Guest Commentary: The Oath; Then and Now

As most of you conclude your work week (and I really begin the busiest stretch of mine), we find ourselves back at the open mic portion of our week. I know it is a night late, but things have been hectic, as I mentioned yesterday. For the record, I will not be posting a Memorial Day article. It simply isn’t worth the aggravation as some conclude that they simply cannot leave it alone and not bash the US military for even a single day of the year. But I do offer my thoughts and prayers to all who have sacrificed so much, no matter their reasons for doing so. For open mic this evening, we have an article submitted by G-Man! I know some of you are rolling your eyes and thinking here comes another conspiracy article. But this is not like that at all. G has decided to talk about the Oath Keepers and offer his thoughts around their declarations of orders that they will NOT obey. I find it an interesting topic, especially given the belief that some have that the US military would be willing to fire on innocent American civilians. So without further ado, I give you G-Man…

The Oath- Then and Now
By G-Man

Yep, it’s me again! Don’t cringe just yet, I’m not going to discuss some conspiracy theory or some unfounded prediction of doom and gloom. I’d like to discuss a subject that, when I was just 17, young, dumb, and full of….

I made a life changing decision.

Way back in the Jurrasic age of 1983, I stood with many other young men and women, raised my right hand, and spoke these words:

I, G-Man, do solemnly swear 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.

I understood what I was doing, what I was saying, and the journey I was about to embark on. Too me it was simple, “shut up and do what your told”. Now, 27 years later, I realize that that Oath wasn’t just for when I was proudly wearing my uniform, but in fact, to me, it’s for life. I have yet to speak to a fellow veteran who doesn’t feel the same way, both older and younger. Regardless of the branch of service served in, a unity exists between us, and the Oath is the sacred bond that drives that unity.

With all the turmoil all around us, I thought it would be interesting to look at an organization made up of veterans, active duty military, police, firefighters and anyone else who has who may have spoken those words contained in the Oath. They are The OathKeepers! I’m not promoting this organization, but rather presenting “Declaration Of Orders We Will Not Obey”, and discuss the need for these declarations, and why we, as a country, are in this mindset. So, here we go”

1. We will NOT obey any order to disarm the American people. The attempt to disarm the people on April 19, 1775 was the spark of open conflict in the American Revolution. That vile attempt was an act of war, and the American people fought back in justified, righteous self-defense of their natural rights. Any such order today would also be an act of war against the American people, and thus an act of treason. We will not make war on our own people, and we will not commit treason by obeying any such treasonous order.

Nor will we assist, or support any such attempt to disarm the people by other government entities, either state or federal. In addition, we affirm that the purpose of the Second Amendment is to preserve the military power of the people so that they will, in the last resort, have effective final recourse to arms and to the God of Hosts in the face of tyranny. Accordingly, we oppose any and all further infringements on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. In particular we oppose a renewal of the misnamed “assault-weapons” ban or the enactment of H.R. 45 (which would register and track gun owners like convicted pedophiles).

** I agree with this in it’s entirety, as most of you know**

2. We will NOT obey any order to conduct warrantless searches of the American people, their homes, vehicles, papers, or effects — such as warrantless house-to house searches for weapons or persons. One of the causes of the American Revolution was the use of “writs of assistance,” which were essentially warrantless searches because there was no requirement of a showing of probable cause to a judge, and the first fiery embers of American resistance were born in opposition to those infamous writs. The Founders considered all warrantless searches to be unreasonable and egregious. It was to prevent a repeat of such violations of the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects that the Fourth Amendment was written. We expect that sweeping warrantless searches of homes and vehicles, under some pretext, will be the means used to attempt to disarm the people.

** The key word here is “warrantless” **

3. We will NOT obey any order to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to trial by military tribunal. One of the causes of the American Revolution was the denial of the right to jury trial, the use of admiralty courts (military tribunals) instead, and the application of the laws of war to the colonists. After that experience, and being well aware of the infamous Star Chamber in English history, the Founders ensured that the international laws of war would apply only to foreign enemies, not to the American people. Thus, the Article III Treason Clause establishes the only constitutional form of trial for an American, not serving in the military, who is accused of making war on his own nation. Such a trial for treason must be before a civilian jury, not a tribunal.

The international laws of war do not trump our Bill of Rights. We reject as illegitimate any such claimed power, as did the Supreme Court in Ex Parte Milligan (1865). Any attempt to apply the laws of war to American civilians, under any pretext, such as against domestic “militia” groups the government brands “domestic terrorists,” is an act of war and an act of treason.

** I’m against any law that is put in place that would make something illegal because it “might” cause harm. Example: Arrest all the Black Flags in the country, because they could revolt and overthrow the government.**

4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state, or to enter with force into a state, without the express consent and invitation of that state’s legislature and governor. One of the causes of the American Revolution was the attempt “to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power” by disbanding the Massachusetts legislature and appointing General Gage as “military governor.”

The attempt to disarm the people of Massachusetts during that martial law sparked our Revolution. Accordingly, the power to impose martial law – the absolute rule over the people by a military officer with his will alone being law – is nowhere enumerated in our Constitution.

Further, it is the militia of a state and of the several states that the Constitution contemplates being used in any context, during any emergency within a state, not the standing army. The imposition of martial law by the national government over a state and its people, treating them as an occupied enemy nation, is an act of war. Such an attempted suspension of the Constitution and Bill of Rights voids the compact with the states and with the people.

**While “Martial law” has been the subject of many conspiracy theories, I like this written context and how it is presented**

5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty and declares the national government to be in violation of the compact by which that state entered the Union. In response to the obscene growth of federal power and to the absurdly totalitarian claimed powers of the Executive, upwards of 20 states are considering, have considered, or have passed courageous resolutions affirming states rights and sovereignty.

Those resolutions follow in the honored and revered footsteps of Jefferson and Madison in their Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, and likewise seek to enforce the Constitution by affirming the very same principles of our Declaration, Constitution, and Bill of Rights that we Oath Keepers recognize and affirm.

