‘Religious Leader’ Bears False Witness against Oath Keepers
“The militarization of police such as in Ferguson, the massive arming of citizens, and new generations of militia such as the ‘Oath Keepers,’ merge with centuries of racism rooted in slavery and enforced by policing, housing discrimination, segregation, income inequality, and voter disempowerment brings us to this moment in history unlike any we have seen in 50 years,” a collectivist identifying herself as “Rev. Dr. Nancy Wilson, Global Leader, Metropolitan Community Churches (MCC),” writes on the “progressive” Huffington Post.
“Americans are locked and loaded. In Ferguson, predominantly White ‘Oath Keepers’ walk fully armed with automatic weapons and munitions in the streets, and say they just want to defend the Constitution,” Wilson continues. “Their website makes a point to say that military officer Oath Keepers do not pledge to obey the President of the United States.”
Where do we begin with such nonsense?
How about, since she makes a point of referencing the Oath Keepers website, we assume she actually spent some time doing what responsible writers do, that is, researching her subject matter so she can at least be accurate, if not authoritative.
As for her first attempt at conflation, Oath Keepers has been at the forefront of warning against police militarization and the threat to liberty that poses. As Oath Keeper Ed Wilson noted relating his conversation with founder Stewart Rhodes, “[W]e firmly oppose the current morph from community policing to federally militarized and federally subsidized abduction of the people’s local protection.”
Then there’s Wilson’s “militia such as the ‘Oath Keepers” charge. Editor Elias Alias addressed that media-fueled misconception:
The reason Oath Keepers is not a Militia is simple — among other considerations, we do not have a command structure, do not assign Militia rank designations or titles, and we are not a division of any State Militia Office, since to the best of my knowledge those no longer exist in modern America. Oath Keepers loves the name “Militia”, but Oath Keepers is not a Militia. We would, however, love to see every State have its Office of the Militia, for we do honor out Oath to the Constitution which requires the Militia. Why else would the SPLC and DHS hate our guts, eh?
Next, Wilson attempts to play the race card, either oblivious or not caring that Oath Keepers is a champion of civil as well as natural rights. The Bylaws make it clear:
No person who advocates, or has been or is a member, or associated with, any organization, formal or informal, that advocates discrimination, violence, or hatred toward any person based upon their race, nationality, creed, or color, shall be entitled to be a member or associate member.
As for Oath Keepers “walk[ing[ fully armed with automatic weapons,” Wilson shows the typical ignorance and bigotry of those who demand more anti-gun edicts while being clueless about existing Intolerable Acts. She’s playing right into the hands of the Violence Policy Center, which as far back as 1988 laid out the deceptive game plan:
The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.
As for not taking an oath to obey the president, Wilson, who like a good national socialist prefers a loyalty pledge that mimics the one imposed by you-know-who, commits several sins of omission by not explaining the Oath Keepers position:
Current Serving and Veterans, you swore an Oath…
Military Enlisted Oath I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.
Military Officers Oath I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God
NOTE: While the enlisted oath does contain a pledge to obey the orders of the President and of commanding officers, that is still preceded by a pledge to “defend the Constitution,” and is also qualified by the requirement that such orders be “according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.” Any order, by anyone, that is not constitutional or according to regulations, is unlawful and military personnel are not obligated to follow such orders – and, in fact, are obligated to refuse.
In other words, “I was just following orders” is not an excuse for committing crimes under color of authority, and Wilson objects to that?
That’s hardly a surprise for those of us who have come to understand that for “progressives,” every day is Opposite Day. It explains why, rather than embracing the true power sharing made possible with the right of the people to keep and bear arms, fake egalitarian Wilson instead advocates for a state monopoly of violence and the totalitarianism, mass human enslavement, suffering, misery and death that enables.
That’s some ‘reverend.” It does make it fair to wonder the nature of the “god” she serves.