Friday November 16, 2018
SNc Channels:

Search
About Salem-News.com

 

Oct-03-2009 01:43printcomments

Are Right Wing Extremists Trying to Recruit Our Troops?

"We are in a battle for the hearts and minds of our own troops" - Direct quote from Oath Keepers

Photo courtesy: thedonovan.com
Photo courtesy: thedonovan.com

(CINCINNATI, Ohio) - A few months ago there was a controversy that got just as much a radical reception from the right-wing as the tea parties and Fox news coverage of the never ending Health Care debate.

The controversy I'm really talking about is when the Director of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano was forced by pressure from right-wing talk radio commentators and other conservative mouth pieces like the American Legion to apologize to America's Veterans and Troops for something that actually is a real threat. The potential threat of right-wing extremists or domestic terrorists attempting to recruit our troops is real as this story will affirm.

The American Legion meant well but takes it for granted our troops are too patriotic to be recruited by right or left wing extremists. WRONG! It is just that patriotism that patriotic extremists play on and manipulate. [See Right-wing extremism memo controversy in comments section. VT. Ed]

We will leave it to the Department of Homeland Security (unless they have been too intimidated by the right wing), Department of Defense, and our readers to decide if what Oath Keepers is doing to attract our troops to take an Oath to potentially disobey orders from their Chain of Command is legitimate or if the Department of Defense and Homeland Security needs to closely monitor such recruitment.

Taking oaths to disobey orders of any Chain of Command is not only illegal under the UCMJ, but it is also illegal under the Hatch Act which most of our troops, including Junior Officers don't know the meaning of.

Keep in mind, Oath Keepers at this time is only asking our troops to Take an Oath in addition to the one they already took to the U.S. Constitution the only difference is they are asking OUR TROOPS to endorse their unofficial version of the Constitution.

It is an Oath selectively designed to be attractive to Gun Nuts and the Second Amendment over all other amendments in the Constitution. The threat is twofold: (1) how many troops can they reach, and (2) will their oath someday go beyond debating the Constitution to recruiting our troops to keep their weapons at the ready when they come home in order to defend the Constitution as Oath Keepers defines it against our duly elected government.

We at Veterans Today have been asked to consider posting a story by such a conservative right-wing group that approaches being extremists when it actively recruits our active duty troops. In all fairness Oath Keepers has their selective and narrow view of what the U.S. Constitution means and the document is all about the Second Amendment and nothing else worth mentioning. However, this group is actively trying to recruit our troops into their organization with an emphasis on the Second Amendment and of course First Amendment rights as they apply to the Second Amendment. Don't they realize that there's a rational and logic reason why the Second Amendment for Gun Nuts is just that - second and not First Amendment?

This emphasis on the second amendment we can almost live with out of respect for THE FIRST, but recruiting active duty troops for any domestic challenge to the Constitution brings into question too many issues more in the jurisdiction of Homeland Security and DoD. It was just this concept that eventually led to the West Point class of 1861 spitting up to head North, South, East and West to kill one another. It is this concept that gave rise to the Southern militias that would be the backbone of the glorious Confederate Army.

In their own words, "The mission of Oath Keepers is to vastly increase their numbers. We are in a battle for the hearts and minds of our own troops." Direct quote from Oath Keepers.

In response to Oath Keepers request to post their story, we will on condition that they change the Oath to the revised one recommended by Veterans Today News Network. Lastly, we want to remind our readers including members of Congress that only the Department of Defense working in cooperation with Homeland Security can determine if groups like Oath Keepers pose a threat to the U.S. Constitution, our legally elected government, and of course Homeland Security. Surely the fact that either left or right-wing extremists groups may be trying to recruit active duty troops can't be based on but one group thus a closer examination is warranted.

Revised Oath Recommended by Veterans Today News Network for taking Oath Takers serious:

We at Veterans Today have no problem with our troops taking this revised Oath:

1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people or any other people in the world to show serious consideration for the 2nd Amendment. If the 2nd Amendment is good enough for us, it should be an aspect of democracy we export.

2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrant less searches of the American people or any other people in the world.

3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens or any other citizens of the world as "unlawful enemy combatants" or to subject them to military tribunal. This means the immediate closing of GITMO. Once again if detention of U.S. citizens is not good enough for us then it only stands to reason that it is NOT GOOD for the rest of the world.

4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a "state of emergency" on a state, or any nation in the world meaning an immediate cease and desist from the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.

5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state or nation that asserts its sovereignty, which means when asked to leave Iraq, Afghanistan or anywhere else we are not welcome by all the people WE LEAVE!

6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American or international cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps. [So much for our occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. VT. Ed]

7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens or citizens of any other nation into any form of detention camps under any pretext. Thus, GITMO plus any secret detention camps still maintained by our government must go as well as immigration detention centers.

8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to "keep the peace" or to "maintain control." By the same token we will NOT obey any order to assist or support foreign troops on foreign soil against the people of any nation in the true spirit and meaning of our U.S. Constitution.

9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, or any other people in the world, 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. In sincere respect for the First Amendment, we believe that right should be exported as our gallant noble cause to show the world how America really works. Free speech to all - everyone in the world

To see the original go to Oath Takers, but until they revise their oath, we don't take it serious.

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2009/03/03/declaration-of-orders-we-will-not-obey/

If Oath Takers will make the above revisions, we at Veterans Today just might take you serious, it is up to Homeland Security and the Department of Defense to consider you a threat to National Security.

