Jon A Firebaugh wrote:I suppose that it seems silly to some that these people would affirm their oaths to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. I went to the website that you linked to and all I see are 10 illegal acts that these individuals will not perform, ordered to do so.
Wait a sec... it's illegal to declare a state of emergency in a state?
It was illegal to engage in the US Civil War in 1861?
You SURE about those things?
It would seem to me that these are pledges to reject totalitarianism. But I suppose that supposed "liberals", who have railed against warrantless searches, feel uncomfortable about publicly pledging to disobey any order for such a search, while a leftist president continues to extend federal power over the citizens of this country. It's a shame that you think pledging to uphold the Constitution is a wacko thing to do.
I question the things that they promise to oppose that would never happen anyway. Why do they think they need to guard against sealing off a city to make it a concentration camp? Where on the list of likely things to have happen does this lie, do you think?
I mean, I could claim that I'll vehemently oppose my company requiring me to swallow broken glass. How heroic would you think I was being?
The truth is that liberal leftists would oppose such a pledge because the use of the word "citizens" might allow for a warrantless of a non-citizen, whom they claim is afforded all the rights and privileges of citizenship. The pledgers are citizens who are merely exercising their right to free speech, which is always a threat to the thought police.
I have no problem with someone saying they will follow their oath of service. I expect them to do that anyway. And if there was a well-known problem with soldiers and police officers being given illegal orders, or with them not following orders, I would think the group made sense. Have you heard any evidence odf either of these things happening?
No, I think it's a sign of paranoia that they think they need to announce in public that they will fight to the death to prevent cities being turned into concentration camps, among other things.
Do you see the difference? I would not urge that this group be silenced. Instead, people need to be careful about them as they are bordering on being dangerously insane. We do not need insane soldiers stationed around the country. The folks at Ft. Hood would surely agree with that, you think?
The fact that these people have a public website reassures me that they are not the lunatic fringe. I would be much more worried to learn that they were working covertly.
You do know that Al Qaeda has web sites, right?
Apparently, if someone expresses an opinion that you don't believe is"politically correct",or doesn't conform to your mindset, you don't think that opinion should be stated. Golly it's so frightening that these guys have publicly sworn to protect our constitutional rights. I suppose I should go lock my door and hide.
Are you lying about what I've said, or are you trying to use hyperbole? I said that I think they are not fully connected with reality and I have stated my reason for saying so.
It is surely a stretch to posit that any time soon a city would be turned into a concentration camp. But you're sorely mistaken if you think that is not possible for the government to act against its own citizens at sometime in the future. It has in fact already happened:
http://www.examiner.com/x-536-Civil-Lib ... ain-fiasco
If you think that an eminent domain seizure of property to provide room for a mall is the same as using the military to "turn a city into a concentration camp" it's obvious that reality has little real use for you.
