Posted on 10/21/2009 12:09:47 PM PDT by broken_arrow1
---AND is the key word here (defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic,...AND that I will obey the orders of the President of the United). IF these two are in conflict (U.S. Constitution vs. Presdident), how can it be a lawful order (e.g., Second Amendment - "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall NOT be infringed")?
I don't think that was a workable defense for ex-Nazi Officers at Nuremberg Trials. The majority of the defendants claimed they were unknowing pawns of Adolf Hitler or were simply following orders.
On October 16, 1946, Ribbentrop was the first one taken into the execution chamber of the Nuremberg prison and mounted the gallows to be hanged. He was followed in quick succession by Keitel, Kaltenbrunner, Rosenberg, Frank, Frick, Streicher, Seyss-Inquart, Sauckel, and Jodl.
http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/nurem.htm
Ping to read later
Ping.
Redstate also was pushing idiots like Rudy, Mitt and McCain. So it’s understandable they don’t particularly care for the constitution.
oathkeepers will defend our citizens from any threats or
actions against them. we are not militants, but we stand together as one.
join us
oathkeepers.org
It’s getting pretty easy to tell who the elitists are, regardless of what they call themselves or what political registration they hold.
I stopped at the Katrina part.
The fema had to wait three days b4 intervening, that was the law!
I support Oath Keepers.
I’m an Oath Keeper.
~SC
Sounds like battle lines are being drawn!
I know whose side I’m on!
Um ... that's exactly what happened. Why does he think British troops were heading there?
I wonder which “Czar” he works for???
High tea?
The flaw in the argument criticizing the OathKeepers is that the original 1776 patriots were likewise, from the perspective of their own governing authority, mutinous rebels who violated their own oaths of loyalty to the King.
The OathKeepers merely appear to be drawing a line in the sand against the creeping onslaught of socialism.
What’s wrong with that?
It’s said that a frog will boil alive in a pot of water if you turn the heat up gradually. Much like modern America.
Read the oath carefully. There is not an Obama Exception to the oath...
He kind of cornholes his own argument there.
Points out that the officer's oath is to the Constitution, then blathers on about an "0bama Exception", when the oath is to the Constitution, not the president.
Your analysis is spot on. Every soldier has to act according to his conscience, either the conscience that binds him to his oath or the conscience that answers to a higher morality. The principles enumerated by the Oath Keepers are simply reiterations of those in the Constitution. Soldiers swear ro defend THAT, not the orders of their commanders without regard to their legality. Where the two collide, the Constitution rules.
There should be a National Day of Free Beer for Oath Keepers.
You can stop by my place anytime you need to reload.
45ACP, 30-06 anyone?
Thank you Patriots.
I am on your side.
And just what “domestic enemies” does he think the oath refers to?
There was an incident during King William’s Great Patriotic War Against Serbia in which Gen. Wesley Clark ordered a British general to roust the Russians out of some airport they had recently occupied.
The Brit replied “I’m not going to start World War III for you”.
I presume Mr. Streiff would have the Brit court-martialed and hanged for insubordination.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.