October 6th, 2012

Q And A with Oath Keepers Founder Stewart Rhodes

Below are two inquiries sent in to Oath Keepers by readers. The names of the individuals sending in the queries are protected. Replying to their questions is Stewart Rhodes:




Question Number One:

From:    “B”

Date:    Wed, October 3, 2012 11:52 am

To:      memberships@oathkeepers.org

Last Sunday I heard on the car radio that the “Obama government has issued a

warning to private militias that they must come under the control of the

federal government”.  What has OathKeepers to say about this since it is the

Constitution which grants special rights to militias to be formed as

citizen’s protection against errant government leaders?

Stewart Rhodes in reply:


I’d love to listen to the broadcast if you can tell us which show it was.  I can look for an archive of it.

My first response is that private associations of Americans are not subject to government control.  But the second response would be that the militia of the several states are a STATE organization which answers first and foremost to the governor of the state, under  t he statutes and state constitution of that state, and are only subject to federal call up for three very carefully enumerated purposes, as articulated in Article 1, Section 8 of the federal constitution, where it states that Congress shall have the power:

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.

And, whenever an attempt is made to call forth the militia for any other purpose, or to call them forth in an instance which is not a valid execution of CONSTITUTIONAL laws of the Union (any unconstitutional law or decree is null and void), or in an instance in which the resistance to federal oppression is justified because  the federal government has stepped outside the bounds of the Constitution (and thus that resistance is not an insurrection) then it is the duty and the right of the militia members to refuse the call up, and it is the duty and the right of the Governor of that state to refuse to turn his militia troops over to the feds.

And that is the beauty of the militia system – because the military force of the state is in the hands of the state, and made up of the people of that state, they hold in their hands the very real capacity to refuse to serve under unjust federal command, and they hold in their hands the very real capacity to resist federal violation of the rights of the people.

So, any blanket declaration that militia should be always under control of the federal government is itself null and void from inception, because in direct violation of the very structure of our constitutional republic, and contrary to the express commands of Article 1, Section 8.

The militias, of any type, should tell Obama and the rest of the Washington DC boys to go pound sand.



Question Number Two

Name: “M”

Hello, I would first like to thank the Oath-Keepers for everything you guys are doing and I hope to become a member soon (I’m an Army veteran). However, I had a quick question regarding something that I have been hearing lately. I have been hearing a lot about Russian troops on our troops on our soil and have been pretty much been dismissing it as paranoid conspiracy theory up until now. However, I watched a video this morning with an Oath Keeper talking about it, which made me pay a little
bit more attention

Does this guy speak for the Oath Keepers? What is the stance of the Oath
Keepers on this issue? I know that the US military often trains /with
foreign troops and never really saw that as a big deal, especially with an
industrialized country like Russia. However, I’m not sure what to think
about it and I was wondering if this guy’s views are representative of the
Oath Keepers on this issue. Thanks!


Stewart Rhodes in reply:

Hi “M”,

Thanks for writing.  Well, I listened to the interview, and the Oath Keeper, Donald Rutledge (the guy in the Oath Keepers T-shirt), hardly even got a word in edge-wise with the silly host rambling on and on, and making many logical leaps.  I didn’t hear Donald say anything that was not our standard message about honoring the oath, when he finally got a chance to talk….

I think the host of the show jumped to some conclusions, such as going from there being training, to saying this is “proof that foreign troops are STATIONED HERE for the purpose of controlling the population.”  That is a leap.  I have seen no confirmation of that, and I don’t think Donald was taking that position – the host was.

Donald is one of our Texas regional coordinators, and a solid retired Army Sgt.  He is good to go.  He was just being polite.

So, no, the host’s assertions that there is absolute proof that foreign troops are stationed here to be used against us is not our position ,and I don’t think Donald was making that claim.

Now, do we have a concern that foreign troops could be used against us in the future?  Absolutely.  Hence our Order #8, in our declaration of orders we will not obey (active duty):

8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control” during any emergency, or under any other pretext. We will consider such use of foreign troops against our people to be an invasion and an act of war.

During the American Revolution, the British government enlisted the aid of Hessian mercenaries in an attempt to subjugate the rebellious American people. Throughout history, repressive regimes have enlisted the aid of foreign troops and mercenaries who have no bonds with the people.

Accordingly, as the militia of the several states are the only military force contemplated by the Constitution, in Article I, Section 8, for domestic keeping of the peace, and as the use of even our own standing army for such purposes is without such constitutional support, the use of foreign troops and mercenaries against the people is wildly unconstitutional, egregious, and an act of war.

