rigorousintuition.ca

justdrew wrote: If these fucks want a civil war, they're going to get one hell of a surprise if they think no one's going to be shooting back.

Hehe, a war built on goofy fake conspiracy memes:p

Well, then again now that I think of it...many wars have been fought over false tales(religion)

8bitagent wrote:

justdrew wrote: If these fucks want a civil war, they're going to get one hell of a surprise if they think no one's going to be shooting back.

Hehe, a war built on goofy fake conspiracy memes:p

Well, then again now that I think of it...many wars have been fought over false tales(religion)

that's the way it almost ALWAYS goes, the would be attackers need to hoot and screech and generally get themselves ready to swing the club. Eventually a few of the particularly brave/stupid ones will run across the clearing a take a swing before getting caught or chased back to their side. eventually they all charge.

monster wrote:Your comment is a perfect example of how they've got us divided and conquered. Americans, as a group, are incapable of acting as one.

Yes. I had heard of the oath keepers, and felt pretty positively about them, even though you could tell just from a brief description that they belong to the right-libertarian tradition. Still, take a look at what they're saying. For instance, some of the "orders they will not obey" are:

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.

7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.

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.

If I were you I'd be quite relieved that at least some cops are saying this in public. But the left/right divide is so set in the American mind that liberal writers like Lady Liberty and Mike Flugennock have no qualms about describing them as "right-wing extremists", providing no quotes, bios, etc. or anything like proof. Now the government wants to discharge these men for publicly swearing to uphold the Constitution, and the left consensus seems to be that it's all hunky dory. (Actually I took a closer look and that's all speculation, but the fact remains that the bloggers AD links to would quite happily see the Oath Keepers kicked out of all police services... leaving the thugs who will always obey Washington's orders, no matter how illegal. Not ideal.)

It's true that these people were silent when Bush was doing the same thing as Obama, but better late than never.

Thanks stefano

The folk here that promote divisiveness are just as wacked as the White Power types.

But I will admit to an exchange with a white power type many years ago. He started talking his shit and I responded that he and his buddies should all move to Idaho and declare war on the rest of us, then he could see for himself how well fags, niggers and ninnies could fight. Anyway I like the guy and he respected me, maybe cause I said it to his face.

OMH posted an article awhile back where it was suggested that the left may do better trying to understand the right rather than antagonizing them.

People that employ divisiveness as a tactic are not to be trusted.

That's you AD, transparent as glass. I saw this from the first week I was here three years ago, and you never do a thing to change my mind.

I've noticed that the people who talk about "divisiveness" and "moving beyond right and left", are usually sympathetic to extreme right wing ideas.

I say we should support real anti-authoritarianism by insisting on freedom in our own lives, but give the boot to all the racism, fascism, immigrant-bashing and all the other crap that plagues the Militia/Constitutionalist/Oath Keeper-type circles.

After all, none of us should want to be part of a "controlled opposition"...

Sounder wrote:Thanks stefano

The folk here that promote divisiveness are just as wacked as the White Power types.

But I will admit to an exchange with a white power type many years ago. He started talking his shit and I responded that he and his buddies should all move to Idaho and declare war on the rest of us, then he could see for himself how well fags, niggers and ninnies could fight. Anyway I like the guy and he respected me, maybe cause I said it to his face.

OMH posted an article awhile back where it was suggested that the left may do better trying to understand the right rather than antagonizing them.

People that employ divisiveness as a tactic are not to be trusted.

That's you AD, transparent as glass. I saw this from the first week I was here three years ago, and you never do a thing to change my mind.

Excellent thoughts stefano and Sounder.

I had an experience recently at an airport where I got to see up close how intimidating police can be. The person I was dealing with appeared to have lost his humanity and entered some sort of trance state. When he received the factual information I said he needed (that I was not required to carry visual ID), he came out of trance, gave me a big warm smile and let me on my way. I realised that it could have turned out so different.

Security forces have been receiving School of the Americas-LITE training and are being anchored to trance states in which their normal responses as human beings and sense of ethics and common sense is being replaced by a programmed state. I think that many of the Oath Keepers are actually very close to the traditionally leftist position that that the Army is there to serve the needs of capital, not protect the people (see General Smedley Butler)

From friends of friends who are serving in Afghanistan, there is huge upset there at the utter corruption of Afghan government, coalition agencies et al. The corruption in the private security forces is apparently like Bosnia/DynCorp * 10.

Many of the people in Oath Keepers I think see these dangers and do not like the dangerous direction security training is going (the extensive Marines training to fight Americans in urban America for example). If I was in a dangerous situation, I would feel much happier if security staff were constitution focused rather than Presidential focused.

I find the cartoon of the pig really really naff - divisive and de-humanising and it doesnt represent how I think or feel.

American Dream wrote:the [...] fascism [...]that plagues[...]Constitutionalist/Oath Keeper-type circles.