Chief among those principles is that ours is a dual sovereignty system, with the people of each state retaining all powers not granted to the national government they created, and thus the people of each state reserved to themselves the right to judge when the national government they created has voided the compact between the states by asserting powers never granted. Upon the declaration by a state that such a breach has occurred, we will not obey orders to force that state to submit to the national government.

** Can we say ObamaCare?**

6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps. One of the causes of the American Revolution was the blockade of Boston, and the occupying of that city by the British military, under martial law. Once hostilities began, the people of Boston were tricked into turning in their arms in exchange for safe passage, but were then forbidden to leave. That confinement of the residents of an entire city was an act of war. Such tactics were repeated by the Nazis in the Warsaw Ghetto, and by the Imperial Japanese in Nanking, turning entire cities into death camps. Any such order to disarm and confine the people of an American city will be an act of war and thus an act of treason.

**This one makes me go HMMM. History has a strange way of repeating itself**

7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext. Mass, forced internment into concentration camps was a hallmark of every fascist and communist dictatorship in the 20th Century. Such internment was unfortunately even used against American citizens of Japanese descent during World War II. Whenever a government interns its own people, it treats them like an occupied enemy population. Oppressive governments often use the internment of women and children to break the will of the men fighting for their liberty – as was done to the Boers, to the Jewish resisters in the Warsaw Ghetto, and to the Chechens, for example.

Such a vile order to forcibly intern Americans without charges or trial would be an act of war against the American people, and thus an act of treason, regardless of the pretext used. We will not commit treason, nor will we facilitate or support it.”NOT on Our Watch!”

**same comment as #6**

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.

**With 80 million armed citizens in this country, use of foriegn troops could not be for peaceful purposes, we are a self sufficient people, and can keep the peace without outside help**

9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies, under any emergency pretext whatsoever. One of the causes of the American Revolution was the seizure and forfeiture of American ships, goods, and supplies, along with the seizure of American timber for the Royal Navy, all in violation of the people’s natural right to their property and to the fruits of their labor. The final spark of the Revolution was the attempt by the government to seize powder and cannon stores at Concord.

Deprivation of food has long been a weapon of war and oppression, with millions intentionally starved to death by fascist and communist governments in the 20th Century alone. Accordingly, we will not obey or facilitate orders to confiscate food and other essential supplies from the people, and we will consider all those who issue or carry out such orders to be the enemies of the people.

**I personnally could not take food from anyone, no matter how hungry I may be. I would accept an offer of kindness, and would extend that offer if I have the means. Sadly, many people would not act the same**

10. We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.

There would have been no American Revolution without fiery speakers and writers such as James Otis, Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, and Sam Adams “setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” Patrick Henry: “Give me Liberty, or Give me DEATH!” Tyrants know that the pen of a man such as Thomas Paine can cause them more damage than entire armies, and thus they always seek to suppress the natural rights of speech, association, and assembly. Without freedom of speech, the people will have no recourse but to arms. Without freedom of speech and conscience, there is no freedom.

Therefore, we will not obey or support any orders to suppress or violate the right of the people to speak, associate, worship, assemble, communicate, or petition government for the redress of grievances.

— And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually affirm our oath and pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor. Oath Keeper

The above list is not exhaustive but we do consider them to be clear tripwires – they form our “line in the sand,” and if we receive such orders, we will not obey them. Further, we will know that the time for another American Revolution is nigh. If you the people decide that you have no recourse, and such a revolution comes, at that time, not only will we NOT fire upon our fellow Americans who righteously resist such egregious violations of their God given rights, we will join them in fighting against those who dare attempt to enslave them.

This short video says much about the need for the actions (or non-actions) contained in these ten declarations.

I am not a current member, but I am considering this action. I’m not promoting membership, that would be a personnal decision that one can make on their own merits.

The discussions we have had on immigration, the fine articles written by D13 and the work the good Colonel is doing down in Texas, is what inspired me to write this. In some ways, I feel that the Feds have all but abanded it’s citizens and are attacking our freedoms at it’s core. These 10 declarations and the history behind them poses a very important question. “Where is this country headed that we would need to have these declarations?

To visit the OathKeepers site, go here:


Peace and Live Free my Friends!


  1. Nice article G-Man. I must say I feel better just after a quick read through. I will post more in depth once I have done a deeper read. 🙂

    • THanks Jon 🙂

      I’ve been following them for awhile, and on a very rainy Saturday, I thought it would make for a good read. I’m glad that it was posted this weekend, keeping with the theme of Memorial Day.


  2. I have my opinions about Oath Keepers, which I have shared before.

    • Kent,

      Glad to see that you are not negative about them. I see the Oathkeepers as good people who will not harm others on the orders of a currupt government. I think we all hate taxes, and there are far too many laws that deteriorate our freedoms. You are a very deep thinker, but express yourself well and make for an easy read.


    • Bottom Line says:


      I have to agree with the premise of your unwritten summary question…

      Why stand up for natural rights some of the time? Why not ALL of the time?

  3. Cyndi P says:

    posting for comments

  4. I am an “Oath Keeper”. I have been for quite sometime now, and I know quite a few others who are in my state and other states. It has been rumored among us the the DHS is considering putting us on the “possible terrorist” watch list. We are here, and we will not go quietly into the night.

    G-man, you are quite a bit younger than I since you first took that oath two years after I transferred to the inactive reserve. Upon retiring, no one is required to take a “de-oath” or something like that. That is the bond that holds us together. Too bad Kent does not understand that.

    More later.

    • Mornin G.A. 🙂

      Well, we have something in common, as I’m a member as well. I hope that our numbers grow and grow, and let the DHS put us on their little list, at least they will know that there are good people who will oppose any of the government BS that may come down the road.



  5. whitehorn says:

    Being a veteran also and makeing that pledge, I honestly feel a deeper bond to this Country then others who never made the pledge I to am a OATH KEEPER and no matter what happens we will never walk away from our Country and were not going to dissappear in the night

  6. Questions for Members of Oath Keepers

    How are members recruited to the Oath Keepers?

    Does anyone know if there were any members of Oath Keepers involved in the guard units that took guns from innocent people in New Orleans? If so do you know whether they actually refused the orders?

    In fact, does anyone know of Oath Keepers that have refused any orders that violate the criteria listed above?