We will oppose such troops as enemies of the people and we will treat all who request, invite, and aid those foreign troops as the traitors they are.

That was published back in 2009, and we included that plank for very good reasons – there is a historic pattern of governments using foreign troops against their own people.  Heck, as noted above, the British used the Hessians against our Forefathers for much the same reasons – more compliant and less sympathetic enforcers.

Also, there are mutual aid agreements that have been signed between US Army North and military leaders in Canada, and if I recall correctly, something similar was signed with Mexico, all under the banner of NORTHCOM, which encompasses all of North America.  So, we are concerned about that coming down the road.

And, thus we do pay attention when there are foreign troops training here.  Yes, it has been going on for decades.  When I was a young Paratrooper, I saw plenty of foreign troops on post – South Korean ROKs, and guys from Central and South America (at the School of the Americas), and so on.

But now we are increasingly concerned that such troops are not merely being trained to go home and do their work in their home countries, but that they could be used here, against us.  Why?  Because our own government is increasingly portraying conservative, liberty loving Americans as a future military enemy in the “war on terror.”  And the Russians, among others, are now allies in that war on terrorism.

Do I have proof that this is the plan, aside from those mutual aid agreements with Canada and Mexico?  Proof that they plan to use Russian Spetznatz against us?  No.  No hard proof.  Yet.  But i have concerns about “dual use” from such training.  Sure, they are here to just learn from each other, but that will also help if and when they are used here.  They learn the roads, the terrain, the people, the culture, and they learn to work with American counterparts, and those Americans are getting used to, and conditioned, to working with those Russians, here on US soil.  And likewise for all of the other foreign troops that have trained here in the US recently.  And there have been plenty, including Uzbekistani troops training right here in Montana, where I live, alongside Montana National Guard.

Can I prove it is all for evil intent?  No.   But i worry about that dual use of such training.  And I don’t trust the current powers that be in charge of our national government.  Not one bit.   I can see them going down the same road as King George of Britain did, and being tempted to try to use foreigners to do what our own troops may not.

I will remain vigilant, as we all should.

Stewart Rhodes

Placing billboards outside of military bases to remind service members of their oath

Please donate and support Oath Keepers mission, every little bit helps!

 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.

11 Responses to “Q And A with Oath Keepers Founder Stewart Rhodes”

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All

  1. 1
    Cal Says:

    The Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654 (Dick Act) broke the militia down into three groups. The three Militia classes H.R. 11654 provides for are:

    The organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia;
    The unorganized militia
    And the regular army.

    It states: “The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy.”

    “The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the high powers delegated directly to the citizen, and is excepted out of the general powers of government. A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power”. Cockrum v. State

    State v. Chandler and State v. Reid: Concealed weapons bans are constitutional as a manner of time, place, and manner restriction since, while arms bearing is an individual right…
    Where three justices of the Arkansas Supreme Court split three ways, with the lead opinion taking the view that the ban was a reasonable regulation and adding that the right to bear arms “for the common defense” meant only that the government might not impose regulations that interfered with the ability to resist tyranny…

    Nunn vs. State ‘The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.’ The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the milita, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right”.

    The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government.” Patrick Henry

    “It is not the function of the government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the government from falling into error”. Justice Robert H. Jackson

    “… By calling attention to a well-regulated militia for the security of the Nation, and the right of each citizen to keep and bear arms, our founding fathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy. Although it is extremely unlikely that the fear of governmental tyranny, which gave rise to the 2nd amendment, will ever be a major danger to our Nation, the amendment still remains an important declaration of our basic military-civilian relationship, in which every citizen must be ready to participate in the defense of his country. For that reason I believe the 2nd Amendment will always be important”. John F. Kennedy

    “The framers gave us the Second Amendment not so we could go deer or duck hunting but to give us a modicum of protection against congressional tyranny”. Walter E. Williams

    “Where is it written in the Constitution, in what article or section is it contained, that you may take children from their parents and parents from their children, and compel them to fight the battles of any war in which the folly and wickedness of the government may engage itself? Under what concealment has this power lain hidden, which now for the first time comes forth, with a tremendous and baleful aspect, to trample down and destroy the dearest right of personal liberty? Who will show me any Constitutional injunction which makes it the duty of the American people to surrender everything valuable in life, and even life, itself, whenever the purposes of an ambitious and mischievous government may require it? … A free government with an uncontrolled power of military conscription is the most ridiculous and abominable contradiction and nonsense that ever entered into the heads of men”. Daniel Webster

