Government Agents Seize Oath Keeper’s New Born From Hospital

[Dennis S]

Bernie wrote: I am a card carrying Oath Keeper...

Damn, brother, I don't believe I'd 've told that.

[mattkime]

oath keepers:tea party as tea party : republicans

[Grace62]

Bernie wrote:
Stewart Rhodes writes today on the Oath Keepers website that the Southern Poverty Law Center is now officially part of the Department of Homeland Security. Rhodes sources a DHS document, entitled “Countering Violent Extremism Working Group,” that lists Richard Cohen as a member of the DHS created group. Cohen is president and CEO of the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Does this Document look Legit?

I'm a long time contributor to the SPLC, and hearing from you directly and seeing the level of paranoia, and who and what you support, reassures me that my money is well spent.

[Don Kiyoti]

This would be a good time to point out the obvious to Bernie and to Stewart Rhodes: being part of a working group advising the DHS Advisory Council does not make one "officially part of DHS."

Reading the responses on the Oath Keepers site (and taking note of the few members pleading against racism and anti-Semitism), it is apparent that the OK's purported rejection of racism has not filtered down to the rank-and-file.

[lafinfil]

IMHO the oath keepers angle is a gimmick that he is using in order to gain attention and it is
more than likely to see it backfire on him and perhaps the whole organization. The possible exception is
that the oath keepers are probably seeing an influx of cash for his defense and he will not likely see any of it.

Reading of his previous charges and two children removed and placed in foster care,
I just hope they don't let the guy own a dog either.

In a previous life I have been called to hospital ER's in the wee hours of the night to photograph children
that have been victims of some of the most horrific neglect and abuse that you can possible imagine.
(abused women and seniors too for that matter)

My experience was that by the time that it reached this point a case had been brewing for quite awhile
especially by the time children are actually removed. Family Services are usually so overworked and backlogged
that sadly often kids end up dead before they get removed. I have photographed more of those cases both
in the ER and the morgue then I care to remember.

[Ted King]

From an Oath Keeper's blog:

http://oath-keepers.blogspot.com/2009/03...rs-we.html

"The time is now near at hand which must probably determine, whether Americans are to be, Freemen, or Slaves; whether they are to have any property they can call their own; whether their Houses, and Farms, are to be pillaged and destroyed, and they consigned to a State of Wretchedness from which no human efforts will probably deliver them. The fate of unborn Millions will now depend, under God, on the Courage and Conduct of this army" - Gen. George Washington, to his troops before the battle of Long Island

Such a time is near at hand again. The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the Courage and Conduct of this Army - and this Marine Corps, This Air Force, This Navy and the National Guard units of these sovereign states.

Oath Keepers is a non-partisan association of currently serving military, reserves, National Guard, peace officers, and veterans who swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic … and meant it.

Our oath is to the Constitution, not to the politicians, and that oath will be kept. We won’t “just follow orders."

"Such time is at hand again." It's scary to me that so many people believe this.


"...swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution..." One would assume that means the WHOLE Constitution. According to the Constitution itself it is the Supreme Court that is the final arbiter of what the Constitution means and their rulings become the law of the land. So, the Oath Keepers should, if they are serious about supporting and defending the Constitution, uphold what the Supreme Court says even if they do not agree with a particular ruling that it gives. From the same blog site they say this, "Accordingly, we oppose any and all further infringements on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. In particular we oppose a renewal of the misnamed “assault-weapons” ban or the enactment of H.R. 45 (which would register and track gun owners like convicted pedophiles)." So if the Supreme Court has or does rule that assault-weapons bans or enactment of H.R. 45 are Constitutional, will they uphold the Constitution (which says the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of the meaning of the Constitution itself) by enforcing such laws? If not, then they, as the cliche goes, would be taking the law into their own hands - law enforcement officers taking the law into their own hands.

[Gutenberg]

The government is right now taking steps to probibit banks and mortgage companies from seizing people's homes without due process. How nefarious and underhanded our government is!

[btfc]

"Reading the responses on the Oath Keepers site (and taking note of the few members pleading against racism and anti-Semitism), it is apparent that the OK's purported rejection of racism has not filtered down to the rank-and-file."

Yes, the comments were illuminating.

[Bill in NC]

n/a

[Bernie]

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2010/10/15/update-on-the-new-hampshire-case-after-the-hearing-and-our-rally-it-was-a-good-day/

Just for those that think such a thing could happen here in America. The State returns baby and says nothing.