Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-21-2009, 10:51 PM
LML
 
Location: Wisconsin
7,100 posts, read 9,106,269 times
Reputation: 5191

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by summers73 View Post
No civilized person would even think about obeying laws relating to martial law, crushing a sovereign state movement militarily or concentration camps. Those are the general tenets of the Oathkeepers.
And you think leaving it up to this bunch of crazies to decide that a FEMA supply depot is really a concentration camp or that the National Guard doing their weekend training drills is really getting ready to crush the sovereign state and impose martial law. No thanks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-21-2009, 11:02 PM
 
Location: Sandpoint, Idaho
3,007 posts, read 6,281,932 times
Reputation: 3310
I had never heard of the Oathkeepers, but I am impressed by their principles.

Matthews POV is so East Coast.

Allow Idaho to assert its sovereignty!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-21-2009, 11:59 PM
 
1 posts, read 949 times
Reputation: 11
OMG!!!!! Matthews totally tried to DISTORT everything. That was filled of "guilt-by-association" fallacy!! Matthews and that SPLC scum pulled out every BS stop short of bringing up the "KKK" to distort and smear. I have now lost all respect for Matthews. That Oath Keeper should have done a better job calling Matthews out. Matthews kept trying to describe these people as dangerous and violent -- yet the Oath Keeper explained more than once that they are talking about STANDING DOWN, not up. Shame on Matthews, people can see his bias.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2009, 12:08 AM
 
Location: Prepperland
19,001 posts, read 14,178,621 times
Reputation: 16697
Having a modest understanding of the terms of the original compact, and subsequent compacts, I have a genuine distrust of any group or ideology that purports to "support the Constitution", without understanding it.

A. The Constitution is a compact for specific performance. The question is: who's obligated to perform to it? Do the American people perform to it? NO. Its terms are binding on the public servants who swear an oath, and inscribe said oath into the public record. Did the "oath keepers" file an oath?

B. Since the people in America are sovereign, but (c)itizens are subjects, "everyone" can not be born into citizenship. Citizenship has mandatory obligations (jury duty, militia duty, etc) and to impose them, at birth, is involuntary servitude, and unconstitutional. Do "oath keepers" know the difference between sovereign people and subject citizenry? Will they only seek to "govern" those who had given consent?

C. Since Socialism, by definition, abolishes private property (absolute ownership by individuals), and there is no law compelling enrollment into Social Security (national socialism), can any "voluntary" socialist "Oath keeper" be trusted to honor private property rights, as required by the fifth amendment? Are they acting in contradiction to their oath, if they consented to socialism?

D. Usury, the charging of a fee, in money, for the use of money (or extension of credit) is mathematically impossible to pay in a finite money token system and is denounced by all religions (that I checked), and especially denounced as a capital offense (see: Ezekiel 18:13 KJV) in the Judeo - Christian - Islamic law. Can any "oath keeper" with an interest bearing bank account be in compliance with his religious tenets? And if he isn't in good standing, can you trust his oath made before God? Is he an infidel (unfaithful) to his religious affiliation?

In short, I am not relieved by "oath keepers".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2009, 12:54 AM
 
Location: Somewhere gray and damp, close to the West Coast
20,955 posts, read 5,540,369 times
Reputation: 8559
Matthews sounds like the illegitimate son of a syphilitic monkey and a wild party at the SPLC. Gawd, I could hardly listen to the whining beyotch!

Rhodes, by comparison, is the soul of dignity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2009, 01:02 AM
 
Location: Eastern Missouri
3,046 posts, read 6,283,777 times
Reputation: 1394
Matthews isn't in an insane asylum yet? Oathkeepers are some of the most practical people we have in this Country!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2009, 04:57 AM
 
Location: USA - midwest
5,944 posts, read 5,580,276 times
Reputation: 2606
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12GO View Post
Matthews isn't in an insane asylum yet? Oathkeepers are some of the most practical people we have in this Country!
Nothing's as patriotic as turning against your own country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2009, 06:04 AM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
20,054 posts, read 18,270,797 times
Reputation: 3826
Quote:
Originally Posted by LML View Post
And you think leaving it up to this bunch of crazies to decide that a FEMA supply depot is really a concentration camp or that the National Guard doing their weekend training drills is really getting ready to crush the sovereign state and impose martial law. No thanks.
Just as you trust government (history has shown trusting one's government to be a losing proposition), I will trust a group of men loyal to the Constitution only.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2009, 06:17 AM
 
Location: Texas
38,859 posts, read 25,512,000 times
Reputation: 24780
Question just asking

Quote:
Originally Posted by summers73 View Post
Just as you trust government (history has shown trusting one's government to be a losing proposition), I will trust a group of men loyal to the Constitution only.

Is organized lunacy legal?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2009, 06:28 AM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
20,054 posts, read 18,270,797 times
Reputation: 3826
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo View Post
Is organized lunacy legal?
Heck yeah, we have over 500 of them in DC. Although I wouldn't refer to them as "organized" in a good way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:56 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top