    • Hi JAC!

      I don’t know of any active recruitment happening. It’s mostly word of mouth, that’s how I found them.

      In the last week or so, a posting on the Oathkeeper site discussed the Katrina issue, and it was found that some members refused to take people weapons, I’ll have to do some research to find it, and when/if I do find it, I will post the link.

      Peace and Live Free!


        • I read about this on the Gun Rights Examiner a couple of weeks ago.

          I applaud those who refused to help violate the rights of people, but I think that was only a first step; a baby step at that. To really keep their oath they need to actively stop the oath breakers from violating the rights of others. That means by any means necessary including treating them as enemies in this war and using deadly force.

          Standing by while you know that others who are supposedly “on your side” do the things you know to be wrong, and doing nothing to stop them, is what makes people assume that all those in the government uniforms are the same. It might be suicidal to be different, but so are many of the other actions that those in uniform are honored for engaging in. All I’m asking is that if you are really serious about the oath, and liberty, show it.

          • Kent, It all starts with education, especially in the younger years. We can’t stop the madness without realizing that it is insane!



          • Kent, as I read your statement it appears to me (and this may not be your intent) to advocate the armed and violent overthrow of our government. Something of that nature just is not acceptable to me. I know that you are a self proclaimed anarchist like Black Flag says he is, however, hoping that the U.S. government (and all other governments) just go away is one thing and advocating the violent overthrow of a government is something else entirely. It is entirely up to you, but you just might want to reword your statement for clarification.

            • I never swore an oath to uphold the Constitution.

              If those who have take that oath seriously, that oath means you must use violence against domestic enemies (who, by definition can not be “The US government”). That is not “overthrowing” anything legitimate, and it is not my business nor my concern.

              I am just looking for consistency here.

            • G.A.

              Curious as to why you think it is wrong to violently overthrow of the government.

              • Same reason it is wrong to resist the mafia: because they say so. 😉

                When you let the bad guys make the rules saying what is or is not OK, you get self-preservation rules like this. Always.

              • Read the Constitution.

                • Bottom Line says:

                  Article 1 – Section 8 – Powers of Congress – The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

                  ~(line 14) – To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

                  “…suppress Insurrections…”

    • JAC…fyi….I had a unit in New Orleans….we did NOT take guns from civilians (at least my unit)…there were plenty of civilians there protecting their property. Where we did take the guns was when they went beyond protecting property and were actively walking in neighborhoods that were declared under curfew for looting. we did take the guns and arrest those type of people. They were clearly not protecting their neighborhood when their ID’s showed being from out of town or different parts.

      I do not personally know of any Oath Keepers in Guard Units. You would have to define “innocent” for me in this context. I have read all reports from Katrina…and do not know of a single guard unit member that shot anyone either..that has been previously reported.

      • I can’t speak for JAC, but to me “innocent” is independent of context. The definition I operate under is found at that link.

      • D13

        How are you today Colonel?

        My comment about the Guard helping take guns is based on three videos I saw that indicated this to be true.

        Here is one of them. While the actual confiscation shown involved police the Guard was clearly supporting the operation. At least as portrayed in the video. I know how that can be spliced.

        Couldn’t find the other ones. I remember one where a family was escaping their home by boat and were stopped and guns taken. I think that one was a sheriff but don’t recall for sure.

        Anyway, do you have more accurate information regarding the OK guard unit that supposedly supported the search and seizure of homes outside the flood area?

        As to your question about innocent. People fleeing their homes by boat, family, are innocent. Families sitting in their homes defending their property are innocent. They have not initiated force against anyone they are innocent.

        Some dick head mayor or police chief suddenly declaring gun ownership or staying on ones property as “illegal” does not make the innocent a criminal in my book. It was the Mayor, the Police Chief and most of the New Orleans and State of Louisiana govt that were the criminals.

        • Doing fine, sir…doing fine.

          We, the guard and reserve, were there primarily to provide support. No guard unit had the authority to confiscate any guns UNLESS there was looting involved and a threat to self. Civilians protecting their property were also supported by the reserve and guard units and NO weapons confiscated. As a matter of record, we passed out pen flares to homeowners protecting their property so they could signal if there was trouble. There is a huge difference in supporting and doing. In support, we stay out of the way and let civilian authority handle it. If civilian authority actually confiscated guns, we were powerless to do anything about it even if we knew they (civilian authority) may be wrong. Since martial law was not inacted, the law enforcement belonged to the civilians. We were allowed to fire back, if fired upon, and to stop looting if no law enforcement was around. We were allowed to stop and detain rapists…which were running rampant around the city. We were allowed to stop and detain anyone that was breaking the curfews enacted by the police. And, when we checked ID’s, someone carrying a Texas ID walking the streets of New Orleans during curfew hours is NOT innocent. Someone carrying an ID from Baton Rouge and walking the streets of New Orleans is not innocent and we did not buy any story that they were looking for friends at 2AM.

          I am completely and totally unaware of any guard or reserve unit actually confiscating weapons….and that includes the Utah guard. All the AAR’s (after action reports) that I read have no reference to confiscation of guns from any innocent civilian.

          Your definition of innocent (People fleeing their homes by boat, family, are innocent. Families sitting in their homes defending their property are innocent. They have not initiated force against anyone they are innocent) matches mine. That was not our function. As a further matter of record, we even supplied ammunition to home owners that were protecting their property if they did not have enough.

          That is about the best that I can tell you. Afte five days we were asked to leave because we were not needed any longer.

          Hope your day goes well, my friend.

          • D13

            Then would you say the New network video I linked to above was “conveniently spliced”?

            Note the headline on the YouTube piece.

            Perhaps what we see in the video is the OK guard assigned to escort the police and then the police start confiscating weapons. Is that probably what we are seeing?

            If so, the the Army’s power was obviously being used to support the confiscation, whether it was the Army’s intent or not. Perhaps something to consider in developing joint operational response to future situations like this.

            • Actually, let me take a look at the video and report back.

