The Federal Bureau of Investigation earlier this year launched a nationwide operation targeting white supremacists and "militia/sovereign-citizen extremist groups," including a focus on veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan, according to memos sent from bureau headquarters to field offices. [More]I guess a nascent movement like Oath Keepers requires an official demonization effort to discredit it...?
Anybody know how to say "Operation Vigilant Eagle" in German?
And I'll anticipate anyone who wants to throw a "Godwin's Law" flag, or observe this is the second post in a row where I've made a Nazi comparison.
Yeah, and your point is...?
19 comments:
To hell with Godwin.
It's a valid comparison- unlike far too many of our fellow citizens, the collectivists have learned some of the lessons of history.
Joseph Geobbels comes to mind.....
Betriebs-aufmerksamer Adler
In a military sense, this would be:
"Operation Wachsamer Adler"
Or, more offensively (as in an "attacking operation"):
"Angriffsoperation Wachsamer Adler"
Take your pick!
Godwin's Law is only invoked when the fascist/statist has lost the argument on all other grounds.
If they WANTED veterans to meet up, arm up and act up, they could not have done a better job of recruiting and incentivizing them.
I know some vets, and I'm sure they can introduce me to others. Maybe I won't die alone after all.
About Godwin's Law... The Unauthorized Journalist several articles below was handcuffed (with lacerations to one wrist) threatened and escorted from the university's grounds. They do not yet execute people on the sidewalk and leave the body as an example -- unless you count Oscar Grant on New Year's Eve in the Bay area in the subway. Shot in the back while prone and handcuffed with cops on either side.
Grant was black, the cops were white and Asian or Hispanic. Hmmm.
Godwin's Law is useful for Nazis to hide behind.
Kent McManigal said...
"Godwin's Law is useful for Nazis to hide behind."
That's it in a nutshell.
IOW:
Let's censor the discussion before we are forced to both acknowledge and attempt to justify certain facts and/or actions that would horrify any reasonably sane person.
Call me paranoid but I've said this before in another place regarding Oath Keepers.
It strikes me as unusual this organization was started just this year in March. I wouldn't doubt that it was an organization started for nefarious means as to identify those people that would be loyal to the people and to the Constitution instead of the government.
I'll call you paranoid, or worse, or a possible disinformation agent yourself. What you do next will help us determine that.
How DARE you make anonymous accusations with absolutely nothing to go on but your hunch--if that's what it is.
Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes is and has been well-known in Liberty circles. It is so pathetically easy to check on his background that you waltzing into message boards spreading that knee-jerk shit under cover of a screen name is lazy, irresponsible, and frankly, contemptible.
Who are you again? What have you done?
A man worth respecting would go back to wherever he has done such damage and publicly apologize. Until you do, you're not welcome here.
Re OathKeepers:
I know the founder. I met with him and others, such as Captain Bailey and LCDR Cunningham, both USN retired, yesterday, and will stand with them on Lexington Green today as Captain Bailey administers the constitutional oath to all attendees.
Every participant today is doing so, proudly and in public, in defiance of those who would further destroy our country.
Join us:
Oath Keepers Oath Affirmation -- Lexington Green 4/19/09
JokersWild sez: "Call me paranoid but I've said this before in another place regarding Oath Keepers. It strikes me as unusual this organization was started just this year in March. I wouldn't doubt that it was an organization started for nefarious means as to identify those people that would be loyal to the people and to the Constitution instead of the government."
If you are so timid and so frightened of engagement on the issues as to fear identification with a movement dedicated to reminding everyone about the LAW, you have no use for your firearms and ammunition. Get back into the flock of unknowing sheep and leave us sheepdogs to deal with the wolves. Please send me the address where I can have liberty-loving patriots of poor resources in your area pick them up so they can be put to good use. Of course if you're too panicky for even that, you may designate a clandestine pickup point of your choice, where my guys can receive the arms and ammo from you while you hide behind a balaclava and the nearest bush.
Sheesh.
Mike Vanderboegh
III
PS: Like Pete, I too will be at the Oath Keepers event today. Do you suppose if I thought it was a false flag operation that I would attend?
I'm still waiting for those really Good Guys in the F.I.B., you know, those "good guys who just want to do the right thing", to come out and say,
"Hey, wait a minute. I didn't sign up for this. I ain't doin' it! Boss, you can kiss my ass!"
