Friday, 7 May 2010

When Republicans commit treason, it's called "citizen's arrest"

As we know, the Republicans like to make stuff up – not only facts, but the very words we use. For every political jihad they fight, the bumper sticker phrases are sure to follow in short order: death panels, permanent bailouts, checkbook tax, tax-and-spend liberal, soft on terrorism, “Support the Troops!”, Kenyan socialism and all the other neologisms.

Their latest gambit: to redefine treason by calling it “citizens arrest”.

As we know, they have set up this incredibly dangerous group called the “Oath Keepers”, which is itself a laughable syllogism because the very intent of the group is to encourage armed men – military and police -- to violate their oaths of duty. Specifically, the aim of the group is to organize armed people to “resist” President Obama because they took an oath to defend the Constitution, and Obama allegedly is violating the Constitution by illegally occupying the presidency.

And now they are putting this into action.

Not long ago, a man in Tennessee demanded that the local grand jury “indict” Obama for his crime, and try him for treason. The grand jury unsurprisingly refused. The man showed up to execute a “citizens arrest” of the grand jury foreman, who is black – to use physical force to stop a legally-selected government official from doing his job. The police arrested the would-be arresting officer. An outraged Oath Keeper, formerly Navy and currently “militia”, showed up with an AK47 to free his ally, and ultimately was also arrested. Other armed men showed up also, and they threatened to bring more. Along the way the Oath Keeper also tried, at one point, to execute citizen’s arrest on the cops who arrested him.

The Oath Keepers are now writing letters to Supreme Court Justice Scalia, demanding justice for their comrades.

The Oath Keepers say they are certain that Obama will come to take their guns and put them in concentration camps. And now that they have been disarmed and arrested, they can say “see, we were right!”

So we have a group of current and former military and law enforcement, concocting plans to use armed violence to stop legitimate government functions.

Also known as “treason”.

For extra credit, look up a bunch called “Repent Amarillo”, a vigilante group that focuses on harassment of gay bars, theatres that should gay-themed plays, a local park (because witches could use it), and eventually a Planned Parenthood site and possibly the entire city of Houston (because they made the terrible mistake of electing a gay mayor).

Next: I took these ideas below from original founding documents. Does this sound like a good working definition of the Oath Keepers? And their teabagger pals?

In the quest for red-blooded American manhood, the group seeks brotherhood with other men who possess the qualifications for membership who share the same beliefs, spirit, character, interest and purpose, united native-born U.S. citizens with no allegiance to any foreign nation or sect, organizing the patriotic sentiment of native-born Americans for the defense of distinctively American institutions, dedicated to the principle that America shall be made American through the promulgation of American doctrines, the dissemination of American ideals, the creation of wholesome American sentiment, the preservation of American institutions. The aim is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, and protect the states and the people thereof from all invasion of their right from any source whatsoever. Major offenses include Treason against the United States of America, violating the oath of allegiance to the groupr or any supplementary oath of obligation thereof, and violation of the Constitution or laws of this order by conspiracy, relinquishment or forfeiture of citizenship, or support of any foreign power against the United States of America. All influence that seek to destroy the sanctity of the American home must be destroyed; the home must be protected, and womanhood must be protected.

The group is organized on a military plan for quick, united action. The member will protect order. His resistance is to be unyielding. The true member is a man and will not be moved by threats of enemies, or threats of punishment by any person or power whatsoever, or by persecution of any kind. He can be loyal and true in the face of every sort of impending danger. He will not yield his honor even for the price of his safety. His resistance will be unswerving. He has sworn, "I will die rather than divulge same, so help me God”. Every member is pledged to go at any time without hesitation to the assistance or rescue of a fellow member in any way. With uplifted hand, every member has committed himself; "at his call I will answer."

The reason I ask, is that the ideals expressed in those two paragraphs came from the Ku Klux Klan manual, 1925.

I ask this also because those Oath-Keeper morons just tried to launch an armed revolt against a grand jury session in Tennessee.

From the link:

AGJ members believe that President Obama is not a natural-born citizen -- a constitutional requirement to serve as president -- because his father was Kenyan, and therefore a British subject, at the time of Obama's birth. "There was no question that to be natural born, you must have parents of the soil, born on the soil," said Swensson. "By Barack's own admission, his father was Kenyan." The founders instituted this requirement, Swensson added, in order "to prevent the possibility of divided loyalties. And now here we are."

Let's remember to hold the Republicans to their own loyalty standard next time around.

Piyush Jindal's parents are immigrants from a country with millions of Muslims; he was raised a Hindu until converting in high school (unlike Obama, Jindal really was raised in an Asian religion). Jindal named himself "Bobby" after the Brady Bunch character.

Charlie Crist also Americanized his name; he is actually Charles Christodoulos, born to Greek immigrants.

Rudy Giuliani, Italian immigrants.

Sarah Palin has expressed support for Alaskan secession -- would her first loyalty be to the U.S. or Alaska?

Haley Barbour is part Native American. Loyal to the U.S. or to his tribe, which was conquered by the U.S.?

And if McCain runs again -- loyal to the U.S., or to his nation of birth, Panama?

John Huntsman lived extensively in Asia and adopted children from China and India; these children will have dual citizenship. What if we get in a scrape with China during a Huntsman administration? Where would his loyalties lie?

Rick Perry has even more divided loyalties -- his parents were (gasp) Democrats! How can you be loyal to the Democratic party and still be loyal to (sniff) Uhmurka??

So Republicans need to stop and think about how stupid they really want to be about all this.

And one more thought: has it occurred to the Oath Keepers that some 30 percent of the military consists of people who are not white males? Setting aside the fact that demographically, minorities show their bravery and patriotism by joining the military in larger numbers than the white guys, there's also the fact that when these guys come home, they most emphatically do not share the sentiments of the Oath Keepers, particularly respecting Obama. And for that matter, there are plenty of white soldiers who support Obama, particularly since he has supported them better than Bush did (got your armor protection finally, boys?).

No comments: