The Mental Militia Forums

Partner Sites => Oath-Keepers => Topic started by: DiabloLoco on November 30, 2014, 08:14:24 am

Title: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: DiabloLoco on November 30, 2014, 08:14:24 am
I'm surprised that it wasn't posted here before the action.

Police shut down mysterious 'Oath Keepers' guarding rooftops in downtown Ferguson

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/police-shut-down-mysterious-oath-keepers-guarding-rooftops-in-downtown/article_f90b6edd-acf8-52e3-a020-3a78db286194.html?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

Quote
“I opened the window and said, ‘Hey, can I help you?’” said Hildebrand, 35, a website developer.

The man said he was security and would be up there at night with others to protect the pocket of second-story apartments and lower-level storefronts near the Ferguson Police Department. A day earlier, rioters had broken out windows below Hildebrand’s apartment in the 100 block of South Florissant Road and torched a nearby beauty supply store.

“I am in the middle of a difficult spot,” Hildebrand said. “I feel a lot better having those guys up on the roof.”

But he wasn’t clear exactly who “those guys” were or where they came from.

Puzzled and alarmed protesters have wondered, too — some accusing the mysterious guards in military fatigues of being in the Ku Klux Klan.

In fact, they are volunteers affiliated with a 35,000-member national organization called Oath Keepers.



Police questioned group members early in the week and allowed them to stay. But Saturday, after media inquiries, St. Louis County police officers ordered the Oath Keepers to leave the rooftops.

Threatened with arrest for operating without a license, the volunteers argued but eventually left their positions early Saturday, Rhodes said.

“We are going to go back as protesters,” Rhodes said Saturday afternoon.

Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: slidemansailor on November 30, 2014, 06:35:04 pm
It is looking an awful lot like the rulers want arson, looting and a racial divide.  Pressuring the local cops to chase the Oath Keepers off is just one bit of evidence. The day before, federal snipers set up and aimed at them in a failed intimidation attempt. 

Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Rarick on December 01, 2014, 05:12:00 pm
Yep. The snipers got scope pictures sent to them by other snipers.......
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: da gooch on December 03, 2014, 10:18:53 pm
"In the wake of Monday’s grand jury announcement, Oath Keepers put out a national request to members to help in Ferguson."

I guess that shows me just how "in the loop" I am with OK these days. Not. One. Peep.
No phone call, no email, no member enroute stopping by to ask If I was interested in riding along.
Nothing. Nada. Zip.

sigh

I wonder if it is the well known fact that I am poor and cannot afford to traipse half way across the country to respond to every incident that comes along OR the fact that I am no longer one of the "fitter" members OR that my chronological number exceeds the caliber of my MBR?

I suppose I should be more attentive to the OK website BUT it is so script dense that on my "blazing fast" 56K (average speed is 28.8 Kbps) dial up connection it takes an hour to load. There May be a small exageration hereabouts ... ahem



Meanwhile, if there are any other links to this Oath Keeper sighting I would appreciate their being brought to us here at TMM. Where Oath Keepers was created.....

Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: da gooch on December 03, 2014, 10:21:16 pm
Yep. The snipers got scope pictures sent to them by other snipers.......

This sort of thing usually does encourage the reconsidering of ones position doesn't it?
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: DiabloLoco on December 04, 2014, 03:26:50 pm

Meanwhile, if there are any other links to this Oath Keeper sighting I would appreciate their being brought to us here at TMM. Where Oath Keepers was created.....
I know, right? That's why I posted the article. I was VERY surprised that there was no mention of this here on TMM. Is Oath Keepers starting to distance themselves from us wackos? Has TMM become too anti-government for them? Tarnishing their desired public image?

Over the past few years, the number of active members has dwindled. The number of new members has decreased quite a bit as well. Is TMM dying, or is this a natural, cyclical thing? Another thing......When JWR handed over the helm of Survivalblog to this "Hugh" character (big mistake IMHO), I'm pretty sure that the referrals for membership to TMM stopped too. That's how I personally found TMM. Rawles suggested it. I'm glad he did! If you really think about it, who was the last new "regular poster". There hasn't been any in quite a long time. :huh:
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: MamaLiberty on December 04, 2014, 03:50:38 pm
Over the past few years, the number of active members has dwindled. The number of new members has decreased quite a bit as well. Is TMM dying, or is this a natural, cyclical thing?

The only thing that never changes is that all things change...

I'm old enough to remember getting our first telephone, the fun of a 16 party line, and how wonderful it was when there were only four other families on that party line later. I remember coffee houses and cork message boards in college, the total paradigm shift of the universe when the post it note came along (LOL)... Leap forward to the start of email. How exciting it was to join the various email groups and discuss things with people all over the place. The forum was a natural outgrowth of that, and gradually blog comment sections took a bite out of those. Now there is a whole new world with "facebook," "twitter" and such things, with ever more and new ones in the pipe for the future. The future comes along a whole lot faster than ever these days. sigh

So, it is entirely possible that TMM can't compete with the newer forms of "social media" and that people we might have attracted in the past will never know TMM exists.

I'd say let's enjoy it while we may, and make every effort to participate if we value it. Otherwise, yes... it will surely die. 
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Elias Alias on December 05, 2014, 05:02:52 am

Meanwhile, if there are any other links to this Oath Keeper sighting I would appreciate their being brought to us here at TMM. Where Oath Keepers was created.....
I know, right? That's why I posted the article. I was VERY surprised that there was no mention of this here on TMM. Is Oath Keepers starting to distance themselves from us wackos? Has TMM become too anti-government for them? Tarnishing their desired public image?

Over the past few years, the number of active members has dwindled. The number of new members has decreased quite a bit as well. Is TMM dying, or is this a natural, cyclical thing? Another thing......When JWR handed over the helm of Survivalblog to this "Hugh" character (big mistake IMHO), I'm pretty sure that the referrals for membership to TMM stopped too. That's how I personally found TMM. Rawles suggested it. I'm glad he did! If you really think about it, who was the last new "regular poster". There hasn't been any in quite a long time. :huh:

In the past I have mentioned several times that I could pack this place with lots of new readers, but the consensus has generally been that we want to keep this place protected from the unwashed masses. So I have not done anything to drive traffic to here. It would be very simple -- I would just ask Bill to get us a "recognized" certificate, then I would put out an email blast to Oath Keepers' membership and support base, which is more than 55,000 souls, and link to here. Some of our members in Oath Keepers will not like what they see here, but thousands of them would. We are dealing with larger numbers at Oath Keepers, and percentages come into play.

Howsome-ever, until the Admins here let me know they want new faces at this table, I'm not going to bring 'em. Personally, I'd like to develop the theme, "Mental Militia", and make it popular with the people outside this small group. I'd like to sell things through this site so I could make some bucks -- long years ago I made up The Mental Militia T-shirts -- that was about twelve years ago. Sold 'em all except for a couple I keep as mementos. It would be very easy to do TMM coffee mugs, hats, and T-shirts and also place a "donate" button on the site here, and generate interest in this place -- because -- the idea of a "Mental" Militia is very timely today.  But when I brought up the topic of doing T-shirts to our Admins last year, there was no real interest and some suggestions that the shirts would not sell anyway, so I dropped that idea.

I am working with James Jaeger and Edwin Vieira, Stewart Rhodes and Chuck Baldwin, Sheriff Mack and Ron Paul, KrisAnne Hall and Walter Reddy (co-founder of the Tea Party), USN Commander David R. Gillie and Rosie Haas, Devvy Kidd and Larry Pratt (of GOA) on this new film named Midnight Ride. The film was inspired by Edwin Vieira's newest book, "By Tyranny Out Of Necessity: The Bastardy Of Martial Law" and it's about the four types of "martial law". Given the dramatic militarization of our local cops these days, the DHS Fusion Centers connecting your local cop with the highest federal powers and interfacing them all into one chain of command, and given the pre-placement of military equipment in smalltown USA, and given the current spate of police brutality, etc etc, we're looking at an infrastructure for a military-police state enforcing martial law. That’s coming, mark my words.

Dr. Vieira notes that the only salvation for America in the face of this sort of martial law threat is to immediately form our Constitutional "Militia of the several States" as the Constitution requires. What Oath Keepers has done this year at the Bundy ranch and in Ferguson, Missouri, when paired with development of our Community Preparedness Teams (CPT), shows the path which Dr. Vieira has pointed out to us. It starts at the community level and moves to institute Militia offices in County Commissions, where all citizens go to register and become thereby individual parts of their own local government. The movie MIDNIGHT RIDE will promote Edwin Vieira's vision outward to the liberty movement, but as James Jaeger noted on the Liberty Brothers radio show today, getting that message out to the circles which await beyond the reach of the liberty movement, is a trick. Hitting the average American over the head with a frying pan with smart-assed remarks about purist perspectives on libertarianism or philosophical anarchy suddenly shuts the door to that one person's mind, and the message that said person needs to grok is lost in futility as he walks away mad. Oath Keepers has a way of getting past that barrier, and TMM could do it also, if "we" here at TMM merely wanted to do so. But again, to date this group has held fast with a mutual disdain for allowing the unwashed masses into our little oasis of libertarianism.

