23 wrote:"So seeing someone in a flag or with a beard or hunting rifle may be subconscious triggers to patterns unrelated..."
Which is why choir lofts, where everyone sings by the same song sheet, and echo chambers aren't particularly good for one's health. Harmonious vibrations need discord, from time to time, to jar themselves out of the rut of similarity.
My daughter and I are exposed to members of the discarded class, on almost a daily basis. They too, like your Rasta friend, are often taken aback by our willingness to give them the commodity of attention, and not just the loose bills or change that we have.
At present, I spend more time socializing with members of the discarded class than I do in the company of any other human beings on a daily basis. Although my closest and most intimate relationship is not with a member of the discarded class, at present. Or a resident of the same city.
In any event. I would never have thought to call them the discarded class. Although they sure are. I just think of them as my homeless crack addict friends. But it's a useful appellation, for which I owe you some gratitude. Because while I could not say that I am or have ever been a homeless crack addict, I could say that I have been and will probably again some day be a member of the discarded class. Which will have some real practical value to me as a clear short answer to a question I otherwise inevitably end up lengthily failing to answer. I mean, to me, those friendships are just a natural and uninflected part of my life -- you know, they just happened to develop because we meet every day on the streets where they literally and I figuratively live. But to the friends who join me in the more prominently perceptible class to which I belong at present (white, middle), they're fucking totally unaccountable. So thanks.
It's a commodity that we often take too lightly, if not for granted.
I know what you mean. I would phrase it differently, but I would mean the same thing. And how I would phrase it is: Once, for whatever reason, you've recognized it as a distinct commodity well enough to speak of it as such, you do not forget its worth. Although you might well cease to value it as you ought. People are kinda generally prone to that kind of error. Because they're people and that's how people are, I mean. And it's therefore not a federal offense. It's just the paradoxical nature of human existence. For ya.
And back to topic:
I do not think the Oath Keepers are issuing propaganda with the aim of building a popular base of support from which to commit the military coup d'etat that they say they're not going to because I saw a picture of a man with a beard.
I think it because those oaths rhetorically appeal to fear; as well as to the desire for the sense of order and comfort that come from knowing that Good Dad is home now and will tell us how we can take care of the mess we've been too overwhelmed by to know how to clean up ourselves, even though living in it is making us absolutely miserable; as well as to something that's a little less sympathetic and a little more egotistically jingoistic than that; as well as to the eternal hope and longing that lunges from the human heart and hurls itself into the arms of anything that looks like the One True Answer that will cleanly and effortlessly solve all our problems and cure all our ills simply by encompassing us in the warmth of its Ten-Oath embrace every single damn time we see it, again and again and again.
And I also think it because when I look at the Oath Keepers and remember exactly what commodities I recognize and know for their true worth -- which include my right to freely assemble with myself and freely speak my own thoughts secure in the knowledge that it is equal to everyone's -- it takes me about two seconds to see that appeal is all, entirely, utterly and one-hundred percent rhetorical. It walks, talks, acts, fundraises and is organized like a political movement that sees the military as the ruling class that is itself by right, nature and definition completely above the laws that it says it's going to make sure get enforced.
Which very noticeably fucking do not include any of the laws that members of the military are actually violating right now. At present. As we speak. And equally fucking noticeably limits its ten oaths to NOT obey orders that -- chance being a fine thing -- none of their superiors are ever going to make them prove themselves by issuing. Because all of their superiors have already sworn oaths not to give those orders or to obey them already. As have they them-fucking-selves, if they were and/or are either members of the military or officers of the law.
So tell me: Why do you think they're swearing them again, exactly? And how do you think a bunch of current and former members of the military and police officers whose major assets are: (a) your money and your faith in them; and (b) their guns and their conviction that they do NOT have to obey orders they do NOT believe in are going to enforce the laws they're rhetorically so very gung-ho about, exactly?
Searcher08, 23, Stefano, et al --
How can you guys not see what they are? It's not like they're even really trying to conceal it. Have you looked at every part of that site? At their resources page, for example? I'll save you some time, if you haven't. It has eleven links, the last of which is not like the others:
Soldier Assist – care packages for all deployed military personnel
Tactical Graphic Design – Visual Communication Specialties
Swat Magazine – Stewart Rhodes writes a column (Enemy at the Gate)
Rat Cutlery – Knives and Survival Gear
Alphie Omega training – Survival Training
Pro Troop Events – Calandar for Pro Troop Events
Liberty Rider – a cross country bicycle ride promoting the value of Liberty
Gathering Of Eagles – Defending the Liberty our servicemen have fought to protect
Committees Of Safety – Local community organizing for security and liberty
JPFO – Jews For The Preservation Of Firearms Ownership
Sheldon Law Firm – Military Law and Litigation
Try clicking it if you want to see what kind of law is a commodity they don't take too lightly.
Or wait. I'll save you the trouble.
Here are twelve of the cases he lists on the "cases and references" tab:
On January 22nd 2009, before the Physical Evaluation Board, Mr. Sheldon represented a Public Health Service Officer. After a contested hearing, the officer was retired permanently -- the officer was to be separated with severance and now because of Mr. Sheldon's efforts the officer will received retired pay and benefits for the remainder of her life.
