Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Yes, I know Oath Keepers has withdrawn from the RTC rally. But let's all just take a breath.

I first heard about it in a crowing email from a LaRouchie some days ago. Apparently he had an "in" on the OK board. I rather suspect that the board may have been stampeded by the LaRouchie assault on me. Time will tell. However, I didn't believe it then and asked for confirmation from OK. After some delay, it was confirmed.

A few points bear repeating.

First, the Restore the Constitution rally is not "my" event. I am not the "organizer." To say so, as others have, is a bald-faced lie (a lot of that going around these days). When asked by Daniel Almond I agreed to speak at the rally.

Second, I am not a member of Oath Keepers (despite other bald-faced lies to the contrary). Oath Keepers is not a militia. Oath Keepers is not, strictly speaking, an advocate of the concept of the Three Percent. Oath Keepers has its own mission. If it believes it is consistent with that mission to withdraw from previously-promised participation in the RTC rally, it is well within its rights to do so and I will have no comment upon that until after the rally. Of course, it is also well within the rights of OK membership to judge after 19 April whether it was a wise and principled decision. I rather suspect that whether Stewart Rhodes speaks or not will be immaterial to the many Oath Keepers who will still attend regardless of the brouhaha.

Third, the LaRouchies are specialists in division and promoting factionalism. They've been doing so for nigh onto fifty years now. It is what they do and who they are. It is no shame that many have not heard of these sidewalk-crack excrescences. Only those experienced with the various collectivisms have had any reason to pay attention to this cult of personality of lying loons. But they only gain their victory if we dance to their lying tune.

Thus, I will not be sucked into playing the LaRouchies' game with Oath Keepers. And, I would recommend, neither should you. Words said now in heat will not be able to be retracted later on. And anything you have to say now will not lack potency if held onto for a later time. A fellow I respect wrote this to me this morning:

If (my dad) was still around, he would say that the enemy is very wily and skilled at dividing us, and he would be able to sort out the different missions of OK and SSI/WRSA. They (the enemy) didn't cause this, but you know they will take advantage of it. We fight a perception war if nothing else. This is giving the enemy a full magazine.

So, let's recap shall we? I am not the organizer of the event, merely a speaker. Daniel Almond is the principal organizer. I suggest that anyone who has any questions about the rally contact him at Reports I have received indicate that the coordination with the US Park Police is excellent and proceeding on track. This will not be the bloody confrontation that our enemies -- and some of our erstwhile "friends" (see my post elsewhere on Walter Reddy) -- have been claiming.

It is within OK's right to withdraw. History and their membership shall judge if this was correct, but I, for now, will not because it would play into the LaRouchies' (and our other more serious enemy's) lying hands.

I'm sure it is cold comfort to Daniel, Tom and the other organizers of this rally that they must be over the target because the flak is intense. But all that means is that we stay on course and complete the mission. Nothing else matters.



Anonymous said...

"But all that means is that we stay on course and complete the mission. Nothing else matters."

Well said, sir. Well Said.

Up the Republic!

Jay said...

Americans have got to get savvy and wily, or else we will continue to get t-boned by these kind of attacks. We also need to develop a long memory, so people like Newt Gingrich and Dick Armey can't reemerge 15 years later and reinvent themselves.

Concerned American said...


Anonymous said...

Whether “LaRouchie had an "in" on the OK board” or not, is an excuse. Nothing more, nothing less.

“Oath Keepers has its own mission.”

True. I have several friends that are Oath Keepers. Some were my father's, some I have made in my lifetime. I have spoken with them over the last couple of days, after they heard the rumor, which has now turned out to be truth, that the Oath Keepers would not be “officially” attending the rally. Every one, to a man, and one woman, has expressed their disgust of this fact to me. While it may be within the Oath Keepers leadership’s right to withdraw from the rally, the leaders of Oath Keepers do not speak for all their members. Thankfully. But what it does say of their leadership to their members is this: we will not support you.

“...the LaRouchies are specialists in division and promoting factionalism.”

True, and I’m shaking my head sadly at this. The Oath Keepers let themselves be divided. We cannot be divided unless we ALLOW ourselves to be divided. When leaders decide to do what is in THEIR best interests, rather that that which is in the best interests of those they represent, it is called self interests. Should the OK leadership continue to do this they will not stand much longer as an organization. One year in and this?

“...they only gain their victory if we dance to their lying tune.”

True. And it appears they did gain this time, as the OK leadership bowed to them.

“Thus, I will not be sucked into playing the LaRouchies' game with Oath Keepers.” That’s good to hear, Mike. Very good to hear.

“History and their membership shall judge if this was correct, but I, for now, will not because it would play into the LaRouchies' (and our other more serious enemy's) lying hands.”