              • Ok…saw the video and did NOT see one National Guard troop confiscate a weapon. I saw patrolling, which is fine. You must understand that the patrols were there to help protect the neighborhood. I saw that it was the police that were going into homes and I did not see one National Guard troop enter a home….they were all swat. I did not even see the National Guard backing up the police even outside any homes. We could not enter the homes and had specific orders not to….unless there was a danger….and that danger WAS NOT a homeowner with a gun.

                I saw the Police Chief of that city doing what he should not have been doing….. but it is not a military position to call him out. We were there as a request. When we did question the local police, we were asked to leave.

                At the end of the interview, there was selcetive cutting of the whole answer. It made him sound like he was ordered to shoot American Citizens… which he was not, unless danger presented itself…. His answer was that he did not like patrolliing his own streets and that included the possibility of having to defend himself against an American Citizen.

                You said: “If so, the the Army’s power was obviously being used to support the confiscation”.

                D13 says: No sir, we patrolled and did not support the police in breaking into any homes.

                • D13

                  Let me ask one more question for clarity.

                  Did the Guard units patrol with the police at the same time when the police were taking guns from homes of the innocent?

                  If not then this was a clear effort to edit tape to portray the Guard as being involved.

                  If they did then I agree they did not participate directly. But the police created an “impression” of military force by having the Guard present.

                  It sounds like it is the first case and not the second. I will let you confirm this however rather than put words in your mouth.

                  Thanks for clearing this up.

                  • JAC asks: “Did the Guard units patrol with the police at the same time when the police were taking guns from homes of the innocent?”

                    D13 says: No. I was there for five days…I never patrolled with a police officer….the rest of my time there was setting up a remote site 25 miles outside of NO that would have housed five thousand with food, water, medicine, sanitation…..and we were told to break it down and go home…and had not one visitor. Instead they were housed in the Dome and sent to Houston, Dallas, Fort Worth.

          • D13

            P.S. Curfews should be illegal to impose upon anyone.

            Walking down the street, no matter where your hometown, is not criminal and is not imposing harm against anyone.

            I understand the circumstances quite well, but it is time we start finding more Liberty minded solutions to these situations.

            Who knows, it might start rebuilding public confidence in our law enforcement and visa versa. Your response to helping homeowners actually defend their property is such an example I believe. To bad the cops didn’t take the same approach. But then again, it was New Orleans. I’m still not sure why we didn’t just let the damn place wash out to sea.

            • The local citizenry could not protect themselves at all except for a few. Curfew was necessary as who else was going to stop the looting?

              JAC says: “Walking down the street, no matter where your hometown, is not criminal and is not imposing harm against anyone.”

              D13 agrees and disagrees: If you wish to walk down my street at two in the morning….you are free to do so. If you walk down my street in a blackout situation in a flooded or destroyed neioghborhood….I would question why? I would not wait for harm to be done because why else would you be there? Sightseeing at 2AM in the morning with no flashlight and electricity?

              JAC says: “Who knows, it might start rebuilding public confidence in our law enforcement and visa versa.”

              D13 responds: I would say that allowing such a situation that resulted in thievery or rape (as were a majority of the cases then)..the outcry from the public would be much louder.

              • D13

                As I said, I understand what the situation was quite well.

                And thus I understand why things were done the way they were, except for the stupid gun confiscation and breaking into homes defended by their owners.

                But as I said before also, what do you expect from New Orleans and Louisiana. Maybe some day they will run the corrupt politicians and law enforcement out of that state.

                Obviously action is needed to protect those who can not protect themselves. But it is the approach to that action that needs more thought. The example of giving lights and ammo to homeowners is a good example.

                Also stopping the “sightseeing stranger” to ask questions is totally appropriate given the circumstances. But I would still approach him as innocent. But the curfew itself makes him not innocent and that is what I have the problem with.

                My bigger point is this. To often our powers in charge fall to the hardest option first. I am hoping that in the future we can find ways to make the hard option the absolute last option.

                I think the Katrina response provides many chances to learn with regard to several factors. The law enforcement and protection is just one of many.

                By the way. I figured out right away the guard member was talking about shooting a bad guy that might “pop around the corner” at him. That is why I became suspicious of the rest of the tape and the way the story was spliced and diced together.

                Remember, I was there when the media tried to tell the USA that loggers were killing fish when they used pictures of electroshocked Carp from some other state in the news footage.

                Happy Memorial Day Colonel.
                Thanks for all you have done and all you are doing.


                • JAC says: “By the way. I figured out right away the guard member was talking about shooting a bad guy that might “pop around the corner” at him. That is why I became suspicious of the rest of the tape and the way the story was spliced and diced together.”

                  D13 says: Yes sir….it was a hatchet job and the Oklahoma Guard did not assist police in confiscating weapons. However, it was reported that the POLICE and NATIONAL GUARD were patrolling the area and the news linked the two together….we did not ride with them or go with them on calls. Our job was simple…..patrol the curfewed areas where lootings were taking place…detain and call local police force.

              • D13

                One more thing.

                Just finished watching an old Gary Cooper western called


                Dallas and Ft. Worth were portrayed as having around 2000 people each. Right after the civil war.

                Good movie as all westerns of that age were.

                In the film it is said that TEXAS is an Indian word meaning Friend.

                Do you know if this is true?

                • It is actually spelled Tejas…which means friend and our state motto is “friendship”.

                  • Also, Fort Worth was the last fort going west in Texas. It guarded what is called “california Crossing” in Dallas…whjich was a low water crossing on tghe trinity on the way to California.

  7. G Man

    Great article, thanks for the info. I was aware of the Oath Keepers, but not many details. Do you know anything about their numbers? Would be interesting to know if 10, 20 or 50% serving have taken the oath.

    I didn’t buy into your conspiracy theory article, but found it to be interesting and thought provoking. I still think there is a chance a eco-nut was behind the BP disaster.

    “Where is this country headed that we would need to have these declarations?”

    In New Orleans, police illegally searched citizens homes, then illegally seized
    their firearms. The President, the Attorney General and other high ranking government officials have denounced an Arizona law, that is a watered down version of federal law. The only difference, Arizona will enforce its law, while no one can force the federal government to actually act as the law mandates.

    Sounds like the Oath Keepers read too much history.

    I have posted on the NRA on the last open mic that might be of interest.
    Bet a DP that Judy says some dirty words….

    • LOI…thank you for pointing out it was the police that illegally searched homes…not the military or the military working with the police. As I said…I was there. The military DID NOT do this.

      • D13,

        My pleasure sir. N.O. police, under a radical mayor and a radical police chief. I think the Oath Takers also include law enforcement officers, possibly in reaction to N.O.?

    • LOI!

      History is a great teacher. I think as you investigate this topic, you may find it educational and worthy.


    • LOI, one cannot read enough history as we learn from history. He who does not know history is destined to repeat history . . . Our greatest teacher is the past . . . Our greatest enemy is ignoring the past!

      • G.A.

        I think the interesting thing is all the MSM talking heads are outraged by Obama compared to Hitler, but were silent or supportive when that was said of Bush. Last week, 14 busloads, over 500 people
        went to a Bank of America executives house a block outside D.C.. The guys 14 yr old son was there alone with these “people” on their front doorstep, and COVERING the entire front yard. All were SCIU members, protesting something. No arrests or citations were issued.

        Is it proper to compare the SCIU with the Brown Shirts? Or am I being racist? People who read history keep pointing out the worst atrocities in history happened after gun registration, and then, gun seizure. Slick Willie & the MSM say “lets ban all semi-automatic firearms—-no, that won’t play. Let’s call them “assault weapons”. And the president of Mexico says bueno, see….

  8. G-Man…. First, thank you for the kind words at the end of your article. It means a lot to me. Secondly, I am not a member of this organization so I will not say anything positive or negative about it until I research more of it. Thirdly, I took my oath in 1969 and at the time, it did not mean much to me. It was something that we had to say to get things moving along. Over the years, the oath that I took not only for this country but its people as well, has become to mean more and more. In my opinion, if you take the time to make an oath, they become an important part of your life…for to violate an oath is a character issue….an issue of integrity.

    This country, the USA and its people, mean everything to me. It is my country and my flag and I will do whatever is necessary to protect my country and its ideals.

    Have a great Memorial Day… is a special time for me.

    • Colonel,

      This holiday is special for many of us. I’m happy that you enjoyed the article. I spoke from the heart and believe in my fellow vets.



  9. Judy Sabatini says:

    Hi All

    Good article G, I will make sure I tell my boys and hubby about the OathKeepers. I know my youngest son said that going in the Marines was the best thing he did, doesn’t regret it for a minute. My oldest also said the same thing about going into the National Guard. He’s been in for 8 years now, and plans on making it his career.My youngest son is also in the Guard now as well, has been for 2 and a 1/2 years.

    Hope all is doing well today. I too would like to say my thoughts and prayers go with those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for this country, and to those of their families. God Bless them all.


  10. Murphy's Law says:

    G-man- what a great article! It sounds like a great organization, but I want to find out more before I recommend it. I have 3 sons, at least 2 of whom would probably be all over this if they knew of it. The both are gun owners and very much supporters of our right to own- in fact my middle son’s recent birthday gift to his older son (13) was his own gun.

    Hope everyone has a wonderful Memorial Day…..truly remembering those who have made such a day as this possible.

    To all of you on this blog who have served in any capacity in our armed forces…..deepest and most heartfelt thanks.


  11. Bottom Line says:

    Sup G-Man,

    Nice article!

    In general, I like Oathkeepers because they are about protecting rights. But I question the integrity of anything that is organized. I have to ask…is this just another form of controlled opposition? All human action is ultimately individual, and it seems to me that Oathkeepers don’t need each other to refuse to violate rights?

    Do you need someone to agree with you when you refuse a direct order to kill an innocent person?

    Do you really need someone to agree with you for killing an armed man that has come to collect your guns and infringe on your natural right to protect yourself/family/property?

    Where is the gain? You get to have your name on a list? Collective moral support for principles?

    Or is it a precautionary move by the people?

    I can see the potential for, and attritional value of, organized infiltration and subversive action against tyranical moves by the state.

    G – “an organization made up of veterans, active duty military, police, firefighters and anyone else”

    BL – This kinda reminds me of the scene in “Fight Club” where they took the guy into the bathroom and threaten to cut his jewels off. The circumstances are different, but the sentiment is the same.

    “We’re everywhere. We fight your wars. We police your cities. We put your fires out. You depend on us, so don’t f*$% with us, cuz we’ll cut of your ability to violate people’s rights.”

    They are essentially saying, “Oh no you won’t, …not on my watch”.

    G – ““Where is this country headed that we would need to have these declarations?”

    BL – Indeed. What is the need? What has happened? What have we lost? What are we going to do about it?

    • To my knowledge the Oathkeepers is not an organization that requires a membership register. We are just a bunch of veterans and law enforcement officers (active and retired) who have reaffirmed our original oath and have decided that we have the right to refuse any orders that are illegal in nature and origin. Just like when we were on active duty the UCMJ told us that we could refuse an order that was illegal no matter who issued that order. I know some who have had to do so in Nam. I also do not know of any organizational meetings of Oathkeepers nor of any active recruitment efforts for membership. I learned of them from another veteran in my town and looked it up on the internet, liked what I read and signed on. It is nothing but an individual commitment on a personal level as far as I know. I hope that has helped.

      • Bottom Line says:

        G.A. Rowe – “It is nothing but an individual commitment on a personal level as far as I know. I hope that has helped.”

        BL – Yes it did. Thank you. So I guess it’s just a collective reminder of the concept of an unlawful order to the state.

  12. Judy Sabatini says:

    Rest in Peace Mr. Hopper, you’ve earned your wings. You were always one of my favorite actors. You will be surely missed.

  13. Cyndi P says:

    Off topic. I found this comment over on Zero Hedge. I think the write summed it up nicely.

    how can there possibly be a recovery? we have a consumer-driven economy….and Bennie Boy forgot to give the peasantry any money and any way to get any…..

    jesus…..we all need to understand what’s going on here. the banks are gradually “gathering” all the assets. the public is being literally drained dry.

    to pretend that somehow, magically its all going to get better is ludicrous now. bloomberg’s articles on the “recovery” sound more foolish every day.

    i talked with the head of social services in our town yesterday. she is overwhelmed by the need >> from people with skills, trades, education…..and most are now so deep underwater, it will take them years to recover, if they ever do.

    its over. i used to say if the banks were reined in, we’d have a chance, but its over. the financial reform bill showed us that. its over. they won. they are going to get it all, destroy the economy and the country and walk away scot free.

