment.

Russia, the world’s largest energy producer, has boosted its holdings of U.S. debt by more than 1,600 percent since September 2006, according to U.S. Treasury Department data. Russia used surging commodity prices to build the world’s third- largest reserves pile, boosted in part by return on Treasuries.

via www.bloomberg.com

If this isn't a wake-up call, what is? The other two world super-powers are dogging the USA for their idiotic debt--al the while making a bigger killing from US bonds than either of their bloodiest dictators.

Warren Buffett’s Taxing the Rich Won't Solve Deficit, Says Tax Foundation | CNSnews.com

“There's simply not enough wealth in the community of the rich to erase this country's problems by waving some magic tax wand,” said Logan.

Buffett, in an August 15 op-ed in the New York Times said it was time to stop “coddling” the wealthy and called on Congress to raise taxes on those making $1 million or more.

“But for those making more than $1 million  there were 236,883 such households in 2009 I would raise rates immediately on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including, of course, dividends and capital gains. And for those who make $10 million or more there were 8,274 in 2009 I would suggest an additional increase in rate,” Buffett wrote.

“My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress,” wrote Buffett.

However, according to the Tax Foundation study written by Logan, even taxing the nation’s millionaires at 50 percent – even eliminating loopholes and deductions – would only reduce the deficit by 8 percent and the national debt by 1 percent.

“[T]aking half of the yearly income from every person making between one and ten million dollars would only decrease the nation's debt by 1%,” the report said.

via www.cnsnews.com

I am certainly not rich;p: not even wealthy. But I have long held that "taxing the rich" beyond the amount they are currently being taxed, simply will not solve the debt problem that faces the nation. I have not been making an idealogical argument, although there is that. It is that from my estimates, the numbers just didn't anywhwere near add up.

I was confused by Warren Buffets contention that it did add up. Now I am thinking maybe they need to administer math tests to all billionaires to see if thye really should be millionaires. Just take all the money from those who don't pass. Buffet would obviously at the top of the list.