This place has huge potential for growth and development, for as I noted already its time has come. Those of you who have been here forever will recall that I'm the guy who named "The Mental Militia" back in 1999 as a Yahoo Club (before the clubs were turned into groups) (and also of note, that original Yahoo Club site is still online after all these years, by invitation only). I am the guy who had Bark build this forum in 2003, which we as TMM gave to Claire Wolfe and Debra Ricketts and named "The Claire Files Forums". When Kirsten and her crew of subversives did their infamous "Flounce-off" after four years of head-aches for Claire, Claire sold this place back to TMM. We bought the site from her in 2007 for $1500.00, under her expressed requirement that we rename it from The Claire Files Forum back to The Mental Militia. I say "we" bought it because we used this site to raise that money, which was contributed by many of our members here. At that time I bowed out as an "authority figure" here and became just another one of the Administrators with no extra powers. I wanted it to be a group effort, with no one person in command. I even let them require that I quit calling myself “General Elias Alias”, though Claire calls me that to this day, and some of us old timers here also call me that.

I have no desire to over-ride anyone's wishes here, so I have held back on running this place as I'd want to, and y'all should probably be glad about that, lol. But if the Admins want to give me license to develop traffic and money here and get this idea of a "Mental Militia" out to the American people, that can be done. What I would want would be the "right" to think up ideas for things to sell so I could supplement my income from the traffic at this forum. Otherwise, I'll slowly, as minutes allow, continue to build my own site and start selling my poetry there, and perhaps start up an "Alias Revolution" movement at my site, or something.

I have had that site for several years. Ragnar built it originally as a Drupal site, at my request, and I paid him to do that, but recently I've asked Bill St. Clair to be the webmaster for it, as Rags has not got the time. There are less than twenty articles posted on that site, for one good reason -- I'm editor for Oath Keepers national, am on their Board of Directors, and work like a beaver for James Jaeger and Edwin Vieira on making movies which might help someone some day decide to live and work for freedom, maybe. I have zero minutes each day for myself, but try at times to sit for a stolen hour and do some writing for my own pleasure, and every now and then I actually get a post up at my own site. But soon I will put up a "tip jar" link there to accept donations from people who appreciate my work and want to help keep me going, and my hope is that some day I'll be able to make my basic income from developments at that site. (Dream on, right?) LOL!  Of from this site.

Anyway, this place has a history and that history is fine with me. I don't post here often for reasons I have just explained -- no minutes, day after day. I've been five and a half years totally swamped with trying to keep up with Stewart Rhodes, and that's enough to make me an old man, which I now appear to be, ack!

So anyway, when y'all get to thinking you'd like to rock 'n roll with this place, let me know and I'll focus energies here for future development and hopefully a bit of future income for myself. There could also be a fund established for the leadership at this forum in addition to what I might need, such as paying Bill St. Clair for what he does for us here. It would be great to cut a check for MamaLiberty now and then, for all she has done over the years. I've been sending Bill money in gratitude for his loyal and dependable service to this place, and for paying TMM’s bills. I get that money as a paid employee of a Nevada corporation named Oath Keepers, which would probably be paying Gooch too had he stayed in the saddle long enough. I worked for free for Oath Keepers for several years and paid some of Oath Keepers costs out of my own pocket. Now I'm being paid by the organization to do what I do for it, and I use some of that money (which ain't a lot, but is enough to pay for the groceries and gasoline and my rent) to pay the bills here. That is why I owe my minutes and time first to Oath Keepers, and must take care of my responsibilities there before I can come by here and use up minutes to chew the fat, right?

The question of whether to let this place die on the vine or pump new life into it is of course a serious question for many reading here. I want to be on the record in stating right here that I do not have any wish to over-ride what the Admins here want to do about that, and I think that the regular members here should have a say in that also. Yes, I named the place, and am the oldest living member at these boards. (I noticed that some time back it was decided to leave off members’ member-number, and that doesn’t bother me either, but for the record, Bark was member #1, which was officially retired when he died of cancer at my home in Willow Creek, Montana, and I was member #2, ahead of Claire and Debra, because Bark and I built this place and had to be here first. That’s the history.) So I’m open, either which way this place wants to go.

I’m also aware of the conflicts which would come if we brought in a new bunch of people here, and the other problems which presently are mostly prevented by our member policy and Admin policy. I recommend that each person here, if one thinks about this question at all, be cognizant of the potential problems which new and larger traffic would bring with it. It’s y’all’s call, is my final word on the matter.  I can go with my own site, develop that for a future income, or I can build traffic here and develop income through this place, or continue to work as an associate producer on James Jaeger’s movies and start taking James up on his offers to pay me for the fundraising I do – which I’ve to this date declined to accept from him. But I’m an old guy, and need to think ahead for my remaining years, and I don’t like the idea of having all my eggs in one basket (Oath Keepers), even though Oath Keepers continues to show good strength and promise for the near future. Nice things keep on happening for us, such as Ted Nugent’s joining Oath Keepers as a lifetime member. The Bundy Ranch knocked us for a loop, and then along comes Ferguson and our numbers are swelling again due to the national publicity we’ve just had.

Personally, I think it would be sorta “wrong” to change the tone and dynamic of this place just to make it commercially viable. I do also think that it could be done in a way which would add a sparkle of excitement and a certain value in educational activity with outreach to those who have no clue about what’s happening to our country. To develop that, I’d want license from the Admins to draw money from the volume of money I think I (we) could generate here. Otherwise, I’m content to drop by at times for a brief visit, but cannot afford to work these boards the way I must work Oath Keepers’ national website and other facets of business. My cabin in the woods came cheaply, but the rent still comes due each month.

I think, in closing, that this place could recognize that it has a mission inherent in its very name, and the country is ready to look more closely into the whole idea of a Constitutional "Militia of the several States" as required in the Constitution; and I also think that we're in a mental war for the hearts and minds of the American people, and there is no better way to approach that war for the hearts and minds than to develop The Mental Militia and run this place like we at Oath Keepers run that place. Gooch is right -- Oath Keepers was born right here. I recall the private message I got from Stewart The Yalie back in 2008, wanting to talk with me about an idea he had. He told me he thought that idea would "grow legs", and it did. He will tell you today that I was the first guy he came to with the idea, and I'm damn proud of that fact. Visionary people are not like most other folks. I don't mind one bit admitting that I'm visionary in ways which I ascribe to my personal spirituality. I am a Voluntaryist, and a philosophical anarchist -- but I'm willing to come off my exalted high horse about my personal views long enough to share the light with those who are searching for some truth with which to answer the threat of the coming martial law. The question is: Is TMM ready and willing to step down off their libertarian purist high horse to become an effective tool for liberty? Or would TMM prefer to go quietly into that good night as people continue to lose interest in "just talking" on forums?

Salute!
Elias Alias
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Elias Alias on December 05, 2014, 05:49:27 am

Meanwhile, if there are any other links to this Oath Keeper sighting I would appreciate their being brought to us here at TMM. Where Oath Keepers was created.....
I know, right? That's why I posted the article. I was VERY surprised that there was no mention of this here on TMM. Is Oath Keepers starting to distance themselves from us wackos? Has TMM become too anti-government for them? Tarnishing their desired public image?

Over the past few years, the number of active members has dwindled. The number of new members has decreased quite a bit as well. Is TMM dying, or is this a natural, cyclical thing? Another thing......When JWR handed over the helm of Survivalblog to this "Hugh" character (big mistake IMHO), I'm pretty sure that the referrals for membership to TMM stopped too. That's how I personally found TMM. Rawles suggested it. I'm glad he did! If you really think about it, who was the last new "regular poster". There hasn't been any in quite a long time. :huh:

Oath Keepers leadership has no reason to distance themselves from TMM. Again, as Gooch pointed out, Oath Keepers was born here. At the core of our leadership, we few who run Oath Keepers national fit nicely with the philosophy of self-governance and personal responsibility. TMM is not anti-government, it’s just particular about which government any free soul may choose for his own government – “the self” being high on my list, personally, and also on Stewart’s list as well. The only reason Stewart and I can’t be here more often has to do with what it takes to run a national organization. The insanity levels are indescribable. I’ve got more than thirty thousand unopened emails in my email inbox. Stewart’s inbox is in even worse shape. We already cannot possibly answer all our correspondence. There is the activity of the Board of Directors. There are the many State chapters with their needs, gripes and complaints as well as their awesome achievements which need posting at our site. There is all this public relations work, and the day-to-day workload – I burn DVDs for the Oath Keepers membership packets, and ship boxes of those all over the country, along with boxes of our brochures, bumper stickers, etc etc. And still try to find time to call my mother each day, noticing that I have to work to set aside the pressing needs for me to be elsewhere during the few minutes that call takes. We work with national names on a daily basis, travel, etc. For example, last year I rode with Stewart by car from Memphis, Tennessee, to Birmingham, Alabama where we picked up Mike Vanderboegh of the III% movement, up to Massachusetts for our Lexington Green Oath ceremony to mark Oath Keepers’ fourth anniversary. We appeared at two events in Connecticut, one event in New York upstate, and two events in Massachusetts. This year I’ve driven with my two cats from North Carolina to Washington State, from northern Montana to southern Nevada, and made a number of thousand-mile round trips on Oath Keepers business. Meanwhile, I have helped write the script for James Jaeger’s upcoming film, MIDNIGHT RIDE, have recruited five people to be in that movie, and have started promoting the film. Here is an example: 

https://eliasalias.com/2014/11/23/oath-keepers-saddle-up-for-midnight-ride/

I’m now writing up articles to announce KrisAnne Hall’s entry into the movie, and also Ron Paul’s coming on board.  I also post other-sourced articles at our website, clear the comments under our articles, answer as many “contact-us” messages as I can, deal with the Board work, take phone calls from all over the country, and yadda yadda etc etc etc until my head is swimming. It’s not that Oath Keepers wants to distance itself from TMM – it’s that we’re too damn busy to read and write here. What else am I doing? Well, since you asked, I’m helping build Oath Keepers’ brand new awesome website, and I’m writing the “Oath Keepers Academy”, which will be a section of our new site. The new site is beautiful and clean, and anyone can come in there and find easily whatever they’re looking for, which is not the case with our present site.

