BulletWounD
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2009
- Messages
- 984
- Reaction score
- 210
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Last edited by a moderator:
Soldiers pledge to refuse disarmament demands
An invitation to soldiers and peace officers across the United States to pledge to refuse illegal orders – including "state of emergency" orders that could include disarming or detaining American citizens – has struck a chord, collecting more than 100,000 website visitors in a little over a week and hundreds of e-mails daily.
Spokesman Stewart Rhodes of Oath Keepers told WND his organization's goal is to remind military members their oath of allegiance is to the U.S. Constitution, not a particular president.
He said the organization deliberately does not collect the names of those who subscribe to Oath Keepers' beliefs because of their status mostly as active duty soldiers.
[snip]
I never cease to be surprised by the extent of the nuttiness of the right.
Thanks for that info, it makes me feel a little better about our current dire straits.
You wouldn't have a direct link to the website in question, would you?
G.
Look, I know plenty of soldiers and LEO's who would refuse this order.
It isn't going to happen. This is yet more fear mongering coming from uber partisans. "Oh this isn't in response to Obama's policies, but WE NEED TO MOVE NOW!"
| Moderator's Warning: |
2) Whoever owns the copyright to this horribly written drivel probably wouldn't appreciate your copying of all of it. |
Moderator's Warning:
2) Whoever owns the copyright to this horribly written drivel probably wouldn't appreciate your copying of all of it.
On a more personal level, you will find yourself better educated and more knowledgeable about the world if you stop reading anything on WND.
Sorry if I broke the forum rules and I probably should have posted a summary in compliance with fair use.
On a seperate note, I like WND. Some of the stuff they post is difficult to find elsewhere.
Not a problem.
That's probably because it's either a) false, or b) spun to fit their viewpoint.
Of course it's spun. There's nothing wrong with partisan information sources as long as you exercise your critical mind and compare the information with what you already know (from outside sources). Do you have any examples of blatantly false information?
On December 3, 2006 a WND article said that: "Reports that KGB defector Alexander Litvinenko converted to Islam before his mysterious poisoning with radioactive polonium 210 is raising suspicions that he may have been involved in a plot to smuggle the deadly substance to terrorist groups."[33] According to an article in The Times, apparently mentioning the WND article, the evidence for these suspicions was "gossip from his Muslim next-door neighbour."
During the debate over the failed 2007 Immigration Bill, WND popularized opposition to an alleged "North American Union (NAU)", a dystopian vision of a future America politically and economically merged with Canada and Mexico, in a fashion similar to the European Union. [1] WND blames a "shadow government" in the form of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) for the alleged NAU plot. CFR Conspiracy theories are not a new phenomenon. Jerome Corsi, a popular WND columnist, has penned a book about the alleged plot called The Late, Great USA, which was promoted by the website. The "North American Union" is considered a conspiracy theory by popular social conservatives such as Michael Medved [2] and Kimberley Strassel [3], and has been disputed in the mainstream media.
During the closing days of the 2008 presidential campaign, and in the weeks following Barack Obama's election as president of the United States, WorldNetDaily posted numerous articles that advanced conspiracy theories about his citizenship status, alleging he is not constitutionally eligible to be president because he is not a natural-born citizen and that his Hawaiian birth certificate is a forgery.
...