The silence is deafening.
Hold it, David, Mike! Just a damn minute here. Nobody is nastier and meaner to pragmatists and other traitors than I.
However, Jokers Wild hasn't voiced an opinion on liberty or standing for it or even an opinion on the Oath Keepers. I admit he may have been remiss in not researching the founders of Oath Keepers and their past proven loyalty to the republic and to the oaths they have taken. While admitting that, it is not a horrible slander or crime to wonder if our enemies wouldn't have done much the same thing for just the purposes he has stated as a posssibility.
I also admit, he hasn't really thought it through, or he would realize that even if his scenario had some legitimacy, the response to Oath Keepers would have made any nefarious purposes that could be attributed to it self-defeated.
All we can hold against him is that he didn't think it through. We can't really accuse him of cowardice or disloyalty to the republic and its principles. Nor can we accuse him of any evil intent. He may be a neophyte, just awakening to the dangers plagueing the republic, and just not be adroit in navigating his way through all the issues, yet.
But for Pete's sake, let's give him a chance before we get so emotional we respond to something he didn't say. And if that something he didn't say, is something he should have, then let's inform him. If he fails on principle, or integrity or courage we will know and have plenty of time to boot him. Right now, all we can accuse him of is ignorance, and that can be fixed.
Let's try that first.
Sheesh, I never thought I would be the coolest head in the room.
I have to side with straightarrow on this one. As someone who is also relatively new to the whole Liberty campaign, I wouldn't know who Mr. Rhoades is or his character without people who have been in the trenches longer.
His skepticism isn't necessarily misplaced, it just means he is questioning much of the things presented before him. And his suspiscion does make it sound like something the government would do given the timing and recent reports put out by the gov itself in order to determine whose loyalty it doesn't retain.
So I would suggest cutting him a little bit of slack, posting a few links for him to learn more about Oathkeeper's and it's founder and participants.
I think it is David whom I heard the phrase "Spread light, not heat"
Wrong, guys--read what I wrote again.
I used his own criteria but left the outcome in his hands. And I gave him ways to verify, through the Oath Keepers article link, through providing Stewart's name, and with a personal reference/testimonial.
My speculation as to his motives is actually more valid, because we have none of these things to judge him by. But I still gave him a way out--and a way to make things right.
If you think I was hard on him, you should read what I wrote before I reworked it. It wasn't his speculation so much as the fact he admitted spreading this elsewhere. And I don't automatically trust those places will be as vigilant as here at correcting the record.
That's irresponsible, and I'll not let my friends be hurt by that--I'll stop it immediately in no uncertain terms with any chair at hand. Because I have no doubt he would spread this poison wherever the subject was broached unless stopped.
The reason we're in the fix we are now is as much because of the lazy and ignorant imposing their uninformed opinions on us as anything else. They may just end up getting a wake-up call a lot more rousing than what I just did.
And heat and light are not mutually exclusive. Sometimes, you need a really bright light and the heat is just a byproduct.
My guess is it worked and he won't do that again. And if he does, we'll know all we need to know.
Godwin's Law does not mean what you all seem to think it does. Godwin's Law has nothing to do with the mention of Nazis resulting in the end of the argument and losing it, it merely states that the longer an argument lasts the more likely Nazis are to be mentioned.
I specifically linked to an article explaining that...:)
David,
I can say that your paranoia doesn't match mine but does come close. I'm not disinformation agent, I'm merely someone who's just recently gotten into firearms and everything that comes with it. We exchanged e-mail regarding the 20/20 piece. Just so you know who I am personally.
I did go back and apologize for not doing my due diligence in checking it out. I'm a green horn and I'm going to make mistakes. I'll also apologize here for such. I also appreciate those fellows speaking on my behalf. I'm not one to take things at face value in any avenue and being as cynical as I am I may not always make the best call.
And Mike, I may not be up to speed with you but I've busted my ass to get what I got and I intend to keep it. I only believe in sharing of my own accord and not someone else's opinion. And I have my reasons for my paranoia and my questioning that shall remain my own.
I'm not perfect, but I am trying. I don't suppose anyone here is perfect either now or at any time in the future and that everyone had to start some place.
And that's about all I have to say about that.
Post a Comment