    “The NRA believes America’s laws were made to be obeyed and that our Constitutional liberties are just as important today as 200 years ago. And by the way, the Constitution does not say Government shall decree the right to keep and bear arms. The Constitution says ‘The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. Ronald Reagan

    “Whereas it has been proposed that the United States of America become a part of a world federal government;
    And … this program…would entail the surrender of our national sovereignty and… bring into being a form of government whose authority would supercede that of the Constitution of The United States Government;
    And … institute a system of laws where-by American citizens could be tried by aliens in controversion of the provisions of the Constitution of the United States;
    And … the Veterans of Foreign Wars is composed solely of men who have worn the uniform of the United States on foreign shores and in hostile waters in time of war and from their personal experiences are familiar with the traditions and operations of other countries;
    And … many of our comrades rest forever in foreign soil and their sacrifices were made to retain the dignity and sovereignty of the United States of America:
    Now therefore, be it Resolved by the Fiftieth Annual Convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, That we hereby declare that we are unalterably opposed to any program which would entail the surrender of any part of the sovereignty of the United States of America in favor of a world government…” Veterans of Foreign Wars

    Joel Barlow, Revolutionary War veteran, who authored “Advice to the Privileged Orders, in the Several States of Europe”, a clergyman and theologian, a popular poet, a successful diplomat, and an American whose political writings were debated on the floor of Parliament. Barlow said: “… not only permitting every man to arm, but obliging him to arm.”

  2. 2
    Cal Says:

    Obama has given himself many powers not authorized by the US Constitution. But since Obama, Panetta, Gen. Dempsey themselves say that their “authority comes NOT from the US Constitution; but comes from the United Nations (in letters, on videos, in front of the senate) – which means that they are openly committing treason.

    Most of the legislative and part of the judicial are traitors because they are not doing impeachments, bringing this out to the public. Remember Germany, the Weimar’s constitutional government was taken over from within. All this stuff happening here, happened there first, except for now they took over the mass media first now.

    But no one cares. No one is prosecuting them for treason under our legitimate government.
    Now there is this:
    H.R. 6566: Mass Fatality Planning and Religious Considerations Act
    112th Congress, 2011–2012. Text as of Sep 28, 2012 (Introduced).
    Status & Summary | PDF | Source: GPO
    HR 6566 IH
    112th CONGRESS
    2d Session
    H. R. 6566
    To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to require the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to provide guidance and coordination for mass fatality planning, and for other purposes.
    September 28, 2012
    Ms. RICHARDSON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Homeland Security, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

    A BILL
    To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to require the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency to provide guidance and coordination for mass fatality planning, and for other purposes.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
    This Act may be cited as the ‘Mass Fatality Planning and Religious Considerations Act’.
    Congress finds the following:
    (1) Emergency preparedness often plans for how to prepare and provide for survivors of a natural disaster, act of terrorism, or other man-made disaster, but fails to plan for how to prepare for and respond to mass fatalities that result from such an incident.
    (2) Funeral homes, cemeteries, and mortuaries could be overwhelmed should mass fatalities arise from a natural disaster, act of terrorism, or other man-made disaster.
    (3) Different religions have different customs surrounding death; for example, the Jewish and Muslim religions call for burial of the deceased not later than 48 hours after death.
    Section 504 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 314) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ‘(c) Preparedness for Mass Fatalities- In carrying out this section, the Administrator shall provide guidance to and coordinate with appropriate individuals, including representatives from different communities, private sector businesses, non-profit organizations, and religious organizations, to prepare for and respond to a natural disaster, act of terrorism, or other man-made disaster that results in mass fatalities.’.

  3. 3
    DD823 Says:

    Question for Stewart.

    I’ve been a member of Oath Keepers for a few years and feel that this organization is becoming out of touch with whats happening in this country. Now that obama has been re-elected there will be no no stopping him from crushing any opposition to his plans for this country. What disturbs me is the many stories about Bengahazi, Recession, Get a Job, etc, etc. These are stories we get from news websites, radio and television. Why are there no stories about the UN Arms Treaty that will kill our 2nd Amendment rights and recommendations on how to fight it? After all is this not the the first order that should not be obeyed?

