CSPOA Video
Please donate and support Oath Keepers mission, every little bit helps!
February 27th, 2012
Read More Posts
Comments posted belong to the commenter alone, and are not endorsed by Oath Keepers or the administrators for this site. We will remove offensive, racist, or threatening comments.
February 27th, 2012 at 10:50 am
Innocents Betrayed The True Story of Gun Control
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1nz0rPIU_w
February 28th, 2012 at 12:51 pm
WASHINGTON, DC
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz is our guest on “Newsmakers.” He discusses the Administration’s proposal for new privacy protections for people using the Internet and smartphones. The proposals, unveiled Thursday, come as an increasing number of companies have collected personal information about Internet users.
He spoke with reporters Brendan Greeley, Staff Writer for Bloomberg, and Juliana Gruenwald, Tech & Telecom Staff Writer for National Journal.
FTC Chairman: Google Users Face a “brutal choice” — Europeans: “Google’s new policy does not meet the requirements of the European Directive on Data Protection.”
http://www.c-span.org/Events/FTC-Chairman-Jon-Leibowitz-This-Weeks-Newsmakers-Guest/10737428541-1/
February 29th, 2012 at 7:02 pm
Freedom Warrior @ comment #2,
There’s absolutely no reason that the government should be attempting to “protect” the Internet.
The Internet consists of data residing on peoples’ own personal property, and government requires a warrant in order to peruse such information.
Don’t allow the government to monitor the Internet. And do privatize the public utility companies (or create private local networks) so they can’t claim jurisdiction over the traffic.
March 2nd, 2012 at 9:28 am
Disappointed in the Press Conference and the continual denying that Obama must have been complicit. Perhaps there is a strategy that I obviously don’t understand. I believe the death/assassination of of Andrew Breitbart may have been the news diversion that Clinton made famous.
March 4th, 2012 at 11:47 am
“Google’s new policy does not meet the requirements of the European Directive on Data Protection.”
It doesn’t meet the US Constitution requirements either.
I don’t understand why we are not arresting, holding for prosecution the domestic enemies within the three branches of our fed gov that are attacking our nation, our Constitution, our liberty, and quite possibly our lives.
The Constitution is very clear that anything that was created by an oath breaker or domestic enemy is “void” and not valid as a law, bill, amendment, or executive order (which is, much like the Fed Reserve, also not legal).
Our Constitutional Republic requires an Oath to get into and to keep the office that they occupy, the Oath is “binding” for life. The three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal employees are required to take an Oath to support and defend the Constitution and not an individual leader, ruler, office, or entity. The POTUS takes an Oath to “preserve, protect, and defend the US Constitution”. Once given, the Oath is binding for life, unless renounced, refused, and abjured. It does not cease upon the occasions of leaving office or of discharge.
First Congress on 1 June 1789, was Statute 1, Chapter 1: an act to regulate the time and manner of administering certain oaths, which established the oath required by civil and military officials to support the Constitution.
The wording of the Presidential Oath was established in the Constitution in Article II, Section 1, Clause 10. The requirement for all Federal and State Civil officers to give their solemn and binding Oath is established in Article VI, Section 1, Clause 4. They are BOUND by their Oath to support the Constitution, and should they abrogate their Oath by their acts or inaction, are subject to charges of impeachment and censure. Hence the need for Statue 1 to define the administration of the Oath.
Remember all past and present members of the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch are REQUIRED to take the Oath to get into the position they are occupying. They MUST keep that Oath. Not keeping that Oath makes them an Oath breaker and a domestic enemy.
That means, that however well meaning it was, anything that weakened or went against the US Constitution since it we became officially the USA is void, invalid.
So why is everyone having trouble with enforcing it? They are going to use weapons against us anyway from the looks of things. THEY are the ones attacking us from within. They need to be arrested and prosecuted after we replace the domestic enemies within the judicial branch. At least we give them representation and a trial.
So once again, somebody smarter then me explain why “… preserve, protect, and defend” and “support and defend” means nothing to even those who are suppose to uphold it?
We the People never gave anyone the right to destroy OUR Constitution, our states, our lives at anytime in our history.
“Bound” – Being under legal or moral obligation; To constitute the boundary or limit of; To set a limit to; confine”
Solemn: “marked by the observance of established form or ceremony”, “legally binding, Common legal phrase indicating that an agreement has been consciously made, and certain actions are now either required or prohibited”, “The other requirement for an agreement or contract to be considered legally binding is consideration – both parties must knowingly understand what they are agreeing to”. (American fully expected a president who followed the US Constitutional definition of how our government operates. Part of his “why he was better candidate” brought up many times while running was that he was a “Constitutional Professor”
“Perjury” – “lying under oath about a material matter”, “violation of an oath”.
The framers wrote the United States Constitution, which delineated a constitutional federal republic. It consists of three separate but equal branches which were not only designed to perform separate and distinct duties, but to keep each other in check, preventing one from gaining arbitrary power. All of these branches were to be checked by the standard of law set forth in the Constitution, which each officer of the government must swear to uphold. If those officers should fail to keep their oath of office, then it is not only the right but also the duty of those who chose those officers to remove them. The success of this form of government depends heavily upon the vigilant and attentive execution of these duties.
The meanings of the words in the Oath: “I”- an individual, person, citizen, one member of the whole, officer; “do” – perform, accomplish, act, carry out, complete, achieve, execute; “solemnly”- somberly, gravely, seriously, earnestly, sincerely, firmly, fervently, with thought and ceremony; “swear (or affirm)” – vow, pledge, promise, guarantee; “that I will” – a positive phrase confirming present and future action, momentum, determination, resolve, responsibility, willpower, and intention; “preserve” – to keep safe from injury, harm, or destruction; “protect” – to cover or shield from exposure, injury, damage, or destruction, to maintain the status or integrity of especially through financial or legal guarantees, to provide a guard or shield; “and defend” – protect, guard, preserve, secure, shield, look after; “the Constitution of the United States.”
The meanings of the words in the Oath for everyone else: “I”- an individual, person, citizen, one member of the whole, officer; “do” – perform, accomplish, act, carry out, complete, achieve, execute; “solemnly”- somberly, gravely, seriously, earnestly, sincerely, firmly, fervently, with thought and ceremony; “swear (or affirm)” – vow, pledge, promise, guarantee; “that I will” – a positive phrase confirming present and future action, momentum, determination, resolve, responsibility, willpower, and intention; “support” – uphold, bear, carry, sustain, maintain; “and defend” – protect, guard, preserve, secure, shield, look after; “the Constitution of the United States.”
March 4th, 2012 at 11:58 am
For all you lawyers, if the law you are following that stops you from doing this is based on something a domestic enemy or oath breaker put into law, amendment, etc – then it is NOT valid, jsut because it was enforced.
You yourself may be abetting that by not making sure that whatever “law”, “code”, etc was created based on a invalid and not legal precept.
nvm.
I know I don’t sound like I appreciate all you do. I do.
But I, and others will be the ones who will be in those illegal “concentration” detention camps for our “own good”. I am not a cop, not a lawyer, not a politician; yet I am doing everything I can to teach those who were NOT taught our Constitution – what it does, who it protects, and who it protects us from.
I study it, I study our forefathers, I study everything I can get my hands on about our laws, where they come from, I read our 1000 PLUS bills that “our” representatives put up. I write them and tell them that THEY are domestic enemies, and that they will one day soon be arrested for working against our nation. I write law enforcement agencies, even the ones we know are working at destroying our nation because maybe one person who reads what I write might realize what they are doing.
What else can I, an American citizen, do? Wait to fight? Wait to be picked up in my home, my nation, my country?
March 4th, 2012 at 2:50 pm
Austrian Economics @ comment #3 I think this wisdom sums it up nicely!
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Ben Franklin
March 5th, 2012 at 4:07 am
Catherine, is this the Press Conference you are referring too?
http://www.art2superpac.com/joe.html
March 6th, 2012 at 1:37 pm
Does anyone know if any other sheriff is investigating or plans to replicate Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s posse work in vetting the identity and documents of the president? There must be more honest lawmen willing to dig in. And if they speak out in a coordinated effort, we might get some traction and even some answers.
March 7th, 2012 at 10:56 am
Texas: High School’s Chant of “USA, USA, USA” Deemed Racist…
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/03/07/texas-high-schools-chant-of-usa-usa-usa-deemed-racist/