    • Bottom Line says:

      It’s been over for a while.

      Cyndi – “jesus…..we all need to understand what’s going on here. the banks are gradually “gathering” all the assets. the public is being literally drained dry.”

      All we own is debt.

      FRN = Unit of Slavery

      WE ARE the assets.

      • Cyndi P says:

        I wonder what our ‘disposition’ will be. I shudder to think, knowing what we have controlling the levers of power in the US Government.

      • Speaking of slavery: Watch this video. It lays out how “we” got where we find ourselves.

        • Kent

          That was very interesting in light of the questions I was asking yesterday about human nature.

          This hypothesis amounts to a finding that those very things that make us civilized also make us uncivilized. That is our capacity to think and thus develop recognition of death, liberty and slavery. Very interesting.

          In the end the conclusion does not address the stated cause, however. The conclusion is it will end and that no more govt is the answer. But our basic psychology remains in tact that allowed the slavery (farming) to develop. Seems to me that it will simply reset the clock, not start a new clock.

          • I know of a few people, who once they realized what is going on, smashed the old clock and are never the same. They “took the red pill”. It is basically what happened to me. It is what changed me from a “conservative” to what I am now. I think this IS the solution.

      • B.L.

        So which of us are considered hard assets and which of us are liquid assets?


        • copious amounts of tequila…..liquid asset.

          throwing up what is in stomach afterwards…..liquid liability.

          inert body moaning on ground….hard asset.

          • Judy Sabatini says:

            Now, that’s just gross D13. LOL!

            Hope you’re doing well today Colonel.

          • D13

            Sorry Colonel, can’t drink that tequila stuff.

            Drank way to much one time and now I have plastic parts in one eye, a crooked jaw and permanently cracked/chipped teeth. On the up side, the chipped teeth are real good at biting off fishing line.

            The smell of tequila makes my stomach start constricting.

            • I have not yet done that with any particular alcohol, but I am often surprised by that fact. I don’t know if maybe I just have not drunk to that point or if its because I have a wrought iron stomach. Considering some of the stuff I can eat, I think it is more likely the latter….

            • Tequila = to kill ya

              It can be hazardous to ones health. it makes you do things that you would not normally do.

              Have a happy weekend all….not too much imbibing.

            • I’ll tell you what, get some good 1800 and it makes a smooth margarita!

        • Bottom Line says:


          That depends on how you define the difference between a “worthless eater” and a “useful idiot”.

          I’m guessing the worthless eaters get liquidated.


    • They will not get away scot free. And they cannot own everything legitimately. I am hoping to write a piece soon on property ownership and how one philosophically handles illegitimate ownership. If things go where they seem to be going, they cannot own all things. It is we producers that create wealth, it is we who need assets and wealth the least. It is we who will inherit the earth when it falls apart. A bank can own nothing if it does not exist, same with a government.

  14. D13IF you took an oath to uphold the Constitution, and IF you know what the Constitution authorizes a US government to do, and IF you take your oath seriously (a lot of “ifs”, I know), then when you see any agents of that government, at any level (local, state, or federal), violating what the Constitution specifically authorizes them to do (not just what has been allowed to go on throughout the centuries), then you have specific duties as regards your oath. These are the “all enemies” of the “domestic” variety you swore to protect the Constitution from. There can be no others. There can be no question that the government has already been overthrown, and those who hold office and make (and enforce) the counterfeit “laws” are the guilty parties.

    For standing up and doing what you swore you would do, you will be made out to be the bad guy and will almost assuredly be killed, but when you took the oath did it say “But only if it is safe to do so, and only if those in charge say it is OK“? If that is the case, what is that oath worth?

    • Ahhhh….ok that makes your point clearer.

    • Good Morning Kent,

      Times have changed since I agreed to the Oath. As a young man back then, the enemies were foriegn and defined. Today, unlike way back then, the “domestic” part of that Oath has become an issue, where as it never was an issue to most of us in the past.

      I have continously failed to explain the Oath and it’s meaning to those who have never taken the Oath and served. While the words are simple, it’s meaning is far more complicated. As D13 said, as a young man, it meant little. But as an older wiser man, it’s meaning has transformed into something far more meaningfull.

      As I write this, I still struggle hopelessly to explain it to those who haven’t been there. I hope that someone could assist in this explaination, but I can say that there is a very special bond among veterans, and many are seeing that the enemies may not just be foriegn or defined, but domestic and undefined.

      You said: For standing up and doing what you swore you would do, you will be made out to be the bad guy and will almost assuredly be killed, but when you took the oath did it say “But only if it is safe to do so, and only if those in charge say it is OK“? If that is the case, what is that oath worth?

      I could be wrong, and I apologize if I am, but upholding the Oath by committing suicide against an undefined enemy is ludicris. Much like trying to explain the meaning of the Oath to those who have not taken it. I wish I could offer more as an explaination, it’s early, and I may be able to better do this after some deeper thought.

      Peace my Friend!


      • I would say that taking such an oath does not necessarily mean that one abandons reason. Kent, you believe in freedom, but do you live free regardless of law all of the time? Do you live by your own law exclusively, or do you bend to the law of the land sometimes because it is wise to choose your battles? You may not have “sworn an oath”, but it is part of your core belief, and you strive to live as close to it and to lead others in that same direction at all times. That is sufficient, and it is more effective.

        There are laws and so forth that you would violate if they called upon you to do certain things. There are some violations of your principles that are worth fighting, some times where you must choose to fight the battle. Some areas where freedom is on the line and must be stood up for. These are like the items G listed in his post. These are the lines you do not cross.

