Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[da gooch]

            What We Are Not


We are Not advocating or promoting the overthrow of
any government whether local, state or national.
We want our governments to return to the Constitutional
Republic which the Declaration of Independence and the
Constitution defined and instituted.


We are Not advocating or promoting violence towards
any organization, group or person.
We are determined to Honor our Oath to support and
defend the Constitution.


We are not advocating or promoting the removal of any
person from his or her elected office.
We want all elected persons to live up to their
Oath to "support and defend the Constitution" as it
is written or to leave of their own volition.


We are not advocating or promoting that anyone in the
Judicial Branch be removed or replaced.
We want the Justices in the Judicial Branch to follow
the Constitution as written without interpretation.


We are not advocating or promoting any particular
form of government other than the Constitutional
Republic which the Declaration of Independence and
the Constitution defined and instituted. 


We are not advocating or promoting the rewriting of
the Constitution nor are we asking for an Amendment thereto.
We are insisting on the Constitution being Enforced
as it is written without interpretation.   


We are Not advocating or promoting any act or acts of
aggression against any organization or person for any
reason including, but not limited to; race, religion,
national origin, political affiliation, gender or
sexual orientation. 

We hope for a return to a Constitutional Republic free from fear and hatred,
We hate only tyranny.


We are Oath sworn Americans who want the
Constitution returned to its Legal and Rightful place, intact,
as the Ultimate Law of the Land.

-------------------------------------------

Comments are welcome.

CaptGooch

[Who...me?]

We are not advocating or promoting the rewriting of
the Constitution nor are we asking for an Amendment thereto.
We are insisting on the Constitution being Enforced
as it is written without interpretation.   

Quick question gooch.

What about the repeal of amendments that harm US Citizens or the original Constitution?

[da gooch]

We are not advocating or promoting the rewriting of
the Constitution nor are we asking for an Amendment thereto.
We are insisting on the Constitution being Enforced
as it is written without interpretation.   

Quick question gooch.

What about the repeal of amendments that harm US Citizens or the original Constitution?

YES
There are a few of those that really need to be "fixed" [read removed ....] BUT not any of the first ten IF you get my drift ?
And also there is the fact that Any law that is unconstitutional [directly in contradiction to the Constitution] is on its face null and void.

                   BUT ....

All in good time my good man, all in good time.
Let us make sure we have a "critical mass" before we start making changes.

IOW .... First things first .... let's make sure this "ship"*  will continue to float and Then we can change her course.
Grab a bucket let's get the bailing process started.   Okay ?
There are bailing buckets for the taking at Oath-keepers.blogspot.com and Appleseedinfo.org and RWVA.org and FIJA.org.

Let's get this ship bailed out, her course changed and then we can see to the specific repairs.
[Like those spurious amendments you mention.]

Once we can be sure that the "ship" isn't going to sink out from under us then we can change her course and fix the damage done by the professional politicians  er .... parasites of the past and present.

Grab a bucket ....

*"ship" = "ship of state."

edit to add some more bucket suppliers   

[Jeff Watts]

I'm glad to see that this isn't a hate group. I'm just returning to the patriot movement. I was a member of a "group" in the 90's and left them because they wanted to open the membership to racists.

[SSgt_USAF_vet]

I'm glad to see that this isn't a hate group. I'm just returning to the patriot movement. I was a member of a "group" in the 90's and left them because they wanted to open the membership to racists.

I commend you for having the wisdom and moral fortitude to leave under such circumstances. There is no place for racism in our movement; the idea of such is actually contadictory and undermining to our mission of re-establishing our Constitutional Republic.

[Jeff Watts]

I agree, just the "paramilitary" attatchment to the patriot movement seems to draw out the wackos, nazis, and other sorts of garbage like flies, and the media is quick to use them as a broad brush to paint all of us.

[CorbinKale]

I'm glad to see that this isn't a hate group. I'm just returning to the patriot movement. I was a member of a "group" in the 90's and left them because they wanted to open the membership to racists.

The phrase, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" is the basic philosophy that negates racism. Skin pigment is a silly reason to hate another man. Just as silly as eye color or hair color. It makes no sense.

[da gooch]

I'm glad to see that this isn't a hate group. I'm just returning to the patriot movement. I was a member of a "group" in the 90's and left them because they wanted to open the membership to racists.