What? What do you think 'Constitutionalist' means? Fascism is the opposite of Constitutionalism. The dangerous idea held so dear by Nixon, Bush and Obama, the idea that the Oath Keepers and Ron Paul supporters are fighting, is that "it's not illegal if the President does it". Mussolini ha siempre ragione. Is that really the political philosophy you want to be defending? Because that's what you're doing.

This is exactly why the Oath Keepers are seen as a threat by the left-authoritarian bloggers you quoted, the ones who despite all their claims of anti-authoritarianism, are exactly as authoritarian as their counterparts on the right. The only substantial difference is that they want a Democrat to be the decider. This is political tribalism on an exceedingly primitive level, as Arthur Silber might say. He's brilliant, see also Dennis Perrin and Richard Seymour on what Seymour calls the "liberal defence of murder", but which obviously extends to liberal defence of torture, imprisonment without trial, soldiers in the streets and so on.

Slight parenthesis: your lazy use of the word 'fascism' to describe people whose views you don't like, even though the word cannot possibly apply to them if words are to have any meaning at all and you know better, is the mirror of the right-authoritarians' use of 'socialism' to attack the current administration. And so it goes.

stefano wrote:

American Dream wrote:the [...] fascism [...]that plagues[...]Constitutionalist/Oath Keeper-type circles.

What? What do you think 'Constitutionalist' means? Fascism is the opposite of Constitutionalism. The dangerous idea held so dear by Nixon, Bush and Obama, the idea that the Oath Keepers and Ron Paul supporters are fighting, is that "it's not illegal if the President does it". Mussolini ha siempre ragione. Is that really the political philosophy you want to be defending? Because that's what you're doing.

(excerpted)

Slight parenthesis: your lazy use of the word 'fascism' to describe people whose views you don't like, even though the word cannot possibly apply to them if words are to have any meaning at all and you know better, is the mirror of the right-authoritarians' use of 'socialism' to attack the current administration. And so it goes.

stefano-

I think it is quite valid to mention Fascism in the same breath as Oath Keepers. See for example my second post on this thread. Here is a direct link to the article concerned: “Oath Keepers” Are Now Promoting Themselves To White Nationalists

Even though there is some kind of overlap between right wing libertarian/constitutionalist types and declared fascist/white supremacist types, it is certainly not accurate to consider them as part of one great undifferentiated mass.

In fact, I can support Right Wing Libertarians on a lot of personal liberty issues. None of us should want a surveillance society, arbitrary detentions, denial of freedom of speech, that sort of thing. So I think we need to look out for false dichotomies here. And excess baggage.


...

Here is an antidotal role model for leftists who see constitutionalists as fascists.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=py8cXlLy ... r_embedded#

Oh, if only there were more leftists like him.

American Dream wrote:stefano-

I think it is quite valid to mention Fascism in the same breath as Oath Keepers. See for example my second post on this thread. Here is a direct link to the article concerned: “Oath Keepers” Are Now Promoting Themselves To White Nationalists

Even though there is some kind of overlap between Right Wing Libertarians/Constitutionalists etc. and declared fascist/white supremacist types, it is certainly not accurate to consider them as part of one great undifferentiated mass.

In fact, I can support Right Wing Libertarians on a lot of personal liberty issues. None of us should want a surveillance society, arbitrary detentions, denial of freedom of speech, that sort of thing. So I think we need to look out for false dichotomies here.

The credibility of saying this is greatly reduced by posting a cartoon portraying a person as a pig.

I went to the link given and that article is REALLY weak. The only thing I agree with it is the White Nationalist movement couldn't organise the prize giving at a pie raffle.

So 'someone' posted joining instructions on a Skinhead board. Does that mean they support them? Who says? I posted on the JREF forum about the LooseChange forum. Does that mean I support JREF? NO!

And using one post on Shitfront as a basis for an argument?
FEEBLE

Searcher08 wrote:

The credibility of saying this is greatly reduced by posting a cartoon portraying a person as a pig.

I can understand concerns about posting pictures of a "right wing pig", though I am personally undecided about it in this particular instance.

However, it should be pointed out that the pig caricature was in a different article than the one being discussed just above.

Searcher08 wrote:So 'someone' posted joining instructions on a Skinhead board. Does that mean they support them? Who says? I posted on the JREF forum about the LooseChange forum. Does that mean I support JREF? NO!

And using one post on Shitfront as a basis for an argument?
FEEBLE

Maybe the answer will be more obvious to some, if someone posted an invitation to RI on the Shitfront board as well.

Hmm!

http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/ar ... 0alias.txt

Oath Keepers aim to curb federal power

published on Saturday, August 22, 2009 8:32 PM MDT
By JESSICA MAYRER Chronicle staff writer

With a bushy red beard, impish grin and sandals, Elias Alias doesn’t look like a rightwing extremist.