        So if the question is, why not stand up for the constitution all the time, the answer is that they are standing for it all the time, but survival and reason and the idea of long-term strategy still comes into play. I am pushing for more and more freedom all the time. I am encouraging others and writing etc. There are times, however, when this is not evident. When I am paying taxes so that I can legally drive, when I am working instead of spending time on writing and research and teaching others about freedom (gotta pay the bills), when one of my clients is a non-profit that gets some of their money from government grants. These are things that violate my ideal, but I must do them for now. I put up with the client because they are good people and they are doing far more with the taxpayer dollars they receive than government agencies, in fact I believe non-profits will be a big part of the transition to private charity from government charity if we make the transition at a realistic pace.

        I fully understand that as I progress toward being more and more vocal about my thinking, and as I do more and more to strive towards my ideal, I may well be singled out and attacked in many ways. I do not fear this. I do, however, find that a lot can and should be done to make my efforts have maximum effect, rather than rashly acting on an ideal.

        G, I am not a veteran nor have I sworn the oath that you have. I know many veterans and I see that bond, even if I cannot be part of it. It is something that must be respected. I hope that I have at least some understanding of your intent, I certainly respect what you have said and think that it is honorable and worthy of praise what you and other oath-keepers are doing and are attempting to do. It gives me great hope that if/when things get bad and the military is wielded as a direct tool of control against the citizenry, MANY of them will not be on the side of those giving the orders. Because of the power of our military, that fact is the ONLY thing that gives hope of victory by what will certainly be a minority of citizens fighting for their freedom.

        Peace to you and to all those who defend, protect and serve on this weekend of remembrance.

        • Jon- I agree. I am only trying to get them to see that they are compromising rather than actually upholding their oaths when they see others violating the Constitution and they don’t actively stop it. Had I ever sworn that oath I would probably do the same. That is why I am glad I never took the oath and why I never would.

          As I have said many, many times- just because you have a right to do something does not mean it is the smart thing to do right now.

          • And further..our oath also says to obey the lawful orders. We can determine what is lawful and what is not. If the National Guard was told to kick down a door by the police chief…it never would have happened. As a Colonel, I would never have given an order to kick in a door to confiscate anything. My captains and Lieutenants would not have either. We know what the Constitution says and we know what is lawful.

      • GMan

        It is very simple and I understand.

        You can not fight a war if you are dead.

        A handful of martyrs does nothing for a revolution that has not started.

  15. D13- I wrote a reply to your earlier assertion that I am wrong, but as it contains a couple of links it is languishing in “moderation limbo” for now. Just didn’t want you to think I was ignoring you.

  16. Hi Ya’ll 🙂

    As I worked diligently on on finishing my pole barn the last two days, I really enjoyed the discussions that took place. I thank everyone who enjoyed the article and hope you will all look into it further.

    I found the Oathkeepers as the closest loosly organized group of non-violent, freedom loving and kind people that fits my direction as a start to total freedom and liberty. One must start somewhere 🙂

    I know that the Black Flags and the Kent’s would like their villages to be made of absolute free men, as I would desire myself. And both BF and Kent, do not feel the need for our Constitution. While I don’t totally agree, I don’t disagree. But it is one document, that for our nation, is a cog to bring freedom loving people with like minded feelings together for a single cause.

    As we do here at SUFA, the fight for freedom comes in many forms, but it’s aimed at the same goal. Freedom is not without cost, many gave some, some gave all, and many more do not understand this. It’s the later that I worry about, they may be the enemy, or just plain stupid!

    Paece my Friends!


  17. SK Trynosky Sr says:

    I love the concept and I am sure that there are thousands in the military and in the police who will not sacrifice the constitution, not for anything. I stand with them. They however, have a much more important task ahead . They have to spread the word to the young PFC or Patrolman who was educationally shortchanged and does not know where we come from or how we got here. It is a difficult task. My own little contribution is The Boy Scouts. I teach the citizenship merit badges and I teach them in a group setting. The kids know nothing when they arrive. They know a little more when they leave.

    • Keep teaching! Your efforts with the Boy Scouts are awesome!


      • Bottom Line says:

        I second that.

        The answer to all the world’s problems lies in the minds of children.

        Youth is King

        Learning is Fun

        Teaching is a Reward

        Knowledge is Power

        Truth is Freedom

        Order out of Chaos

      • Bottom Line says:

        !?!??My reply disappeared!?!?

  18. SK Trynosky Sr. says:


    Back in the summer of 1967, while a Junior in College I was involved in the National Student Association. I had chosen my involvement carefully. The organization was an anti-war, leftist coalition who was, being funded by the CIA. Go figure!

    Well, down at the U of Maryland, where the national Convention was being held, the Conservatives (traditional and libertarian) found each other in a hurry. It was our goal to bollix up the convention as best we could and limit the damage they could do by claiming to speak for all American students. It became obvious that we, the conservative caucus, needed help. We went into DC one day and invited YAF (Young Americans for Freedom) to join the party. We then went back and stole credentials for them.

    For the next ten days we had a ball. The NSA people could not issue a position paper without us issuing a counter position paper. Roberts Rules of order ruled the day. We cajoled and converted moderates by pointing out where this was all going. We actually brought in conservative speakers in the evening from YAF. They tried to shut us down by issuing new credentials, we stole them. people who did not necessarily agree with us hung out with us because, “You guys are fun to hang with, your not doctrinaire” as one CCNY kid told me. I also got a much better understanding of how close left wing and right wing rational anarchists are when I found some of our best allies to be among the non Maoist, non Stalinist “Students for a Democratic Society”. I often wonder where some of those guys wound up on the equation.

    Anyway, at the end there was a giant love fest in the gym. At that time everybody joined hands and sang “We shall Overcome”. We, sang it with the most gusto. We would overcome, and did it in 1980.

    In ’68 after graduation but before the Army grabbed me I had a choice, work private or public. As 1A draft bait, the private was not exactly knocking down my door. By default, I went public. Returning from the Army, the job was still waiting for me. I had no intention of staying more than a year. I stayed 21. Why, you ask? Same as above. The opportunity to not so much change things from within, but to subvert things from within and accomplish goals that were not part of some bureaucratic master plan.

    That is the answer my friend, take a tip from the left, subvert from within!