In an August 23, 2008, article about Berg's lawsuit, WND claimed it had examined Obama's Hawaiian birth certificate with forgery experts and "found the document to be authentic," contradicting claims made in other WND articles and in Corsi's book.[47] However, on December 20, after numerous liberal websites, politicians, and media personalities touted WND's findings, Joseph Farah claimed in a WND column that the forgery experts had not actually concluded it was authentic, and that, "None of them could report conclusively that the electronic image [of the birth certificate on Obama's campaign website] was authentic or that it was a forgery."[48] After MSNBC's Keith Olbermann named Farah the "Worst Person in the World" on his show, Countdown, for his apparent reversal, Farah defended himself, claiming, "the veracity of that image was never the major issue of contention. Rather, the major issue is where is the rest of the birth certificate – the part that explains where the baby was born, who the delivery doctor was, etc...I can tell you WND has done its part to find out the truth."[49]
In a February 10, 2009, column, Janet Porter further alleged that President Obama was acting as a mole for the Soviet Union. Porter suggested that Obama was raised as an atheist and communist, and was subsequently trained by Soviet agents during the early 1990s, despite the fact that the Soviet Union no longer existed at this time. Porter also suggested that Obama's election as president was the result of a long-term communist conspiracy. Porter's only evidence for these allegations was a series of uncorroborated claims made to her by an American computer programmer, who claimed to have spoken to a Russian scientist in 1994 who told him that Obama was a communist and was being groomed by Russian agents to infiltrate the presidency.
On September 20, 2000, WND published an article[52] claiming that Clark Jones, a Savannah, Tennessee, car dealer and fund-raiser for then-Vice President Al Gore, had interfered with a criminal investigation, had been a "subject" of a criminal investigation, was listed on law enforcement computers as a "dope dealer," and implied that he had ties to others involved in alleged criminal activity. In 2001, Jones filed a lawsuit[53] against WND; the reporters, Charles C. Thompson II and Tony Hays; the Center for Public Integrity, which had underwritten Thompson and Hays' reporting on the article and related ones[54]; and various Tennessee publications and broadcasters who he accused of repeating the claim, claiming libel and defamation. The lawsuit had been scheduled to go to trial in March 2008[55], but on February 13, 2008, WND announced that a confidential out-of-court settlement had been reached with Jones.[56] A settlement statement jointly drafted by all parties in the lawsuit states in part:
Discovery has revealed to WorldNetDaily.com that no witness verifies the truth of what the witnesses are reported by authors to have stated. Additionally, no document has been discovered that provides any verification that the statements written were true. Factual discovery in the litigation and response from Freedom of Information Act requests to law enforcement agencies confirm Clark Jones' assertion that his name has never been on law enforcement computers, that he has not been the subject of any criminal investigation nor has he interfered with any investigation as stated in the articles. Discovery has also revealed that the sources named in the publications have stated under oath that statements attributed to them in the articles were either not made by them, were misquoted by the authors, were misconstrued, or the statements were taken out of context.
WorldNetDaily - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
****ing LOOOOOOOL
WND is just ****. Absolute, unmitigated ****. Anything you want to learn about that's on their site is somewhere else, written better. If it's not, there's a good reason.
There are also a lot who would not refuse that order. Those are the ones we should be worried about.
Considering the the left's stand on the 2nd amendment how is this fear mongering? Look at their record,the second amendment doesn't mean **** to these libs.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/1057829047-post13.html
http://www.debatepolitics.com/1057829048-post14.html
Too bad the mods do not treat all conspiracies the same.Any man-made global warming article should go down to his forum section,although the religion section would probably make a better forum section for man-made global warming articles.
How is refusing to violate their oath to the Constitution "nutty?"
I just read it again. Yeah, there is some nutty stuff in there :lol:
Look, I know plenty of soldiers and LEO's who would refuse this order. The Sheriff of my county has publicly stated he would refuse to seize his citizens guns if the 2nd Amendment were suspended. However this issue is only getting play because people are hyping up this myth that Obama is going to try to disarm the population through executive muscle.
It isn't going to happen. This is yet more fear mongering coming from uber partisans. "Oh this isn't in response to Obama's policies, but WE NEED TO MOVE NOW!"
:rofl
Good for them, and I am glad there is some group of soldiers and LEO's who say they will refuse an order like that, but the probability of that order coming down is about as high as an order to outlaw religion.
It isn't going to happen.
Moderator's Warning:
2) Whoever owns the copyright to this horribly written drivel probably wouldn't appreciate your copying of all of it.
On a more personal level, you will find yourself better educated and more knowledgeable about the world if you stop reading anything on WND.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?