I'm glad to see that this isn't a hate group. I'm just returning to the patriot movement. I was a member of a "group" in the 90's and left them because they wanted to open the membership to racists.

I commend you for having the wisdom and moral fortitude to leave under such circumstances. There is no place for racism in our movement; the idea of such is actually contadictory and undermining to our mission of re-establishing our Constitutional Republic.

I agree, just the "paramilitary" attatchment to the patriot movement seems to draw out the wackos, nazis, and other sorts of garbage like flies, and the media is quick to use them as a broad brush to paint all of us.

I'm glad to see that this isn't a hate group. I'm just returning to the patriot movement. I was a member of a "group" in the 90's and left them because they wanted to open the membership to racists.

The phrase, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" is the basic philosophy that negates racism. Skin pigment is a silly reason to hate another man. Just as silly as eye color or hair color. It makes no sense.

All of the above is why Stewart and the rest of the Oath Keepers Crew felt that a "We are Not" list should be posted.  To head off the broad brush of racism or of any other isms that the MSM might try to use beyond Patriotism.

Help us spread the word of what we Are but also of What we are Not.


CaptGooch


"Not on Our Watch"

[Jeff Watts]

That's my intent, once I've looked around for a bit.

[Klapton Isgod]

We are not advocating or promoting the rewriting of
the Constitution nor are we asking for an Amendment thereto.
We are insisting on the Constitution being Enforced
as it is written without interpretation.   

Quick question gooch.

What about the repeal of amendments that harm US Citizens or the original Constitution?

As an Oath-Keeper, I support the Constitution, including the amendment process.  I think the point of this thread, however, is simply to state that the Oath-Keepers organization is not promoting any particular amendments - just a return to the Constitution itself.  If FedGov actually OBEYED the Constitution, it would become very clear that some things need to be amended.  But at that point, Oath-Keepers would have already succeeded in its mission.

[Maxstake]

Well Said Sir, Very Well Said!

[TNT]

as much as I agree with not supporting any particular amendment I think we should suppoort one by having one added.  Our forefathers forgot to add one to punish those who abuse the system, primarily holding those elected accountable for there actions just we are accountable for ours.  And even though we have term limits in place, they have still managed to abuse it and treat things like this was a permenant job.  And that our fore fathers never intended for it to be.  IMO 

[Who...me?]

Our forefathers forgot to add one to punish those who abuse the system, primarily holding those elected accountable for there actions just we are accountable for ours.

I think you are missing the point that the laws already in place, if they were enforced by the federal and state law enforcement, are sufficient to hold the gov accountable. More laws or amendments would not make a bit of difference when congress can lie under oath, commit fraud and generally do what they want because they no cop will arrest them and the courts won't prosecute. It's just like the gun lobby calling for more gun laws when they are already there. In fact, on a side note, I think there should only be ONE gun law. That being if you use a gun to commit a crime you get extra jail time over and above the original crime you committed.  Anything else is just BS.

And even though we have term limits in place

What term limits, there are none. Congress would have to pass a law saying that, like thats gonna happen. If fact the supreme court rule that the States do not have the right to limit terms.
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/93-1456.ZO.html

Justice Brown's plurality opinion also rejected the argument that Amendment 73 is "merely a ballot access amendment," concluding that "[t]he intent and the effect of Amendment 73 are to disqualify congressional incumbents from further service." Id., at 265-266, 872 S. W. 2d, at 356-357. Justice Brown considered the possibilities that an excluded candidate might run for Congress as a write in candidate or be appointed to fill a vacancy to be "glimmers of opportunity . . . [that] are faint indeed--so faint in our judgment that they cannot salvage Amendment 73 from constitutional attack." Id., at 266, 872 S. W. 2d, at 357. In separate opinions, Justice Dudley and Justice Gerald P. Brown agreed that Amendment 73 violates the Federal Constitution.

[TNT]

What term limits, there are none. Congress would have to pass a law saying that, like thats gonna happen. If fact the supreme court rule that the States do not have the right to limit terms.
http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/93-1456.ZO.html

then it is time my friend we add another amendment to that would you say so...?

[Klapton Isgod]

I folks are tossing around amendment ideas, I like this one:

Voluntary Funding Amendment

Government agencies shall be funded by voluntary donation or by fees for services rendered.  Government shall not have a monopoly on the provision of any service, but we the people shall choose our own providers.  Neither shall government be funded by debt.