    Oath Keepers does not appear to have any plans to fight what is defined under the “Ten Orders We will not Obey” Also, what happens if the government shuts down websites like Oath Keepers . . . how do you plan to communicate with the members? Under the circumstances is it a good idea for members to use their real names, especially those on active duty? I think we all realize the government has infiltrated Oath Keepers to tract what we are doing.

    Enough with the feel-good meetings and marching in parades lets start doing something! And don’t give me the crap about not wanting to appear as a far right organization that wants to bring down the government. If we believe in the oath we all took “To protect against all enemies, etc. then we have to start doing something before its too late.

  4. 4
    rooney Says:

    Is it a site to support army, navy, police and law institutes?

  5. 5
    Tim Hallam Says:

    Most of the over 40 crowd with military experience don’t seem to making the news. We are not the damaged goods that our society is apparently producing these days. We didn’t have time outs, standing in the corner or politically correct. Punishment was usually right to the point and swift. We respected our elders, others property and the boundaries in life as determined through training and observation. There weren’t shootings at schools, workplaces or the town hall. We respected our parents and protected our neighbors. What the hell happened? I am a father of 6. The grandfather of 18. My family fragmented due in part to the pressures of their environment. We have allowed this society to mold the generation into entitlement , anti-patroitic and unwilling to protect themselves or their families. God Bless America, AGAIN.

  6. 6
    Sonny Gladson Says:

    I believe in WE THE PEOPLE … I would like to join Oath Keepers .. thanks

  7. 7
    Ray Brown sui juris Says:

    I would like to thank all the men and women who have not forgot our oath! I am not a bible thumper but as I review my life, I would like to bring attention to some scripture. We all must remember that our Constitution and Bill of Rights, Laws are based from scripture ‘Common Law.’
    Blessed is the man whom thou chastenest, O Lord, and teachest him out of thy law. Read PSALMS 94:12-17.
    Our loss is done from our ignorance and laziness to allow statues, codes, regulations, etc. to govern us instead of lawful laws from Common law.
    Keep up the good work all of us out here. Continue to educate the public, officers, and military that we can once again unite this great nation.

  8. 8
    Jim Cumber Says:

    I, like DD823, am concerned that the present POTUS is “illegal,” an Oath BREAKER, a GD Communist, “Red Diaper Baby,” a Muslim extremist, and is trying to “take the country DOWN!” If we are TRULY, “Guardians of the Republic,” WHEN, OH, WHEN do we declare “OPEN SEASON” on these treasonous TRAITORS, like “good Jedi Knights?” We have a “Sith Lord” in the White House! IMPEACHMENT FOR TREASON sounds about right, if you ask me! Unfortunately, the only “Congress Critter” with the testicular fortitude to propose a Bill of Impeachment, is leaving the Congress – your former Boss, Ron Paul! BTW, could we please have a List of the Oath BREAKERS in the halls of Congress? It would certainly make it easier to BOOT THE BASTARDS OUT! I took the Oath about 1969, when I was a “casual Asset” for the FBI and doing “Covert Ops” against the Communists in the “misnamed” Peace Movement during the ‘Nam. “One of J Edgar Hoover’s Irregulars.”

  9. 9
    frank j scalzo Says:

    would like to sign up,,,,,address sent to and received by Oath Keepers.

  10. 10
    Kenneth Blair Says:

    My name is Kenneth Blair and I took an oath 17 years ago. I served for a total of eight years in both the Army and Army National Guard. Even though I don’t put on a uniform anymore, the oath I took still means the same now as it did then. Although I have seen the signs of corruption and criminal activity by certain people in our government I did not fully understand what was going on until the past year. Thanks to Alex Jones and Jesse Ventura I was able to see the big picture. My hat is off to Mr. Rhodes for starting this organization. Our job too defend This Country and the constitution is never over. I was following up on the latest Alex Jones video on U-tube and this President wants to go outside of law and take our right to defend ourselves. Also a possible third term. What needs to be done in my opinion is for the President and all the criminal bankers that has hijacked this Country now or we won’t have a Country left to defend. If the President carries out his agenda and starts physically confiscation weapons, I do not have enough ammo to hold out very long. I am not going to surrender. Our forefathers would be ashamed if we did and our children are counting on us wether they realize it now or not. Never Quit!!!!!

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All

Leave a Reply

© 2012 www.oathkeepers.org | Oath Keepers Corp Address: 5130 S. Fort Apache Rd - Las Vegas, NV 89148