The Mental Militia Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Major General Albert (Bert) N. Stubblebine Joins Oath Keepers  (Read 5487 times)

Foresam

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 30
Re: Major General Albert (Bert) N. Stubblebine Joins Oath Keepers
« Reply #15 on: June 20, 2009, 11:09:26 am »

Stewart,
When all you do is sling some crap at me instead of addressing any of the concerns I raised about the general misdirecting people to fight the wrong battle, you aren't engaging in genuine discourse.  As you might say to someone on the stand who you were questioning, please answer the question.  And yeah, I heard your story on April 19 before I shook your hand.
Logged

Stewart the Yalie

  • Moderator Group
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 516
  • "The final weapon is the brain"
    • Dirt Rhodes Scholar
Re: Major General Albert (Bert) N. Stubblebine Joins Oath Keepers
« Reply #16 on: June 20, 2009, 12:49:33 pm »

So far, you have used innuendo as your method of "proving" the General is a liar and a fraud.  Why should I spend my time rolling around in the mud you are slinging?

You said:
Quote
It's pretty easy for an ex general who's about 80 years old to say he won't shoot any civilians, especially when he lives in Panama.  I don't think anyone expects him to charge into battle either.

Again, what does that have to do with vaccines?  Nothing.  It's just a rude personal attack.  I don't have discourse with rude people.  Come back someday when you learn some manners. 

Quote
As you might say to someone on the stand who you were questioning, please answer the question.

What question?  All I have seen are your accusations.  I am not going to try to answer your "question" when it is merely an accusation.  I already said, in the other thread, what I think of your supposed evidence - not much.   You assert that because the General doesn't say all you think he should say he MUST be a disinformation agent.  And his wife once deleted a post you made.  That's your proof?  If I were in court, representing the General, I'd turn to the jury and say, "I rest my case."  (actually, I'd move for dismissal or for a directed verdict or summary judgment, with costs, fees, and sanctions, depending on what kind of trial it was).

And besides that, I have better things to do with my time.  This is not a "debate autism and vaccines" organization. 

As for Lexington, were you the guy in the crazy plague outfit? 
« Last Edit: June 20, 2009, 01:06:12 pm by Stewart the Yalie »
Logged
Remember, remember your body will not live forever
That you will die matters not;
When The Day comes, follow your fathers
Give them ball for ball, and shot for shot.

 Stewart

roadglide71

  • Guest
Re: Major General Albert (Bert) N. Stubblebine Joins Oath Keepers
« Reply #17 on: July 10, 2009, 10:43:57 pm »

The more higher profile people we get the more people will start listening!
Logged

Elias Alias

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4915
  • TMM
Re: Major General Albert (Bert) N. Stubblebine Joins Oath Keepers
« Reply #18 on: July 12, 2009, 01:40:09 pm »

The more higher profile people we get the more people will start listening!

Welcome aboard, roadglide71. You're right - we could say that the tide starts with one drop of water moving forward, and grows as other drops move with it, until it becomes a tide. The first testimonials shall always be treasured as Oath Keepers heroes in my mind and heart. General Stubblebine is the first General to join Oath Keepers, and his membership opens the door for other high-ranking brass to come aboard. I salute his courage and his willingness to embrace the gravity of America's internal problems today.

Salute!
Elias
Logged
"Heirs to self-knowledge shed gently their fears..."

Hollywoodgold

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 845
  • You can trust them to be them...
Re: Major General Albert (Bert) N. Stubblebine Joins Oath Keepers
« Reply #19 on: July 12, 2009, 02:35:03 pm »

Quote
And now, US Troops committed to controlling, quelling, removing and, if need by, according to the training they are receiving, firing upon unarmed US Citizens.

Are they the enemies? I know they are not in their hearts and that no American soldier, sailor, marine, or peace officer will ever obey such an order.

I know nothing of the man, but if he believes that second part, I'm afraid he's sorely mistaken.  I've served with too many and live among many more that wouldn't hesitate, just as there are many cops that wouldn't hesitate to stomp or shoot innocents.  I'm quite sure there are some that will refuse; many of whom are Oathkeepers, but I know that, unless a monumental paradigm shift occurs, most will 'do what they're told' just as they are doing today. 

Just an observation.  I beg to be proven wrong.


Thunder:

I take from the remark you reference he made an attempt to make clear that "at his level", meaning commanding officers, there is a perspective that places Constitutional rights over an unlawful command. He did not necessarily say that he believed no armed services member would fire on citizens, armed or otherwise. If I am correct in this interpretation, that being that the Military leadership would not follow such commands, then it seems unlikely that the soldiers under their command would refuse to follow their orders to not follow their command to do so in their "Oath of Enlistment" which stipulates "the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me,". (Emphasis mine)

The Officer's oath does not mention the President but places the Constitution as the subject of defense and promise. 

Regarding another post, if he lives in Panama, he has chosen an excellent place to reside for a retired person. After all, there are many reasons people choose to live where they live and they are free to do so. The fact that he has spoken out on a few  dangerous turns taken by the FedGov, and has done so from the intel side of the services, must be a net positive IMNSHO.
Logged
"Democracy must be something more than
two wolves and a sheep voting on what to
have for dinner."
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up