Elias Alias talks about the Oath Keepers movement with a reporter recently. “I am interested in personal freedom,” he said.

Alias is working to make Montana the first state in the nation to create Oath Keepers chapters in every county. Oath Keepers, after forming last spring, is comprised mostly of military and law enforcement personnel aiming to resist what it sees as a federal government overstepping constitutional boundaries.

“It’s time for the people to take the government back,” said the 62-year-old Alias, who, until the name change, was Franklin Shook.

Since former U.S. Army paratrooper and Yale Law School grad Stewart Rhodes founded the national organization months ago, state groups have rapidly sprung up, with highway patrolmen, military, county sheriffs, police officers and, according to the group, U.S. Department of Homeland Security employees signing on to stand against overreaching federal authority.

“I’m getting calls from all over this country from concerned people,” said Alias, who lives in Willow Creek and is the editor of a new publication, the Gallatin County Patriot. “The alarm is out there.”

While in office, President George W. Bush used the war on terror to make Americans afraid, Alias said. The goal was to expand executive power under the guise of national security concerns, he said. Under that leadership, the Patriot Act and other maneuvers skirting established legal protections eroded constitutional mandates. Those actions expanded federal authority over the states and increased surveillance of American citizens, Alias said.

“Fear should not be a part of our daily lives,” he said.

And now, President Barack Obama isn’t reversing those executive maneuvers, Rhodes said.

Before forming Oath Keepers, Rhodes — a former firearms instructor and Libertarian who served on Texas Republican Rep. Ron Paul’s staff — had been warning folks for years about the dangers he sees in America’s increasingly centralized power structure.

But during the past several months, as a new administration stepped up, Rhodes’ message has started to resonate with a larger segment of Americans, he said.

“They’re kind of freaking out,” Rhodes said of the conservative flock.

Meanwhile, Alias, a Vietnam vet who speaks with a drawl befitting someone who spent most of his life in Tennessee, has also grown increasingly alarmed. He’s scared his grandchildren won’t have the freedoms he grew up with, he said.

So, he’s working to revive the concept of liberty in the American people.

“That shouldn’t be a threat to anyone,” he said.

But, it is.

Buzz is growing across the country as “patriot groups,” sprout up, some say mirroring a 1990s movement culminating in the Oklahoma City bombing that killed 168 people. Fueled by frustration born of the ailing economy, federal bailouts and, according to the Department of Homeland Security, inauguration of the first black president, radical groups are taking advantage of the current political climate to recruit.

“We think there is cause for concern,” said Travis McAdam, executive director of the Montana Human Rights Network.

And the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks “extremist” activity throughout the country, in a report this month points to the Oath Keepers as a “particularly worrisome example of the Patriot Revival.” The SPLC further reports that it’s likely only a matter of time before some segment of the Patriot Revival becomes violent.

The Department of Homeland Security considers groups that reject federal authority in favor of local authority “rightwing extremists,” according to an April 7 “threat analysis” released by the agency.

And that doesn’t sit well with Alias.

“To call Americans with political concerns, ‘terrorists,’ is unacceptable,” he said.

Those who have sworn to uphold the Constitution are obligated to protect the country’s founding principles, regardless of what authority says, he maintained.

“I will honor the U.S. federal government as long as it operates within its constitutional bounds,” Alias said.

It’s no surprise some are dubbing Oath Keepers dangerous, Rhodes said. Demonizing political opponents is an easy way to stem dissent.

“Every oppressive government throughout history has labeled people as enemies of the state,” he said.

The group maintains it is nonviolent. But its Web site offers repeated references to the American Revolution and broaches the possibility of a second such event.

“If you, the American people, are forced to once again fight for your liberty in another American Revolution, you will not be alone. We will stand with you,” the Oath Keepers Web site states.

And with a message like that, some may grab hold and go too far, McAdam said.

That’s apparently what happened with Daniel Knight Hayden, who, after publicizing Oath Keepers material on MySpace and Twitter social-networking sites under the name Citizen Quasar, was arrested in April after posting online that he was “locked and loaded” on the way to a tax-day protest at the Oklahoma State Capitol.

Hayden is not an Oath Keeper, Rhodes said. And targeting his group because one unstable person latched on is unfair. There is always potential for disenfranchised individuals to use political messages as an excuse to sound off, he said.

“Is that what they want, that we should just shut up shop because some nut might take it too far?” Rhodes asked.

Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. had the right idea, Alias said. He aims to educate people about how to protect the U.S. Constitution and their rights. Racism, violence and demonizing political opponents have no place within Oath Keepers, he said.

“People on both sides of the isle are good people,” he said. “They believe what they’re saying, what they’re doing, just like I do.”

But if active-duty Oath Keepers are given an order they deem unconstitutional, they will stand down, Rhodes said, pointing to government orders that should have been disobeyed, like the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II.

“It’s the people of this country who are responsible for keeping the government in check,” Rhodes said.