Regarding Rawles, for years he was using TMM as his forum, a fact which I encouraged him to do and made sure he knew he was welcome to do so. I don’t know who “Hugh” is, but I’ve not spoken with Rawles in quite some time, several years at least.

Salute!
Elias Alias


Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Elias Alias on December 05, 2014, 06:16:19 am
"In the wake of Monday’s grand jury announcement, Oath Keepers put out a national request to members to help in Ferguson."

I guess that shows me just how "in the loop" I am with OK these days. Not. One. Peep.
(snip snip snip)


Meanwhile, if there are any other links to this Oath Keeper sighting I would appreciate their being brought to us here at TMM. Where Oath Keepers was created.....

Okay Gooch, looping you in now. Pay attention, okay? ;)

December 02 2014 _ Good interview video with Sam Andrews!
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/oath-keepers-are-back-on-the-rooftops-in-ferguson-despite/article_18757380-b471-5a6f-848c-a4dfe9805ed6.html




Our posting of the Dec 02 2014 Fox News interview with Jon Karriman, Missouri leader for OK
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/12/03/fox-news-insider-armed-oath-keepers-threatened-with-arrest-for-guarding-ferguson-shops/

@@@@@@@
Our coverage of St. Louis Post-Dispatch article from Dec 02 2014 with vid of Sam Andrews
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/12/04/st-louis-post-dispatch-oath-keepers-still-on-roofs/

@@@@@@
Our attorney’s letter to Chief Belmar:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/249001595/Letter-for-Oath-Keepers-to-Chief
@@@
http://benswann.com/exclusive-interview-called-domestic-terrorists-by-the-feds-oath-keepers-help-stop-ferguson-from-burning/
http://benswann.com/exclusive-interview-oathkeepers-surrounded-by-50-police-told-to-stop-defending-building-in-ferguson-from-fires/
Awesome interview with Sam:
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/12/02/ferguson-oath-keepers-challenge-order-to-leave/?cp=1#comment-505241
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
New York Times (November 29 2014)
On Rooftops of Ferguson, Volunteers Patrol, With Guns
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/30/us/on-rooftops-of-ferguson-volunteers-with-guns.html?_r=2
@@@@@@@@@
Fox News (December 02 2014)
Ferguson Oath Keepers challenge order to leave
http://fox2now.com/2014/12/02/ferguson-oath-keepers-security-team/
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
December 02 2014
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/12/02/government-threatens-police-academy-instructor-other-volunteers-with-arrest-for-protecting-ferguson-businesses/

@@@@@@@@@
Breitbart.com notes on USA Today article. November 29 2014
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2014/11/29/USA-Today-Ferguson-a-Defining-Moment-for-Race-Relations-Notes-Calls-for-Bloodshed
@@@@@@@
Reuters on November 26 2014
In Ferguson, black residents stand guard at white-owned store
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/26/us-usa-missouri-shooting-gasstation-idUSKCN0JA1XF20141126

Feds Enable Arsonists, Target Oath Keepers Protecting Ferguson Businesses
Feds tell police to stop "domestic terrorists" providing free security

Mikael Thalen November 30 2014 at INFOWARS :::: This is a good synopsis of a timeline regarding the feds shutting down the Oath Keepers security operations for business owners.
http://www.infowars.com/feds-enable-arsonists-target-oath-keepers-protecting-ferguson-businesses/
Police in Ferguson, Missouri, have been pressured by the federal government to stop members of Oath Keepers from guarding local homes and businesses targeted by arsonists.
Oath Keepers, an organization consisting of former and current military, police and first responders, dispatched several members to Ferguson the day after the Grand Jury announcement to provide free security to those in need.
Almost immediately after receiving praise in a local paper for protecting vulnerable residents, Oath Keepers standing watch on top of a locally-owned bakery witnessed a three-man sniper team exiting a silver Suburban on the ground below.
The three men were then seen setting up sniper hides in a nearby building before aiming their rifles directly at the group. Across the street, on top of the fire hall, a seperate sniper team began setting up as well.
A Missouri Oath Keeper named Sam Andrews, who spoke briefly with Infowars, immediately called Unified Command to find out why snipers had taken up an aggressive position against them.
According to Andrews, local police, a large portion of which have been supportive of the Oath Keepers, were completely unaware of the feds movements.
Shortly after, a St. Louis County police officer appeared on scene and began telling Andrews that business owners wanted them off their roofs.
After calling the store owners, Andrews and his team quickly confirmed that no such request was ever made. That is when the officer admitted that his chief was being pressured by the feds to keep Oath Keepers from protecting buildings.
Further reports revealed that the feds had told police earlier that day that Oath Keepers were “domestic terrorists,” an unsurprising claim given the federal government’s baseless targeting of the group.
The owner of a Chinese restaurant receiving free protection was reportedly confronted by federal agents also and told to kick the Oath Keepers out.
Failing to remove the businesses’ and homes’ much needed protection, other officers began telling Andrews that his group was in violation of state law. Police claimed the group needed to posses security licenses, despite the fact that the law only applies to paid security, not volunteers.
“We’re volunteers. We read the statute. We had three attorneys read the statute,” Andrews told Infowars.
Andrews began speaking with other volunteers not affiliated with the Oath Keepers, including a group of young Ferguson residents protecting a local gas station, and learned that none had been approached or told to obtain licenses by police.
Stewart Rhodes, founder and president of Oath Keepers, told Infowars that the American people are being presented with a false choice by those running the show in Ferguson.
“They want to create a false paradigm… They are presenting a false choice between lawlessness, looting, arson, assault, murder on the one side, unrestrained, or a hyper-militarized police state on the other,” Rhodes said. “They are failing to do the intelligent thing and protect businesses without trampling on rights.”
Rhodes’ remarks cause even more concern in light of comments made by Missouri Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder, who accused President Obama of ordering a National Guard stand down as Ferguson businesses burned to the ground last week.
Ferguson Mayor James Knowles also stated that his request for National Guard help was turned down by Governor Jay Nixon, a Democrat ally of the President.
Andrews and the other volunteers, who even spent Thanksgiving pouring water on rooftops in case arsonists and rioters returned, are now shifting tactics in order to continue protecting life, liberty and property in Ferguson.

Natalie’s Cakes And More posted gratitude pic with Oath Keeper on her facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/274915157402/photos/pb.274915157402.-2207520000.1417416757./10152846243627403/?type=1&theater
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Natalies-Cakes-More/274915157402
http://gunfreezone.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Natalies-Cakes-More.jpg
Natalie's Cakes & More
100 S Florissant Rd
Ferguson, MO 63135
Phone: (314) 398-3951

November 30 2014: Ben Swann piece:
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/11/30/ben-swann-exclusive-called-%E2%80%9Cdomestic-terrorists%E2%80%9D-by-the-feds-oath-keepers-help-stop-ferguson-from-burning/

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/11/24/oath-keepers-open-letter-to-the-people-of-ferguson-missouri/
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/11/25/oath-keepers-guarding-businesses-in-ferguson-missouri-calling-on-volunteers-to-assist/
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/11/29/mysterious-oath-keepers-guard-rooftops-in-downtown-ferguson/
Very nice article combination by Stewart Rhodes and Jesse Bogan of St. Louis Post-Dispatch on November 29 2014, sent by John Wallace (Mahoney) of NYOK, at this link:
http://www.libertynewsonline.com/article_301_36611.php
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/11/30/unorthodox-police-procedures-emerge-in-grand-jury-documents/
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/11/30/feds-enable-arsonists-target-oath-keepers-protecting-ferguson-businesses/
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/11/30/madness-in-ferguson-continues/
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/11/30/ben-swann-exclusive-called-%E2%80%9Cdomestic-terrorists%E2%80%9D-by-the-feds-oath-keepers-help-stop-ferguson-from-burning/
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/11/28/black-residents-protect-white-owned-store-in-ferguson/
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/11/27/volunteers-peacefully-protect-ferguson-small-businesses/
My Thanksgiving Letter, with addendum on Ferguson by Stewart at bottom
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/11/27/a-personal-thanksgiving-letter-from-your-editor/
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/11/25/streets-of-ferguson-smolder-after-grand-jury-decides-not-to-indict-officer/
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/11/25/ferguson-grand-jury-decision-browns-death-should-be-call-to-action-not-violence/
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/11/25/staging-ferguson-a-covert-op-and-al-sharpton/
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/11/22/ferguson-experiences-3rd-straight-night-of-unrest/
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2014/11/21/live-video-feed-in-ferguson-missouri/


Ben Swann Exclusive: Called “domestic terrorists” by the feds, Oath Keepers help stop Ferguson from burning

http://benswann.com/exclusive-interview-called-domestic-terrorists-by-the-feds-oath-keepers-help-stop-ferguson-from-burning/

You might have seen them on the news. The people protecting Ferguson businesses from the arsonists and looters ransacking Ferguson, Mo. But here is the real story about the organization protecting those businesses. They’re called Oath Keepers, and they have ex-police and ex-military keeping guard of four Ferguson businesses since late Monday night, Nov. 24, at the permission of the business owners. (snip)

http://libertycrier.com/crisis-reaction-solution-calls-begin-nationalize-police/
From The New American:
Prominent celebrities and leaders of the Congressional Black Caucus have endorsed a major nationalization of local police forces with an August 25 letter to President Obama, calling for creation of a federal police “czar” and greater federal controls over law enforcement in the wake of the Ferguson, Missouri, shooting and protests.
“The Administration must appoint a federal Czar,” the letter states, “housed in the U.S. Department of Justice, who is specifically tasked with promoting the professionalization of local law enforcement, monitoring egregious law enforcement activities, and adjudicating suspicious actions of local law enforcement agencies that receive federal funding.”