Just don't dare Tread on my property with your guns, because I too am a Gun Nut.

Special thanks to VeteransToday.com, to view a large number of articles written by Bob Hanafin, please visit this link: http://www.veteranstoday.com/modules.php?name=VT_Authors&author=indythinker

=============================================== Robert L. Hanafin, Major, U.S. Air Force-Retired, is the Veteran Advocacy Editor for Veterans Today News Network & Our Troops News Ladder. He is a member of Veterans for America (VFA), Veterans for Common Sense (VCS), Disabled American Veterans (DAV), Vietnam Veterans of America (VVA), Military Families Speak Out (MFSO), Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW).




Comments Leave a comment on this story.
Name:

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.



Rewneomyhow September 6, 2015 3:12 am (Pacific time)

Is that true? I’ll spread this information. Anyway, nice article


Traderawb July 14, 2010 3:57 pm (Pacific time)

The Constitution was written to protect Americans from their own government, not to stop America from winning conflicts with other countries by allowing them the very rights they seek to deny us by war. The rules of warfare have been clouded since they apply to uniformed troops not easily applied to Guerilla warfare and civilian populations without danger to innocents. OathKeepers oath applies to the military's role when government turns inward against it own. While there may be enemies within, they are properly handled with internal agencies, state troops and courts.


George Hanshaw October 27, 2009 9:46 am (Pacific time)

In my twenty+ years in the military I got an illegal order once. I did the standard, "Sir, I respectfully request that you put that order in writing," and received an indignant, "Are you saying you refuse to obey that order unless I put it in writing?" My reply was , "No sir, not at all. There is no way in Hell I'm going to obey that order but if you try to make me obey it, one of us is going to get court-martialed. I'm just making things easier for the court-martial board to decide which one." Somehow the illegal order got changed after that. The fact is that Oath Keepers is probably unnecessary. Most military people know what their rights are and what their duties are. Sure, we may bend the Posse Comittatus Act a little bit to help the DEA out with some drug smugglers, but if someone gives us orders in clear violation of the Constitution they are going to be told no. If they push the issue, the troops will push back. If they push the troops hard, the troops will push back harder and someone will die. It may not be the Chicago Way, but it's the military way.......


Paul October 15, 2009 11:17 pm (Pacific time)

Seeing as how the Oath Keepers promises are right there in black and white on their website, it is rather strange how not only the writer but the editor of this website cannot seem to read. Your version of Oath number 6 is an out and out lie.


SGT H. Garge October 11, 2009 1:56 pm (Pacific time)

Frankly, I'm both surprised and hurt given your experience Major Hanafin. Oath Keepers pledge to keep the same oath that you took: to defend the Constitution of the United States. There is no additional oath as you state, only a promise to keep the oath already taken, unlike, for instance, those who unconstitutionally seized guns from law-abiding citizens in New Orleans after Katrina. Oath Keepers are the rain the coat covering the citizens of the U.S.A. from a storm that we all pray never comes. God bless you for your service Major. I'll add a prayer for you in hopes that you see the light on this issue before the dark clouds move in.


Kurt October 10, 2009 12:15 am (Pacific time)

Is this site real? or just satire? i must have counted the words right wing extremist about 5 times in this article. our forefathers were right wing extremists by the same description, and if it was good enough for them then sign me up


Soldier October 6, 2009 1:01 am (Pacific time)

Sir, You have edited the ten orders Oathkeepers will not obey to suit your fancy. Nowhere in OathKeeper's ten orders do they mention international cities or populations. Their orders are ALL directed at Americans only, never international entities. You have edited them for your own purposes.


Glenn October 6, 2009 12:55 am (Pacific time)

Only if you decide that keeping the oath we all took when we enlisted is extremism, only when defending the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic is extremism, only when you decide that unlawful orders must be obeyed, only then can anything about OathKeepers be called extremist or un-American.


A wounded soldier October 5, 2009 2:44 pm (Pacific time)

Having actually read their oaths after reading article, they seem to just want to point out all unlawful orders and put them in oaths. So what? They don't sound right wing, left wing or any wing for that manner but sound like people trying to avoid the problems that arise when an ambitious and ignorant leader orders his men to do unlawful acts. While in Iraq, I too have had to set my Captain aside and let him know that he wasn't allowed to do things. This wasn't insubordination, just another NCO doing his job. Remember that the civilians in charge of us have less knowledge than the officer and sometimes have to be told by their troops.


G-2/3; October 4, 2009 5:26 am (Pacific time)

what they seem to suggest is more than logical compared with our military bases being in 130 of the 190 countries on the planet.I think they lie to us under the pretext of democracy,the constitution was stolen and shredded by the previous administration and continues under Obama in spite of what a lot of us hoped for, what constitutional principals are we upholding and defending in Iraq?,Afghanistan?,Pakistan? Gitmo?

[Return to Top]
©2018 Salem-News.com. All opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Salem-News.com.


Articles for October 2, 2009 | Articles for October 3, 2009 | Articles for October 4, 2009


The NAACP of the Willamette Valley

Sean Flynn was a photojournalist in Vietnam, taken captive in 1970 in Cambodia and never seen again.

Support
Salem-News.com:

Your customers are looking: Advertise on Salem-News.com!

Call 503-362-6858 to Order Ahead  or for Party Reservations!