After Mr. Sheldon filed an application before the Army Board for Correction of Military Records challenging the Army's recoupment of educational expenses from an Army physician in the amount of $65,000.00, the Army subsequently ceased all recoupment action and paid all monies back that has been wrongfully seized from the officer.
On February 17, 2009, the Navy and Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, set aside the findings and sentence of a Marine Sergeant wrongfully accused of rape. The Marine is scheduled to be promoted to Gunnery Sergeant.
In November 2008, Mr. Sheldon settled a Privacy Act case on behalf of a Army National Guard soldier. The soldier received ninety thousand dollars as an award for the violation.
In November 2008, Mr. Sheldon represented an Army officer who had received an Other Than Honorable Discharge. After litigating the case, the Discharge Review Board upgraded his discharge to Honorable. In October, 2008, through Mr. Sheldon’s efforts, a Reserve member of the Army was discharged honorably after applying to the Delay and Exemption Board on the basis of hardship and because he was deemed a “key employee.”
On June 30, 2008, through Mr. Sheldon’s advocacy, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a Texas Death penalty case in a strong rebuke, finding that the death row inmate’s constitutional rights had been violated. Hall v. Quarterman, link to decision, which is attached. This is Mr. Sheldon’s second consecutive win for Texas death row inmat
In May 2008, through Mr. Sheldon’s efforts, an Army Major was placed on the Permanent Disability Retirement List at 70%. The officer had previously been rated at 30%.
In May 2008, through Mr. Sheldon’s efforts, An Army Specialist at Fort Dix, New Jersey received non judicial punishment for possessing child pornography after charges were dismissed prior to the Article 32 hearing.
In April and May 2008, Mr. Sheldon settled two wrongful death claims that obtained recoveries in excess of 1 million dollars.
In March 2008, Mr. Sheldon represented a Lieutenant Colonel in the United States Army who was charged with false official statement, failing to report contacts with foreign nationals, fraud, and adultery. Through Mr. Sheldon’s efforts the matter was resolved at non judicial punishment and the officer was retired.
In January 2007, a Navy Petty Officer’s security clearance, which had been recommended for revocation, was reinstated after a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge in Jacksonville, Florida. Mr. Sheldon and Ms. Danette Dugan, his principal assistant, represented the Navy Petty Officer. His mother and his fiancée attended the hearing in support of him as well as his commanding officer, his senior chief, and several other officers in the command.
In December 2007, Mr. Sheldon successfully defended a Navy Chaplain convicted of forcible sodomy and aggravated assault (having unprotected sex with another male without disclosing his HIV status). The Navy Chaplain was sentenced to 12 years in the brig, but Mr. Sheldon had negotiated a plea agreement that capped confinement at 24 months.
I tried to randomize that selection by making a blind decision to start at the top, then skip two and copy six twice. So I skipped four of the first eighteen. [ON EDIT:
sixteen. I meant "sixteen." Why must numbers go to an alternate dimension between my thought of them and my expression of them, why? It makes math really, really challenging for me. -- c2w] Criminal defense law is a dirty job, but someone's got to do it and I'm glad Mr. Sheldon does it well. Not to mention very fucking impressed that he got anywhere on a Texas death row case, that just happens never. But go check it out yourselves, please.
Here's the link.
Then do a little research so that you don't have to take my word for it when I tell you that the number of sex criminals and big-dollar settlement cases he tries is highly disproportionate to the overall number and kind of cases for which someone might need to hire a good military appellate attorney. Which is what Mr. Sheldon is, by virtue of having done his JAG service in that area. And like I said, a very good one. I mean, I don't really know, but I imagine that there were probably plenty of troops not getting a fair shake from the VA at less billable rates than the ones he's represented who could have used a good military appellate attorney before they killed themselves. I'm pretty sure there still are, potentially, in fact.
Also, full disclosure: I've checked some of those cases to see whether there were any signs that those defendants were getting fucked over (ie -- I presumed them innocent). But only some so far. However, fwiw, so far: Nope. They got away with a slap on the wrist, thanks to Mr. Sheldon, by and large. Especially that chaplain. He didn't stop at one. And they were not all above the age of consent, either. Again, I do not fault Mr. Sheldon for doing his job. It's an important part of the justice system that the U.S. constitution calls for. WRT to civilian courts, anyway. But close enough.
But that doesn't mean I'm blind to the implications of the OK having singled him out. Because it's pretty clear that if you think of members of the military as a class that shouldn't really have to pay much in the way of penalties for their criminal conduct, Mr. Sheldon's definitely the man who stands for what you believe in.
It also suggests to me that the OK just might have a plan that includes some conduct for which a good military appellate attorney will be a key requirement, btw. But it's not like I really needed that hint. I could already see that they want to institute a military coup d'etat.
Please, please heed me. That outfit is dangerous. And I'm not telling you that to be quarrelsome. I'm telling you that because they're a danger to you and to your rights. And I recognize the true value of both.