    • That is a good path for some to take, and I respect that. As long as you do not get converted by constant exposure and submersion in the culture you have infiltrated. It happens.

      It is also not the path for everyone. I couldn’t do it and live with myself. I would be forced to violate my principles in order to stay inside.

      • SK Trynosky Sr says:


        I can see your point but disagree with it. If anything, while inside, I became more committed to what I was doing. I had the good fortune to be able to influence a few young people who had joined my agency. In the beginning it was government, government, government in everything they said. After a few years together they saw how efficient the private sector was in comparison and changed their tune.

        The other thing that you must keep asking yourself over and over is, “Am I right?” Having always been a fan of David Crockett’s axiom “Be sure your right and then go ahead”, you really have to wrap your brain around what you want to accomplish and why.

        I also have to point out that it was a lot of fun.

  19. BL- Which is why I do not support the Constitution. When it is “authorizing” things that are wrong, it is still wrong.

    Taxation is still theft, even if “Constitutional”. No “law” can change an evil act into a good one.

    “General welfare” has been used to excuse a multitude of depicable things. It was a grave mistake (or a calculated plot) to include that phrase.

    “[S]uppressing insurrections” is one of those things that is also wrong.

    The founders would have been guilty of this according to their own new “laws”. Why was it right for them to do, but wrong for anyone who came after them? Either it is right for all people in all times, or it is wrong for all people in all times.

    • Bottom Line says:

      It doesn’t surprise me that you take this approach to the constitution, and I can’t really argue with you. There are some major inconsistencies we’re dealing with here with respect to the protection of natural rights.

      I imagine that in addition to the federalist papers, our founding fathers had a great many conversations resembling things we regularly discuss here at SUFA.

      The constitution has it’s flaws, and the founders knew this. They covered as many bases ass possible and allowed it to evolve. It’s why they dubbed it “The Grand Experiment”. They were just trying to find the proper balance between freedom/natural rights and statism/control. The balance between Order and Chaos.

      PART of the problem is that, over the years, something has been lost. Increasingly, so many people don’t understand what they were trying to do, …or thy don’t care. Instead of trying to understand their vision, they have focused on what this word or that phrase meant and how to manipulate it to their favor.

      It was very cleverly written IMO. I rather like the way it is an interwoven mesh of parameters.

      I.E. –

      Rule X coordinates with rule Z.
      Rule Z covers Rule Y.
      Rule Y covers Rule W.
      Rule W coincides with Rule X.
      Rule F covers Rules A,P,D,N,W,X,Y,& Z
      Rule A covers Rule F.

      This insurrection thing is one example…

      The Bill Of Rights was The Bill Of [PEOPLE’S] Rights. One of those recognizing the natural right to protect one’s self/family/property against threats, ..including tyranny.

      Amendment 2 – Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791. – A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

      It doesn’t say that we have the right to overthrow our government. (Although it was suggested in The Declaration Of Independence.) It says that we have the right to protect ourselves… included in that is against tyranny as defined by the other amendments.

      So, we can DEFEND AGAINST government if need be. Article 1 Section 8 Line 14 gives Congress the authority to protect the state…included is to DEFEND AGAINST/suppress insurrection if need be.

      Article 1 – Section 8 – Powers of Congress – The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

      ~(line 14) – To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

      So, in the event of a major conflict of interest in the relationship between the Militias, the State, and The People…None have the authority to strike first, but are able to defend against the other.

      Initiating violence against the non-violent is evil. I think they were trying to find the proper balance.

      • Right.

        And the difference between a “statist” and a “libertarian” (or “anarchist“, if you prefer) is that when the interests of individual liberty and the interests of the government collide, the statist gives the benefit to the doubt to the government and the libertarian will give the benefit of the doubt to the individual.

      • My eloquent(?) reply once again languishes in moderation. I gotta learn to leave out the links! LOL! Oh well, it will show up eventually.

      • TexasChem says:

        BL Stated:”PART of the problem is that, over the years, something has been lost. Increasingly, so many people don’t understand what they were trying to do, …or thy don’t care. Instead of trying to understand their vision, they have focused on what this word or that phrase meant and how to manipulate it to their favor.”

        TC:I agree 110% with you here BL.Whether or not people want to admit it the facts remain clear.The loss of traditional christian values has led to the decline of our government.Greed, power, lust; the covetous persona of the politician knows no limits.The exercise of political power to reign-in material greed in todays society is sickening.

  20. Great Article G-I noticed in one of the pictures that a military guy had an Oath keeper patch. does the military allow them to wear these patches?

  21. .

  22. TexasChem says:

    Kow-towing to the Islamic ran UN Obama just threw Israel under the bus.He then lit the bus on fire.

  23. TexasChem says:

    Heres one for you old timer vets.My dad loves this song.
    If I can get it to post!

  24. TexasChem says:

    If the world were a bar then our federal government would be the angry drunk waving around a loaded gun!Sure, the other guys in the bar may be afraid of him, but they damn sure as hell don’t respect him.

    And so it begins…

  25. Hi Ya’ll 🙂

    Been busy today! Feel like a one legged fat man in a fast ass kickin contest 😆 Except I’m not fat or one legged.

    Thanks to Bottom Line on his comments, very well done and appreciated Sir!

    Flag, your comment did not appear on the computer I’m on, hope to see it at home tommorrow night.

    Kent, I totally understand your thinking and principles, and respect them. In many ways I wish your world (and Black Flag’s) were a way of life. Wars would not exist anymore, and I would like that.

    To all my fellow vets, I will wake in the morning with sorrow in my heart, as I have done for many Memorial Day’s. Unless those that have lost a loved one or a member of our fraternity, many will not understand. Nobody wants war, but it’s a part of human nature. If the world was that of Black Flag’s and Kent’s throughout history, we would not have a Memorial Day. But history is what it is, and if not not for those who sacrificed all, we may not be able to discuss the issues as we do here at SUFA. I would not have written this artical, if it were’nt for the past that we have no control of. I’m letting my remorse to lead me into a better direction, not just in life, but in being a part of changing the future, so that my Kids and Grandkids, and beyond, can live in peace and freedom.

    Peace to all my great friends here!


%d bloggers like this: