Oathkeepers not helpful in Ferguson…again
The Ron Paulian refugees of Oathkeepers are back in Ferguson this summer, according to the Washington Times which mischaracterizes the organization;
The Oath Keepers organization said its members — all former military, police and first responders — pledged to “defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” NBC reported Tuesday.
[…]
Members of the group, mostly white males, were seen carrying assault rifles and side arms and wearing bulletproof vests and camouflage.
Yes, they are mostly white, much like the Ron Paul campaign rallies that I covered a few years ago. But, they are NOT “all former military, police and first responders”. Most of them are AirSofter-like pretenders who will welcome any excuse to parade around in camouflage with loaded weapons in public. Many of them are not veterans, or they have spotty military records, some have spent time in military confinement facilities for being anti-social. As near as I can tell, Oathkeepers doesn’t verify the military service of their membership. I’m guessing its the same for their first-responder membership, as well.
Our first encounter with the organization came when they were supporting Iraq Veterans Against the War. So much for keeping oaths – at the time IVAW was encouraging military members to refuse to their deployment orders. The Oathkeepers supported the candidacy of IVAW member Adam Kokesh when he ran as a Republican for a New Mexico congressional seat.
The group said they had come to protect a journalist from Infowars.com, The Daily Mail reported.
Crackpottery. The police have said that they don’t want the Oathkeepers there, but, you know, what the Oathkeepers want is more important than what their supposed brothers in uniform want. Allying themselves with Infowars makes them much more credible.
Category: Oath Keepers
I am simply shocked that the Washington Times would bring up race or ethnicity in one of their articles…
You’re probably thinking of the Washington Post, not the Times.
This reminds me of an old Shakespeare quote, “Better to let people think you are an idiot than to say “Infowars” while wearing camo, and remove all doubt.”
The Mercenary of Venice. One of my favs.
The Bard expressed a similar sentiment in Jesse MacBeth, too.
Out, Out damn faker!
Oafkeepers.
What a bunch of tools.
A damned bunch of booger-eating attention whoring trailer park Airsoft®™ Commandos/Soldier of Fortune wannabes wanting to make themselves feel important, a cut below pot-bellied doughnut-guzzling shopping mall rent-a-fuzzes strutting around in uniform thinking they look badassed to the teenyboppers hanging out. The more I see, hear, and read about Oathkeepers, the happier I am that I’ve always kept my distance from them!
It must be in the water they bathe in. They do bathe, don’t they?
I keep telling myself, this, too, shall pass. I just wonder if it will pass in my lifetime. Maybe Disney’s sappy ‘family’ movies like ‘Pollyanna’ weren’t so sappy, after all. Or they brainwashed me, or something.
What is it with these loons? Do they REALLY want to get shot and killed?
As the squirrel said (or maybe it was an Aviation Machinist Mate): “It’s all fun and games until someone loses a nut”.
Maybe they huffed one tube of glue too many while reading “Soldier of Fortune”? Anytime I see the word “Oathkeepers” in an article anymore, my first thought is “What did those skid mark-brained fartheads do or say THIS TIME?” I’m certain that each and every “cat nugget” I scoop out of the litterbox has at least fifty times their collective IQ!
Gee, and here I always thought public masturbation was illegal.
Maybe not if you con NEA out of a grant and call it “performance art” . . . .
“defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” We keep seeing that, don’t we? And who decides who the foreign and domestic enemies of the United States are? Oafkeepers? The Aryan Brotherhood? The New Black Panthers? CAIR? The SCLC? Or maybe none of the above or we end up with chaos and vigilantism.
Gas. Fire. Some assembly required.
Referring to the open-carry debate – just because you CAN do something, doesn’t mean it is smart TO do it.
I USED to be heavily in favor of Open Carry until I saw idiots like them carrying rifles down the street like they’re doing foot patrols in Kabul or Kandahar.
That’ll do it.
If I was a conspiracy-minded nutbag I would simply assume that these open carry morons were working for all the gun control groups out there.
After all, their antics do nothing but feed the narrative that gun owners in America are all mouth breathing racist cretins. They say they’re trying to “advance the cause” but the only cause they’re advancing is the one that favors MORE gun control.
Idiots.
The only cause they’re trying to support is another civil war. They want the chance to walk the streets and shoot anything they feel deserves it. All they require to support their fullest idiocy is that someone else fires the first shot. Then it’ll be a goddam free-for-all.
I wish that both MSM reporters and commenters would wise the Hell up and stop calling all long guns “Assault Rifles.”
Assault is an action, not an object.
Oops, I’m not talking about commenters here at TAH.
I’m talking about the WaPo piece commenters.
Sorry for any confusion.
Shit, not WaPo. The Washington Times commenters.
More caffeine, Claw. More caffeine! 😉
Mixing openly armed civilians within a LE operation is bad news and will always remain bad news.
You obviously don’t know what you are talking about because one of these guys painted his rifle tan/desert color which obviously makes him legitimate and superior to the police, what with their simple black rifles. I can’t confirm this, but I bet that same guy also has a racing stripe on his truck which clearly makes him the fastest guy on the road. If you don’t believe me, then I suggest that you read InfoWars as you will likely find an article interviewing a guy who knows this other guy whose oncologist lived on the same street as a guy who wrote a blog post about a dream that was caused by chem-trails decisively proving that a government program exists to tamp out the desert/tan rifles due to their superiority to the government’s black rifles.
OK, you got me.
I fully retract my statement!
Tan Guns are safe Black ones ar evil so says MSN CNN and palosi
What do they have to say about pink and/or baby-blue ones? (smile)
GF has a pink 38 Special that’ll kill ya just as dead as blued steel 38 Special!
Nothing Hondo it’s the mean scary black guns. Even more so if they have a magazine and a butt stock that moves in anyway 🙂
I still wonder how many of these “Oath Keepers” have a felony conviction on their record. Not only can they not possess a firearm, but body armor is a no-go as well.
more then you can count on ten hands…
That is a great point.
Here we have a salad of whatever they might be and some of their rights are not even in play.
Yes, felons have LESS rights than law abiding citizens, as they should.
But, whatever …
When I hear Oathkeeper, I conduct a proper military 180 and exit the area … Keeping an eye on my 6.
BTW:
Body armor and ballistic protection are 2 separate issues.
Let me splain:
In some juridictions, the possesion and use of body armor is legal and in the same … illegal in the course of a crime.
However, in most cases ballistic protection legally obtained in one jurisdiction will be respected in another.
My point is:
MIL and LE use Body Armor.
Civilians use Ballistic Protection.
If Leroy is caught with a flak jacket from the NAM or Billy Bob robbed a discount licker store with a Kevlar helmet, they are both in trouble!
But if patriot, taxpaying, God fearing and law abing Joe wishes to walk around in his ballistic vest, custom suit and or specialized vehicle … Perfectly Legal (in most places).
So, I thank you for letting me speak the obvious!
I joined their Facebook group a couple of years ago, because I like the concept of men and women that served keeping the Constitution above all else.
Concept and reality seemed to be as wide as the Grand Canyon. I un-liked the group on FB as soon as I realized they were a bunch of crackpots associated with the likes of the Tin Foil Cap brigade that follows Alex Jones and Infowars.
If I recall correctly, the Oathkeepers’ original stated purpose/creed/reason for existence was fairly simple. Members pledged uphold the Constitution (e.g. not enforce unconstitutional laws, disobey orders that violated the constitution).
It looks like they have scrapped that idea and gone full nutter.
Prior to ‘deploying’ the Oaf Keepers watched a Rambo marathon on AMC.
I wonder how many liberal outfits, media and otherwise are taking as many pictures and videos of these crackpots as they can to use in their gun-grabber propaganda?
BWA HAHAHAHA!
Infowars!? Instead of making marks to uphold anything they are allying themselves with a site run by a nutjob. A site where hordes of members gaggle on the same nutball beliefs and yet call those with actual thought sheep?
Ohhhh wow.
As I asked above, who determines the enemy? oBaMa has violated the Constitution. The Supreme Court is playing havoc with it. Congress is, for the most part, either ignoring it or deferring their duties under it. So, what are the Oafs doing in MO? The Constitution’s enemy is not there. They are in Washington, D.C.
I served over 35 years in a combo of military services. I volunteered for a April to June OK operation. I thought it was a good idea, and I liked their mission statement. But, I observed some very serious actions and serious improper judgment calls. A few other “Patriot” organizations joined them as well. I witnessed some Federal violations and also some Oath Keeper National By- Law violations. But it appeared that the those that called themselves the “Command” leadership thought it ok to do as they pleased. I brought a life member up on my show to share his story. He was also former military. I was later threatened by One of the Oath Keeper supporters and Head of another Patriot Organization that they would Destroy me for speaking of what happened and or saying anything that they did not approve of. One of those individuals Leaders identified themselves as former law enforcement. Two of the Oath Keeper “Leaders” were former “Black-water” They were meeting secretly with the FBI and “Others” during the so called “Security Operation” for Miners. When you are told they have “Freedom of Speech” to slander and libel and defamation of Character against you, but you have no right to bring guest up on your show to share their stories and truths and/or evidence….or have you or your career or family threatened by their goons? Try to go to the Founder and he refuses to handle it in house, blackballing anyone who is a whistle blower or calls out foul to serious concerns about occurrences or possible/ obvious money misappropriations.