New York Times: On Rooftops of Ferguson, Volunteers Patrol, With Guns

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/30/us/on-rooftops-of-ferguson-volunteers-with-guns.html?_r=0

There are more on our front page at oathkeepers.org

I spoke with Stewart today by phone. He is now back in Montana, enroute to Idaho next. The chief of police at St. Louis has sent word he wants to talk. Our attorneys and Stewart will be on the line with him. We are not backing down. All statute law has to be pursuant to the Constitution, and we mean to make that point. Armed guests of business owners who are not being paid are perfectly legal under the Constitution, and if the Chief of Police wants to make a big deal out of it, he's in for a legal battle the tax payers in St. Louis may not want to finance. We'll see.

Meanwhile, they're flooding into membership at Oath Keepers, and donations are coming in very nicely due to the national publicity we've just had.

I think that The Mental Militia could, and should, be reaping harvests like that, but if we go for it, we'll lose the "private oasis" which many here want to keep, so I'll content myself with doing it for Oath Keepers.

Be safe and well there, Amigo. I hope you get better online connections soon.
Salute!
Elias

Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Elias Alias on December 05, 2014, 06:17:25 am
Yep. The snipers got scope pictures sent to them by other snipers.......

Hey Rarick, have you got a source you could share with me on that? I had not heard about that and would love to take the news of that to Stewart and also put it on our site.

Thanks,
Salute!
Elias
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: knobster on December 05, 2014, 07:08:51 am
Thanks Elias.  Plenty here to chew on.  I joined in 2009 so my 'say' is only about half-strength compared to other members.

I welcome more people/opinions on this board.  I'm constantly learning from others here and the more minds the better.  I would hate to see TMM whither away on the vine.  I start each day with a cup o' joe and this site.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: MamaLiberty on December 05, 2014, 07:14:54 am
Please take a few moments to express your opinion at the poll.

https://www.thementalmilitia.com/forums/index.php?topic=34619.msg429381#new

TMM members...  Are you ready to rumble?

Don't answer here... go to the poll and leave your comments.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Rarick on December 07, 2014, 08:50:48 pm
Yep. The snipers got scope pictures sent to them by other snipers.......

Hey Rarick, have you got a source you could share with me on that? I had not heard about that and would love to take the news of that to Stewart and also put it on our site.

Thanks,
Salute!
Elias

Call it a rhetorical suggestion for a solution........a camera and spotting scope would do just as well. A solid Psychological gut punch......
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Elias Alias on December 07, 2014, 09:04:15 pm
Yep. The snipers got scope pictures sent to them by other snipers.......

Hey Rarick, have you got a source you could share with me on that? I had not heard about that and would love to take the news of that to Stewart and also put it on our site.

Thanks,
Salute!
Elias

Call it a rhetorical suggestion for a solution........a camera and spotting scope would do just as well. A solid Psychological gut punch......

So you're just saying that it would have been a good idea, but you're not saying that it actually happened, is that right? If it happened, I'd have to have a source to cite before I could publish it, so that is why I asked. You stated it as if it were fact, but now I see that you were simply fantasizing. That's cool.

Salute!
Elias
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Rarick on December 07, 2014, 09:15:17 pm
Nope a imagined suggestion.  people didn't do it, but I think it would be a nice point to make about the fact they are dealing with other pros, who know how to operate........  Like when fighter pilots use the radars of their planes.  The ECM on both sides knows the difference between a regular scan and a lock on for missile guidance......   The photo would give that missile lock signal.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Elias Alias on December 07, 2014, 10:37:46 pm
Nope a imagined suggestion.  people didn't do it, but I think it would be a nice point to make about the fact they are dealing with other pros, who know how to operate........  Like when fighter pilots use the radars of their planes.  The ECM on both sides knows the difference between a regular scan and a lock on for missile guidance......   The photo would give that missile lock signal.

Which itself is a good idea, for sure. It reminds me of the BLM thugs pointing scoped sniper rifles at the Bundy family in their own damn yard. The bastards freaked when then discovered that we had special forces snipers there on the Bundys' side, lol.  They told the Las Vegas Review-Journal that they were scared when they saw the cowboys and their pals with the same arms the BLM had, lol.

So these events are peak events which will mark 2014 in American folk history. And right now I'm working with a movie called MIDNIGHT RIDE (alluding to Paul Revere's midnight ride:

https://eliasalias.com/2014/11/23/oath-keepers-saddle-up-for-midnight-ride/

.... which is about the four types of martial law. We now can see pre-positioning of military assets across SmallTown America in preparation for just that. The movie will blow that crap right out of the water, as it's backed by the incredibly-awesome research in Dr. Edwin Vieira's newest bombshell book, "By Tyranny Out Of Necessity: The Bastardy Of Martial Law".

And all of that has to do with MindWar as laid out by the 7th Psychological Operations Group of the U.S. Army in 1980: "From Psy-Op To MindWar". I've got that pdf, have had it for about five years, and used it in my expose of General Vallely's BS, in case anyone wants to wade through a fifteen-thousand word essay on the matter.

https://eliasalias.com/2014/05/05/reflections-on-oas/

These are the things which make me think that it's time for a "Mental Militia", for we're truly in a war for the minds of the people. I could see that back in 1999 when I offered our study group/discussion group, which included scarmig and others, like 2A who I think is still a member here, the idea of calling ourselves "The Mental Militia". And that is why Claire put my dumb ass on the dedication page of her book, The Freedom Outlaw's Handbook.

I have watched as this place devolved in activity. MamaLiberty wrote to me the other day and said I might be missed here so I came in here and could not contain myself any longer. I see a huge potential in TMM, and if this place does not want to carry that ball, I'll do what I think needs to be done elsewhere, namely at my own site. I am sure that there is a wide and diverse audience out there for the sort of intel I've collected over the years -- look toward the bottom of that long article I linked above. NSA spying, militarization of police, economic uncertainty, wars abroad, corporate fascism and cultural marxism, IRS scandals, Fast and Furious scandals, Benghazi -- all sorts of psy-ops being perpetrated upon the American people to cause them to willingly give up their Constitutionally protected unalienable rights to freedom and self-ownership, including this insane war on drugs and the most blasphemous of all, the so-called "War on Terrorism". We here have a venue to start organizing a "meaning" behind all that sort of stuff, but the venue is withering on the vine. If members here feel impressed that they want to actually do something about it, I think I've got the key to a much more vibrant community of message-senders and popular intel-operators which is grassroots, libertarian in nature, and fearless in how our knowledge is voiced. That could be done -- this place can be transformed with very little work, and I'm fighting here for minutes in which to lay out my plan. My problem is the same problem I've had for the past five and a half years -- I support myself by working for Oath Keepers, and that is quite a full time job, to say the least. I've not even had time to lay in a bunch of articles at my new site which  I've already written.

I've got more to say, and shall as I can get time to come back here and carry on with this discussion. Meantime, I've got to write a piece for Oath Keepers, get it posted at our site, and blast it out to our membership list.

Sorry to unload on you and go off all over the place with this reply, which was intended when I started it to just be a comment in reply to your post. That's another problem I've learned to live with, and must ask others to forgive or tolerate if they can. Sheesh! ;)

Salute!
Elias
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Rarick on December 07, 2014, 10:40:29 pm
No problem.  It carries on a FINE tradition.........go Articulate....
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: da gooch on January 03, 2015, 03:50:20 pm
Quote
I get that money as a paid employee of a Nevada corporation named Oath Keepers, which would probably be paying Gooch too had he stayed in the saddle long enough. I worked for free for Oath Keepers for several years and paid some of Oath Keepers costs out of my own pocket.

I fell out of "the saddle" when my pockets went empty and there was no offer of financial assistance from either the Board or the Organization. I spent my savings and could no longer be helpful due to poverty.  Sorry about that.

I am glad I was instrumental in getting the organization off the ground here in Texas and Nationally as well. I am glad to have contributed to the "Policies" of the Organization and I continue to maintain my OK presence here in my small Texas town. (photographic verification is available here on TMM in this OK section.)

After I "retired" from the Board of Directors my membership on the forum was scrubbed and after Many efforts to get it reinstated (as a "regular" member by myself many times and by another current Arkansas Board member) I gave up on being "involved" even online since I had been effectively (if not in reality) "banned" from using the site.

I sincerely do wish I could afford to be as helpful as I was once upon a time. Oh Well, wishes in one hand and (fill in the blank) in the other. Which one fills first?

I still have not been able to acquire finances enough to be able to install either a cable connection or a satelite connection (with their attendant monthly charges) so I am still stuck on dial-up. Even that was gone for a period of time as my finances didn't allow for "extras". I have been able to work my odd jobs back up to where I can at least have the "swimming in rocks" speed of a dial-up connection.




"In the wake of Monday’s grand jury announcement, Oath Keepers put out a national request to members to help in Ferguson."

I guess that shows me just how "in the loop" I am with OK these days. Not. One. Peep.
(snip snip snip)


Meanwhile, if there are any other links to this Oath Keeper sighting I would appreciate their being brought to us here at TMM. Where Oath Keepers was created.....

Okay Gooch, looping you in now. Pay attention, okay? ;)

 snip snip snip snip snip

There are more on our front page at oathkeepers.org

I spoke with Stewart today by phone. He is now back in Montana, enroute to Idaho next. The chief of police at St. Louis has sent word he wants to talk. Our attorneys and Stewart will be on the line with him. We are not backing down. All statute law has to be pursuant to the Constitution, and we mean to make that point. Armed guests of business owners who are not being paid are perfectly legal under the Constitution, and if the Chief of Police wants to make a big deal out of it, he's in for a legal battle the tax payers in St. Louis may not want to finance. We'll see.

Meanwhile, they're flooding into membership at Oath Keepers, and donations are coming in very nicely due to the national publicity we've just had.

I think that The Mental Militia could, and should, be reaping harvests like that, but if we go for it, we'll lose the "private oasis" which many here want to keep, so I'll content myself with doing it for Oath Keepers.

Be safe and well there, Amigo. I hope you get better online connections soon.
Salute!
Elias

It is good to hear from you again my friend. Looong time no speakee.

For those links I thank you but must once again point out that my connection will not allow videos.
(Not enough bandwidth or speed or something for the videos to download before the connection closes down for "inactivity".) (taking too long buffering?)

The text articles I can read and when I get time (something I know you will understand) I will make an attempt to get caught up with the reading.

I have not given up hope on or for Oath Keepers. I am just poor and cannot do the things that a National Organization needs done from my little town in south Texas.

If you can get my lifetime membership on the forum reinstated I would appreciate it very much.
I don't know and don't care how or why I was removed but I sure enough was. (Probably to cancel my admin status on the boards.)
IF I could access the forum I might be able to be helpful and current again.

It's good to hear from you.

stay safe,

gooch
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: jamie on January 03, 2015, 07:22:01 pm
Yeah I was I think one of the first 20 or thirty people to sign up for O-K , sent them a hundred dollar donation. It was like it never happened.

A few years later I thought well, I shouldn't let that bother me. So I e mailed the state guy, never heard anything. So that's that.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: slidemansailor on January 04, 2015, 10:22:13 am
I have an image of Elias, Stewart and some others as busy as one-armed-paper-hangers... individually doing good stuff, but limiting the capabilities of Oath Keepers because they have so few entrusted to act in official capacities.

Of course many organizations working for liberty allow one wrong person into a cadre position who kills the reputation for all of them.  We know the rulers have full-time employees working to discredit us any way they can. They pose quite a destructive threat, so caution is wise.

It is a dang rare organization that doesn't find significant barriers to their success.

This is in a large part why I think a locally-grown posse is the right model. The individuals are know-able, trust can be earned within a posse and between posses.   

description: http://www.bitterrootbugle.com/neighborhood-posse/ (http://www.bitterrootbugle.com/neighborhood-posse/)
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Elias Alias on January 11, 2015, 10:33:18 pm
Yeah I was I think one of the first 20 or thirty people to sign up for O-K , sent them a hundred dollar donation. It was like it never happened.

A few years later I thought well, I shouldn't let that bother me. So I e mailed the state guy, never heard anything. So that's that.

Hey Jamie,
I'm sorry to hear about your experience. That's awful. What State are you in?

Salute!
Elias
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: jamie on January 14, 2015, 01:23:50 pm
Yeah I was I think one of the first 20 or thirty people to sign up for O-K , sent them a hundred dollar donation. It was like it never happened.

A few years later I thought well, I shouldn't let that bother me. So I e mailed the state guy, never heard anything. So that's that.

Hey Jamie,
I'm sorry to hear about your experience. That's awful. What State are you in?

Salute!
Elias

Nevada. But no worries Elias. Thanks for the concern.

Since then I joined the local VFW chapter. After two meetings I was cured of organizations.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Elias Alias on January 14, 2015, 02:13:57 pm
Yeah I was I think one of the first 20 or thirty people to sign up for O-K , sent them a hundred dollar donation. It was like it never happened.

A few years later I thought well, I shouldn't let that bother me. So I e mailed the state guy, never heard anything. So that's that.

Hey Jamie,
I'm sorry to hear about your experience. That's awful. What State are you in?

Salute!
Elias

Nevada. But no worries Elias. Thanks for the concern.

Since then I joined the local VFW chapter. After two meetings I was cured of organizations.

<grin> Heh! Good answer, Jamie. Know what you mean. Just keep an open mind about Oath Keepers. Things do change, eh? ;)

Salute!
Elias
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: da gooch on January 22, 2015, 11:44:30 am
Still attempting, and not accomplishing, to find time enough to sit and read items that take f-o-r-e-v-e-r to load and occasionally even require my joining a website to be able to read them. Nope sorry not that involved at this point.

Thanks again for all of the links. I do hope that some of our TMM members were able to dig through and enjoy reading them.

stay safe
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: StillaGhost on February 10, 2015, 09:15:53 am



Call it a rhetorical suggestion for a solution........a camera and spotting scope would do just as well. A solid Psychological gut punch......

 
 
     All due respect Elias , but on this issue , if it happened then those who were involved will be keeping their mouths shut into perpetuity about it , that way the trick may be useable again at some nebulous future date. And the ptb has nobody to make an example of.
 
  And the whole concept of running around setting up " hides" right in front of the folks that you're purportedly " worried about" is ludicrous to the nth degree.Lets just say that their tactics suck........

So you're just saying that it would have been a good idea, but you're not saying that it actually happened, is that right? If it happened, I'd have to have a source to cite before I could publish it, so that is why I asked. You stated it as if it were fact, but now I see that you were simply fantasizing. That's cool.

Salute!
Elias
[/quote]
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: DiabloLoco on August 11, 2015, 02:26:27 pm
Here we go again! Obviously, the reporter and/or organization is against OKers. :rolleyes:

Heavily armed 'Oath Keepers' inject disquieting element in Ferguson
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/heavily-armed-oath-keepers-inject-unease-riot-hit-085709866.html
(https://s1.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/lFr.zDXYS4AUNuUGDEJSFA--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Y2g9MjMzNDtjcj0xO2N3PTM1MDA7ZHg9MDtkeT0wO2ZpPXVsY3JvcDtoPTQyMTtpbD1wbGFuZTtxPTc1O3c9NjMw/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/Reuters/2015-08-11T071427Z_47367920_GF20000019708_RTRMADP_3_USA-FERGUSON.JPG)
Quote
FERGUSON, Mo. (Reuters) - Four white men carrying military-style rifles and sidearms added a disquieting element to riot-torn Ferguson, Missouri, when they began patrolling the streets before dawn on Tuesday, which police quickly labeled "inflammatory."
The men said they were part of a group called "Oath Keepers," which describes itself as a non-partisan association of current and former U.S. soldiers, police and first responders who aim to protect the U.S. Constitution. They told reporters on the street that they were in Ferguson to protect a media organization.
The men attracted immediate attention in the mostly black neighborhood, which exploded into violence on Sunday night as protesters marked the one-year anniversary of the killing of an unarmed black teen by police.

Well....That's all fine and dandy, but then they added this-

Quote
The Southern Poverty Law Center, a non-profit civil rights organization, has described the "Oath Keepers" as a "fiercely anti-government, militaristic group," and St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar condemned their appearance in Ferguson.
"Their presence was both unnecessary and inflammatory," he said, adding that police would work with county prosecutors to see if the men had broken any laws.
:rolleyes:



Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: DiabloLoco on August 11, 2015, 02:37:01 pm
And here's another Oker related article!

Armed 'constitutional advocates' defend Montana mine
http://www.kulr8.com/story/29722592/armed-constitutional-advocates-defend-montana-mine

Quote
LINCOLN, Mont. (AP) - Members of armed groups that call themselves constitutional advocates have arrived in Lincoln to support an owner during an ongoing dispute with the U.S. Forest Service concerning a federal mining claim.

The Helena Independent Record reports (http://bit.ly/1KSdzeu) members of the groups Oath Keepers, Pacific Patriot Network and 3% of Idaho have come to Lincoln to begin a security operation at the White Hope Mine east of the mountain town.

The groups say that the mine claim George Kornec holds predates 1955 regulations that granted surface rights to the Forest Service and instead falls under an 1872 law that would grant both surface and subsurface rights to Kornec.

The Forest Service says Kornec abandoned his claim when he missed a filing deadline 1986, meaning the claim is now regulated under 1955 laws.

This story has been corrected to show that the Forest Service says the claim is regulated in 1955 laws.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: FDD on August 12, 2015, 09:46:44 am
Here we go again! Obviously, the reporter and/or organization is against OKers. :rolleyes:

Heavily armed 'Oath Keepers' inject disquieting element in Ferguson
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/heavily-armed-oath-keepers-inject-unease-riot-hit-085709866.html
(https://s1.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/lFr.zDXYS4AUNuUGDEJSFA--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Y2g9MjMzNDtjcj0xO2N3PTM1MDA7ZHg9MDtkeT0wO2ZpPXVsY3JvcDtoPTQyMTtpbD1wbGFuZTtxPTc1O3c9NjMw/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/Reuters/2015-08-11T071427Z_47367920_GF20000019708_RTRMADP_3_USA-FERGUSON.JPG)
Quote
FERGUSON, Mo. (Reuters) - Four white men carrying military-style rifles and sidearms added a disquieting element to riot-torn Ferguson, Missouri, when they began patrolling the streets before dawn on Tuesday, which police quickly labeled "inflammatory."
The men said they were part of a group called "Oath Keepers," which describes itself as a non-partisan association of current and former U.S. soldiers, police and first responders who aim to protect the U.S. Constitution. They told reporters on the street that they were in Ferguson to protect a media organization.
The men attracted immediate attention in the mostly black neighborhood, which exploded into violence on Sunday night as protesters marked the one-year anniversary of the killing of an unarmed black teen by police.

Well....That's all fine and dandy, but then they added this-

Quote
The Southern Poverty Law Center, a non-profit civil rights organization, has described the "Oath Keepers" as a "fiercely anti-government, militaristic group," and St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar condemned their appearance in Ferguson.
"Their presence was both unnecessary and inflammatory," he said, adding that police would work with county prosecutors to see if the men had broken any laws.
:rolleyes:

Isn't the Oathkeepers a police Org.?

And why would anyone listen to the SPLC?
They are the biggest racist group in the US.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Lenny on August 12, 2015, 12:51:09 pm
I'm as anarcho-capitalist as ever; I fully get that homeowners and shopkeepers have a right to expect not to be vandalized, arsonized, and robbed...

But in the context of a city where the corrupt police force has been milking the black population like farm animals (http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/national/department-of-justice-report-on-the-ferguson-mo-police-department/1435/), and where they murdered Michael Brown a year ago, it's clear what message is sent when an armed force shows up to keep the black people in line, right?

When I heard that OKers were in Ferguson (and came here to check into that), I entertained the faint hope that they were there to protect protestors from the police.  :shakehead:
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Klapton Isgod on August 12, 2015, 02:26:23 pm
I'm as anarcho-capitalist as ever; I fully get that homeowners and shopkeepers have a right to expect not to be vandalized, arsonized, and robbed...

But in the context of a city where the corrupt police force has been milking the black population like farm animals (http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/national/department-of-justice-report-on-the-ferguson-mo-police-department/1435/), and where they murdered Michael Brown a year ago, it's clear what message is sent when an armed force shows up to keep the black people in line, right?

When I heard that OKers were in Ferguson (and came here to check into that), I entertained the faint hope that they were there to protect protestors from the police.  :shakehead:

They have nice guns.  They don't need to go to Ferguson to commit suicide.

.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Lenny on August 12, 2015, 02:58:24 pm
When I heard that OKers were in Ferguson (and came here to check into that), I entertained the faint hope that they were there to protect protestors from the police.  :shakehead:

They have nice guns.  They don't need to go to Ferguson to commit suicide.

In that case, would it have been better to stay out of Ferguson, rather than go with the ostensible purpose of suppressing the people who are protesting massive rights violations, and murders, by a bunch of oath-breakers? In what way are the OKers helping matters in this particular instance, by adding to the number of guns pointed at the black people in Ferguson?
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Klapton Isgod on August 12, 2015, 04:29:41 pm
When I heard that OKers were in Ferguson (and came here to check into that), I entertained the faint hope that they were there to protect protestors from the police.  :shakehead:

They have nice guns.  They don't need to go to Ferguson to commit suicide.

In that case, would it have been better to stay out of Ferguson, rather than go with the ostensible purpose of suppressing the people who are protesting massive rights violations, and murders, by a bunch of oath-breakers? In what way are the OKers helping matters in this particular instance, by adding to the number of guns pointed at the black people in Ferguson?

I'm not sure where you see them pointing guns at anyone.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Lenny on August 12, 2015, 06:43:22 pm
Their stated intent is to protect property owners from black demonstrators. Reread the DOJ report and ask how reasonable it is to conclude that the crying need in Ferguson is to go do something about them black people.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Klapton Isgod on August 12, 2015, 07:05:19 pm
Their stated intent is to protect property owners from black demonstrators. Reread the DOJ report and ask how reasonable it is to conclude that the crying need in Ferguson is to go do something about them black people.

The one they saved from burning down last year happened to be owned by a black lady.  And yes, there WAS a need to protect those businesses from SOME of "them black people."  We know the police would not and did not.  They only protect themselves, as you well know.

.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Lenny on August 12, 2015, 08:21:40 pm
See my point again though. Helping the victims of murder and extortion was somehow seen as a lower priority. A clear message was sent that murdering black people isn't the problem; them getting uppity about it is the problem.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Klapton Isgod on August 13, 2015, 05:10:10 am
See my point again though. Helping the victims of murder and extortion was somehow seen as a lower priority. A clear message was sent that murdering black people isn't the problem; them getting uppity about it is the problem.

Yyyyyyeeeeaaahhhh...  They said that.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Klapton Isgod on August 13, 2015, 05:35:00 am
In case you are thinking that OK is "siding with the cops rather than protestors," take a look at this video.  This is an interview with a cop who explains how even though OK is breaking no laws, they are trying as hard as they can to find an excuse to arrest them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBzJdYnLn50&feature=player_embedded

.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Lenny on August 13, 2015, 07:27:40 am
What message are the black people in Ferguson--who are the real victims in this mess--receiving?

Which crimes, of the many crimes going in right now, prompted the OKers to grab their ARs and saddle up?

(That's one question, not two.)
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Moonbeam on August 13, 2015, 03:46:57 pm
I hope someone like Elias is able to respond to the interesting questions being presented. :)
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Klapton Isgod on August 13, 2015, 05:39:50 pm
What message are the black people in Ferguson--who are the real victims in this mess--receiving?

From whom?  Oath Keepers?  Probably the same message everyone else seems to be getting, courtesy of MSNBC, SPLC, etc.  That Oath Keepers are the door gunners from Apocalypse Now. hollering "Git sum!" while they fire their M60s.

Quote
Which crimes, of the many crimes going in right now, prompted the OKers to grab their ARs and saddle up?

(That's one question, not two.)

They are there to prevent the same thing they prevented last time:  idiots from burning down their own town.  Last year, they kept a business from burning down.  Like, literally.  They were on the roof when someone lobbed a Molotov cocktail up there and they put it out.

The real assholes were the police, who did NOTHING to stop the city from burning.  They huddled in their phalanxes, beat up people who exposed themselves too much, and chased away journalists because they didn't want to be filmed being cowardly pussies.

I get it that you think OK SHOULD have gone in there with the stated intention of lighting up the police if they misbehaved.  If you REALLY think that should have happened, where were YOU?

Complaining on the internet about others who actually do stuff.

/shrug.  I'm not doing much but laying low either, but then I'm not trying to find fault with people who DO decide to actually do something helpful.

.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Lenny on August 13, 2015, 10:08:35 pm
It's weird that you condemn the police for failing to crack down on the rioting darkies--but you don't spend many bytes criticizing them for murdering said darkies. Did you REALLY just call for the murderers to get off their asses and get the angry victims back in line? Dafuq?
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: StillaGhost on August 13, 2015, 11:44:59 pm
It's weird that you condemn the police for failing to crack down on the rioting darkies--but you don't spend many bytes criticizing them for murdering said darkies. Did you REALLY just call for the murderers to get off their asses and get the angry victims back in line? Dafuq?

 
 
   Look Lenny , I agree with you as to much of the Ferguson situation. The cops have been out of control for decades and their chickens are coming home to roost.
 
  That said perhaps you should give some credence to Klapton's point , exactly WHAT would you have the Oathkeepers do? It's most definitely NOT the time to precipitate an armed confrontation with L.E. agencies that are already on edge and more than a little trigger happy , all that would have accomplished is to bring down *actual* martial law and worsen the situation , and most of those affected would be within the segment of society that both you and I are sympathetic to.
 
  The time is ripe , but it hasn't quite arrived yet.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Klapton Isgod on August 14, 2015, 04:53:08 am
It's weird that you condemn the police for failing to crack down on the rioting darkies--but you don't spend many bytes criticizing them for murdering said darkies. Did you REALLY just call for the murderers to get off their asses and get the angry victims back in line? Dafuq?

Please.  Now you're going to try to twist this around so that I'm supporting the pigs?

I was almost glad to see you back here for a moment, Lenny.  Now I remember what a douche you are.

Go back to your nowhere and fuck yourself.

.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: MamaLiberty on August 14, 2015, 05:22:10 am
Darn, Klapton... do we really need to start the name calling and nonsense here. If you want to cuss out Lenny, send him a PM, please.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Klapton Isgod on August 14, 2015, 05:42:33 am
Darn, Klapton... do we really need to start the name calling and nonsense here. If you want to cuss out Lenny, send him a PM, please.

He was a douche in public, but whatever.  I doubt I'll have anything more to say to him now.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Lenny on August 14, 2015, 06:11:42 am
It's not time to engage the pigs, because it would be a slaughter (or the start of AmRev II). Agreed. That being the case, it's sure as hell not time to charge in, rifles slung, to keep their VICTIMS in line. In this case, it were FAR better to stay the hell away from Ferguson entirely, than to show up and let the victims know that while you're afraid to confront the murderers (because it's dangerous), you will cheerfully take up arms against their powerless victims.

Or even better, show up (with or without rifles slung) and March WITH the protesters. That would at least align yourselves with the victims rather than against them.

"Just because we're there intimidating the pigs' victims, doesn't mean we're supporting the pigs," may be true in an academic sense, but it's not a very interesting distinction. You could as easily have showed up in Selma and said, "We're protecting the property rights of lunch counter owners is all--we actually HATE the Jim Crow laws!"

Better to stay the fuck home, than that.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Bill St. Clair on August 14, 2015, 08:45:57 am
Reminds me of one of my favorite quotes.

Quote
"Bob Wright has been a compatriot and friend of mine for almost twenty years now. My favorite Bob anecdote: Back in the 90s he was asked by the FBI SAC from Albuquerque whether he would actually activate his unit and go to the scene of another potential Waco in another state. Bob looked him dead in eye and asked: 'Why would I want to do that? There's plenty of you federal sonsabitches around here.' This was an angle that the Fibbie had not previously considered and Bob was enunciating an essential truth of militia. We are all strongest on our home turf." -- Mike Vanderboegh
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: StillaGhost on August 14, 2015, 09:27:29 am

*************
Or even better, show up (with or without rifles slung) and March WITH the protesters. That would at least align yourselves with the victims rather than against them.
******************************
"Just because we're there intimidating the pigs' victims, doesn't mean we're supporting the pigs," may be true in an academic sense, but it's not a very interesting distinction. You could as easily have showed up in Selma and said, "We're protecting the property rights of lunch counter owners is all--we actually HATE the Jim Crow laws!"

Better to stay the fuck home, than that.

 
 
  Lenny , not that I don't agree with you pretty much completely with regard to the Genesis of the problems in Ferguson ( and many other locales)...........but can't you see the Fly in your own Ointment within the highlighted section above?
 
   Since a goodly portion of the looting etc. came from the socalled " protesters " the question arises of what you would have us do when said protesters start their abusive crap?
 
  This isn't Selma , such comparisons are a Red Herring. The cadre that has looted and burned aren't peaceful in the least and in the end are no better morally or ethically than the mindless LEO drones that they face.
 
  And this of course isn't the Bundy incident , the situation for the Oathkeepers has much less of a tenable base in Ferguson than in Nevada , and no matter WHAT we do there will be bitching and complaining from one quarter or another.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Moonbeam on August 14, 2015, 02:31:04 pm
StillaGhost brings up a sentiment that I believe many feel... Why burn and loot your own vicinity?

The reaction of those who experienced horrific treatment back in the '60's serves as an incredibly honorable example of how to handle oneself (his citing Selma in particular) IMHO. I have been EXTREMELY pissed off at others - and I have suffered at the hands of others. But, I have never believed I was entitled or obligated to harm them or their property or for that matter harm someone or something completely unrelated to the subject that caused me grief.

Passion? Rage? Frustration? Anguish? Despair? Hopelessness? Betrayed? Alone? Yes, we have all experienced those emotions and places in our lives that have burned inside us so intensely.

I think many folks on the outside looking in are quickly losing sympathy for the suffering that blacks have experienced when they see the looting, etc. Speaking for myself, I see situations like that and the LA riots, for example, and I am angered that others cannot control themselves. Why cannot folks channel their energetic frustration into something positive? It disgusts me when I see looting and I cannot dismiss it as natural reaction to decades of oppression (oppression that was gladly welcomed, but that's whole other discussion). In a way I can understand OK not wanting to associate with that [looting] deplorable behavior.

Perhaps I do not have all the facts and I am posting a knee-jerk reaction. It is easy for one to project their own feelings and beliefs onto others after all. And I admit to some degree that is what I am doing, rightly or wrongly. I know the shitty things I have been through and haven't taken my rage out on others - especially those who have nothing to do with what happened to me. It's hard for me to muster empathy when what sympathy I had has been squandered by those who merely want revenge - not to remedy their lives or improve their communities or advance their group's (gender, religion, race, or however they associate) self-reliance and liberty.

As for OK perhaps establishing image is paramount? I have no problems with them standing with the small business owners, and if I were one there I would be gracious in welcoming them. Their being present in that capacity is not illegal (so in an abstract/general way for the ignorant why would the LEO's go after them?) and I certainly don't think many would find it immoral. While I don't think that OK is in this for the glory, why shoot yourself in the foot associating with foolishness? And for those Johnny and Suzy Citizens why show them you support illegal activities (legal and illegal a whole other topic, of course). OK is - and I think should be, a recognized and reliable organization for promoting peace and liberty. I assume they are still in the infant stages thus cannot go plopping daisies into the barrel of bean-bag or bullet guns (nor is that necessarily a useful way to go about changing things) I would think that their presence in Texas last year would show their seriousness and commitment to fighting tyranny among the peace lovers.

My apologies for the lengthy commentary and thanks for a place to share such thoughts that tumble around my noggin without always getting sprung free. Back to homeschooling stuff for now...
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: MamaLiberty on August 14, 2015, 02:43:36 pm
Why burn and loot your own vicinity?

Why burn and loot anything/anywhere? I've been seriously abused a few times, but never even considered burning, looting and attacking anyone as an option.  Self defense is a whole different thing.

I think the burners and looters need to be dealt with by their families and neighbors. People coming in from outside the community to burn and loot need to be wiped out by those who's homes, businesses and families are threatened. The ordinary people of Ferguson outnumber the burners and looters by quite a margin... and they can get guns as easily as anyone else if they want to. It is highly likely that if the people there showed a serious determination to defend themselves, and followed through on it, the fighting and looting would stop fast. Maybe Oathkeepers can show them the way, but they can't really do it for them.

Everyone has to face the consequences of their choices and actions eventually.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Docliberty on August 14, 2015, 04:31:01 pm
I will probably regret this..but here goes.

I (through my wife) have been following this situation since just a few hours after Mike Brown was shot.  Not through media outlets but through live streams and tweets from those that were there.  Based on that information, the police have been textbook Jack Booted Thugs from the first night.  The only business that burned that first night (the Quick Trip) was also the only business that had security cameras that could have potentially captured the shooting.  The protesters have repeatedly tweeted about agents provocateur within their ranks and have taken steps to neutralize them as best they could.  There was even a picture of a cop handcuffing a protester and they were both wearing the same department issued utility boots.  It is believed by many of the protesters that the looters were brought into the area, possibly by the cops to provide justification for escalating the situation.

I bring this up to set the stage for what the OKs are in the middle of.  For the protesters, they are white guys with guns and are not to be trusted.  For the cops they are white guys (so they cannot be summarily shot) with guns and armor (possibly betters than theirs) and superior training and experience that could easily start actively working against them.  What a situation to be in.  The good thing to come from this is that some of the BLM leaders are saying that if they did what OK is doing that they would be summarily shot.  This is a dialogue that needs to happen if second amendment rights are to be secured for all citizens.

The situation is St. Louis is far more complex than we can see from a distance.  Indications are that this has been going on for decades but is just now coming to light as the dual factors of wide-spread instant communication through the internet and massive amounts of photographic proof through cell phone cameras comes to bear.  I sincerely hope that violence will not be required to get TPTB start acting responsibly but they are just not getting that "business as usual" is no longer going to work or even be acceptable.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Tahn L. on August 14, 2015, 05:28:21 pm
I tried to find it is a search but could not. Listening to NPR during the Baltimore riots I heard an interview with a resident who stated, as best I can remember, that one looted business "deserved it" because they refused to give/loan him a shirt one time because "he needed it".
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: StillaGhost on August 14, 2015, 06:02:15 pm
 
 
   Criminy Christmas guys , I mean really WTF? Indications? Hell anyone south of the Mason-Dixon and east of Austin can tell you what's gone on in St.Louis and vicinity for decades , as in multiples OF..........and quite a sum of Yankees know too.
 
  The fuse on this particular damn powderkeg has been burning for 40 years or better. And the reason it's gone that long is because of the targets selected and their history of submitting to such abuses.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: da gooch on August 15, 2015, 11:30:17 am
Here we go again! Obviously, the reporter and/or organization is against OKers. :rolleyes:

Heavily armed 'Oath Keepers' inject disquieting element in Ferguson
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/heavily-armed-oath-keepers-inject-unease-riot-hit-085709866.html
>>> (Image removed for bandwidth concerns) <<<
Quote
FERGUSON, Mo. (Reuters) - Four white men carrying military-style rifles and sidearms added a disquieting element to riot-torn Ferguson, Missouri, when they began patrolling the streets before dawn on Tuesday, which police quickly labeled "inflammatory."
The men said they were part of a group called "Oath Keepers," which describes itself as a non-partisan association of current and former U.S. soldiers, police and first responders who aim to protect the U.S. Constitution. They told reporters on the street that they were in Ferguson to protect a media organization.
The men attracted immediate attention in the mostly black neighborhood, which exploded into violence on Sunday night as protesters marked the one-year anniversary of the killing of an unarmed black teen by police.

Well....That's all fine and dandy, but then they added this-

Quote
The Southern Poverty Law Center, a non-profit civil rights organization, has described the "Oath Keepers" as a "fiercely anti-government, militaristic group," and St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar condemned their appearance in Ferguson.
"Their presence was both unnecessary and inflammatory," he said, adding that police would work with county prosecutors to see if the men had broken any laws.
:rolleyes:

Isn't the Oathkeepers a police Org.?

And why would anyone listen to the SPLC?
They are the biggest racist group in the US.
Did this line get missed as you were reading?
"The men said they were part of a group called "Oath Keepers," which describes itself as a non-partisan association of current and former U.S. soldiers, police and first responders who aim to protect the U.S. Constitution." (Note this IS the original concept of the organization. Although properly stated they 'ideally' are there to protect the public by obeying the Constitution and seeing that the local 'oath takers' do also.

And ... immediately following please do notice this line .... "They told reporters on the street that they were in Ferguson to protect a media organization."
This would make it clear that they are there to protect the abused businesses and property owners within the community not the PTB's and that they are there at the invitation of those businesses or organizations.



edit to add italics and further comment.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Docliberty on August 15, 2015, 11:59:28 am

 
   Criminy Christmas guys , I mean really WTF? Indications? Hell anyone south of the Mason-Dixon and east of Austin can tell you what's gone on in St.Louis and vicinity for decades , as in multiples OF..........and quite a sum of Yankees know too.
 
  The fuse on this particular damn powderkeg has been burning for 40 years or better. And the reason it's gone that long is because of the targets selected and their history of submitting to such abuses.

OK SAG, I agree with you but I have no proof, therefore I use the term "Indications are".  The rumor has it that Darren Wilson and his now wife are closely associated with, if not members of, the local KKK chapter, but no proof has been forthcoming, therefore I do not mention it (except by way of illustration).  As you well know, in any forum on the internet, you have to be careful what you say,  Do I believe that the black community in the St. Louis area has been oppressed for decades?  Yes.  Do I believe that the St. Louis community leadership is closely associated with the KKK or something like it?  Yes.  Is any definitive proof of these allegations available?  None that I have seen.  So I hedge my posts accordingly.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: StillaGhost on August 15, 2015, 01:24:08 pm

OK SAG, I agree with you but I have no proof, therefore I use the term "Indications are".  The rumor has it that Darren Wilson and his now wife are closely associated with, if not members of, the local KKK chapter, but no proof has been forthcoming, therefore I do not mention it (except by way of illustration).  As you well know, in any forum on the internet, you have to be careful what you say,  Do I believe that the black community in the St. Louis area has been oppressed for decades?  Yes.  Do I believe that the St. Louis community leadership is closely associated with the KKK or something like it?  Yes.  Is any definitive proof of these allegations available?  None that I have seen.  So I hedge my posts accordingly.

 
 
  Ok , you've got your point. But I'll say it if you won't ( in point of fact I think I did..) , and insofar as it goes the particular situation is not peculiar or specific to only Ferguson.
 
  The same situation exists all over the country , including a good many cities in " liberal " and "northern" locales. It's part and parcel of the larger syndrome i.e. " get in line or else"...
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Docliberty on August 15, 2015, 03:24:31 pm

OK SAG, I agree with you but I have no proof, therefore I use the term "Indications are".  The rumor has it that Darren Wilson and his now wife are closely associated with, if not members of, the local KKK chapter, but no proof has been forthcoming, therefore I do not mention it (except by way of illustration).  As you well know, in any forum on the internet, you have to be careful what you say,  Do I believe that the black community in the St. Louis area has been oppressed for decades?  Yes.  Do I believe that the St. Louis community leadership is closely associated with the KKK or something like it?  Yes.  Is any definitive proof of these allegations available?  None that I have seen.  So I hedge my posts accordingly.

 
 
  Ok , you've got your point. But I'll say it if you won't ( in point of fact I think I did..) , and insofar as it goes the particular situation is not peculiar or specific to only Ferguson.
 
  The same situation exists all over the country , including a good many cities in " liberal " and "northern" locales. It's part and parcel of the larger syndrome i.e. " get in line or else"...

Small minded and petty people need someone to feel superior to.  People with different colored skin are easy to identify so you can quickly know who to feel superior to.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: StillaGhost on August 15, 2015, 04:12:56 pm

Small minded and petty people need someone to feel superior to.  People with different colored skin are easy to identify so you can quickly know who to feel superior to.

 
 
   Exactly , along with the attendant socalled justifications based most often on nebulous statistics.  As as long as it's just the underclass being pounded on Mr. And mrs. JQP feel nice and safe
and warm-n-fuzzy.
 
  What said folks fail to realise is that the crapshow will eventually get 'round to *them*...........
 
  I invite you to take a closer look ( if you have the time) at some of the ridiculous laws in the 'burbs around St.Louis , you wouldn't believe me if I told you.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Klapton Isgod on August 15, 2015, 08:21:33 pm
I have yet to find any confirmation from any other source that any of this is actually true, but...

http://therundownlive.com/oath-keepers-to-arm-50-black-protesters-in-ferguson-with-ar-15s-for-an-epic-rights-flexing-march-2/

Quote
Ferguson, MO – The Missouri chapter of the Oath Keepers are planning to hold an open carry march through downtown Ferguson, Mo., which will reportedly involve arming 50 black people with AR-15 rifles.

The decision to hold the event transpired after St. Louis County officials, in violation of Missouri’s open carry law, insisted that members of the group could not open carry long barrel rifles within the city. In a video uploaded to YouTube, police chief Jon Belmar is seen warning a number of Oath Keepers that open carrying long barrel rifles would be a violation of the law.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Lenny on August 16, 2015, 05:59:00 am
I have yet to find any confirmation from any other source that any of this is actually true, but...

http://therundownlive.com/oath-keepers-to-arm-50-black-protesters-in-ferguson-with-ar-15s-for-an-epic-rights-flexing-march-2/

Now THAT sounds pretty damn interesting. Kudos to them if it's true, and God grant that it doesn't result in a bloodbath when the police see black people with black guns. (I assume they're smart enough to distribute the rifles without ammo!)
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: MamaLiberty on August 16, 2015, 06:40:35 am
(I assume they're smart enough to distribute the rifles without ammo!)

Why would anyone want to do that? What would be the point of having an expensive black metal club?
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Klapton Isgod on August 16, 2015, 06:43:39 am
Here is the most likely way they would get screwed.  The pigs get one of their stoolie pidgeon druggies with a felony record to be one of the volunteers.  (You know, the same druggies who provide them with "witnesses" for their "search warrants.")  An Oath Keeper hands a gun to a felon and BAM - now the cops have an excuse to kidnap them.

.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: MamaLiberty on August 16, 2015, 07:21:43 am
An Oath Keeper hands a gun to a felon and BAM - now the cops have an excuse to kidnap them.

Of course... an excellent illustration of why trying to "work within the system" is such a lost cause.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Lenny on August 16, 2015, 08:00:01 am
(I assume they're smart enough to distribute the rifles without ammo!)

Why would anyone want to do that? What would be the point of having an expensive black metal club?

Handing 50 AR's to 50 black people in Ferguson who (a) have no weapons training, (b) are really, really, really, really pissed off, and (c) are likely to be provoked by cops and even shot at, is a recipe for those people to open fire, or the cops to open fire and claim the protesters shot first--and either way, it'll be a massacre.

In this case, a protest with rifles is a symbolic action, and needs to be managed carefully so it doesn't become a slaughter.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Bill St. Clair on August 16, 2015, 08:07:34 am
In this case, a protest with rifles is a symbolic action, and needs to be managed carefully so it doesn't become a slaughter.

In which case, each rifle should be equipped with an orange chamber safety flag, e.g. http://www.amazon.com/UTG-Universal-Firearm-Chamber-6-Piece/dp/B00CJ7F1T2
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Docliberty on August 16, 2015, 08:08:53 am
Based on what I have observed from the people on the ground in Ferguson, i believe that they are quite adept at identifying the stoolies.  They are also quite good at live streaming interesting things that are happening.  If this does happen, there will be multiple cameras on the action uploading the data in real time.  A video record will exist.

Also, I wouldn't assume that the people that are given the guns will be unfamiliar and untrained.  Plenty of military vets are African-American and an aggressive shot from the police may result in that interesting phenomenon of "machine gun by committee".
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Lenny on August 16, 2015, 08:20:29 am
It could work out OK if we're talking about veterans (who've passed a PICS check). But it will take rock solid discipline to avoid an incident, and even that may not be enough if a cop decides to mingle with the protesters and fire a starter's pistol.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: Klapton Isgod on August 16, 2015, 08:26:11 am
It could work out OK if we're talking about veterans (who've passed a PICS check). But it will take rock solid discipline to avoid an incident, and even that may not be enough if a cop decides to mingle with the protesters and fire a starter's pistol.

When Adam Kokesh attempted to do an armed march in DC, that was his intention.  It was only going to be vets, with DD214 etc. to prove it.

Note:  This does not mean Adam only thinks vets should have guns.  This was just a sensible precaution.  As it turned out, most of the vets I know were even MORE sensible, and pointed out the complete and utter lack of cover on the bridge he intended them to march accross, and said, "nope."

His "march" ended up being a one minute video of him racking a shot gun, for which he spend time in prison.

.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: MamaLiberty on August 16, 2015, 09:01:44 am
Handing 50 AR's to 50 black people in Ferguson who (a) have no weapons training, (b) are really, really, really, really pissed off, and (c) are likely to be provoked by cops and even shot at, is a recipe for those people to open fire, or the cops to open fire and claim the protesters shot first--and either way, it'll be a massacre.

In this case, a protest with rifles is a symbolic action, and needs to be managed carefully so it doesn't become a slaughter.

Sounds like a stupid idea all the way around. Symbolic actions are so often pretty ridiculous. And such demonstrations are most likely impossible to "manage," carefully or otherwise.

Do you mean to tell me that none of those pissed off people could come up with a gun on their own... or find ammunition? How is anyone going to "manage" that? The MSM and the rulers will gladly USE it, but nobody's going to actually control it. Best then, maybe, to leave it alone... or just try to protect the innocent.
Title: Re: The Oathkeepers were in Ferguson?
Post by: StillaGhost on August 17, 2015, 08:00:35 am
Handing 50 AR's to 50 black people in Ferguson who (a) have no weapons training, (b) are really, really, really, really pissed off, and (c) are likely to be provoked by cops and even shot at, is a recipe for those people to open fire, or the cops to open fire and claim the protesters shot first--and either way, it'll be a massacre.

In this case, a protest with rifles is a symbolic action, and needs to be managed carefully so it doesn't become a slaughter.

Sounds like a stupid idea all the way around. Symbolic actions are so often pretty ridiculous. And such demonstrations are most likely impossible to "manage," carefully or otherwise.

Do you mean to tell me that none of those pissed off people could come up with a gun on their own... or find ammunition? How is anyone going to "manage" that? The MSM and the rulers will gladly USE it, but nobody's going to actually control it. Best then, maybe, to leave it alone... or just try to protect the innocent.

 
  Lets just cut to the chase , all it will take is one unthinking/stupid individual to get out of control and the whole tinderbox will go up , and it doesn't matter in the slightest which " side" that individual is on.
 
  It's what the PTB *wants* , gives them the need excuse for martial law and the exercise of yet more control of the populace.