Men are judged by their peers. And I’m not playing into the LaRouchies lying hands, which indeed they are lying hands. The OK leadership didn’t play into their hands either; they gave them the damn ball. Oath Keepers has done much good work in a year, but at their first real skirmish they do this?

“I'm sure it is cold comfort to Daniel, Tom and the other organizers of this rally that they must be over the target because the flak is intense. But all that means is that we stay on course and complete the mission. Nothing else matters.”

They are indeed seeing intense flak. And I am sure that they will stay on course and stand upon the courage of our convictions, unlike some. As will I, as will many. Leaders of men are far less important than men that choose to be leaders.

My Father was an Oath Keeper. 101st Airborne Screaming Eagles, 2/502nd, Companies A&C, '64-'66. He fought in several battles, one being Operation Hawthorne, after volunteering to come off orders to go home. He lost many a friend during that battle. Many. He’d have called this a pussy move. A pussy move by Generals that had never fought a battle. And he’d have been right. I call it a pussy move, too.



julian 3 said...

Well stated with wisdom and graciousness, as always.

I certainly don't harbor any anger at OK, although I disagree with the decision; to me, the sight of a few hundred OKs would have been that much more affirmation of the diverse and universal spread of the message and the commitment of the People to the Constitution and the Republic. Whether I will renew membership when that time rolls around, I do not know. But I know that if I WERE able to be at the event, I would be there regardless; if asked to leave my OK tabs / hat / whatever at home I would comply and simply wear whatever I was planning, in a 'non-OK' format, i.e., golf shirt & slacks, jeans and T-shirt, dress slacks and jacket or Nam era BDUs and boonie... but I would be there first and foremost as a free citizen.
My thinking is that this event is going to speak to a lot of people, and formal participation in it would be a declaration and public commitment writ large as Hancock's signature ( John, not Carlos) , but that is my own opinion. Either way, a Sipsey Street Irregular I will remain, true to God, Country and Code of Honor.
Up the Republic indeed, and Semper Fi.

Temnota said...

I'm very curious about the "secret intel" the OK board has regarding the RTC rally. It seems to have something to do with militias and the way OK is perceived by the military. I have no doubt they're doing what they feel is right, but this "I've got a secret" crap isn't helping anyone. It just gets everyone involved in this looking sideways at everyone else and wondering if there's something they ought to know.

Mr. Vanderboegh, can you please ask your British superiors to ferret this intel out for us?

Anonymous said...

julian 3, I don't harbor any anger against any Oath Keeper. Thank you for your service.

I don't harbor any anger against the leadership of OK. Only disgust.



Dan Galena said...

I myself am disgusted with Oath Keepers as an organization. Their state group moderators (PA) have banned paying members (myself) from the state group simply because I expressed disagreement with OK's decision to thumb their nose at the VA event. Oath Keepers has a Board member who uses TWO different names at Oath Keepers website. Isn't that an interesting phenomena ? A board member who attacks paying dues members and uses multiple names to do so ?

It is my belief there is something radically wrong with Rhodes and the Board of OK. Most of the members are sincere and America loving LE/MIL people, current and former.

Rhodes and his inner circle have done no good with their unexplained (other than rhetoric)decision to pull out of the march in VA.

Oath Keepers has a serious credibility issue in my opinion.

Dan G

Anonymous said...

Oath Keepers have and will continue to have my full respect. Their mission is a crtitical one after many of the details have been brought to light post Katrina.


Anonymous said...

I just read OathKeepers stance on the Rally.

Read it at the above link for yourself.

Consider your brand of protest is near bordering on the level of the Irish Republican Army. (IRA)

You guys would do better to consider the Oathkeepers of which I belong as your "Sinn Féin".

No matter how upset you guys are about Oathkeepers stance on the issue our wish is for your success and we are behind you both heart and soul. Oathkeepers will be there among you.

Keep it peaceful guys and be warry of provocateers.

CorbinKale said...

After due consideration, I believe that the pullout by Oath Keepers was done because of official DoD policies. Since the goal of Oath Keepers is to reach members of the military regarding their Oath, having contact with Oath Keepers prohibited by the military defeats the whole purpose of OK.

I am not 'happy' about the decision, but my tactical brain says this was the correct move. Time will tell. I continue to support the Oath Keeper mission.

Dakota said...

I guess it is always good to know where and when leadership "caves" in to fly by night experts and intel guru's. This is a feather in the hat of our enemies and OK has handed it to them on a silver platter.

Does this mean that leadership can be depended on to "cave" when we are being shipped off or killed too? Believe me .... we either "hang together" or we hang ourselves.

I can only assume that they were a little overwhelmed at shaking their fist in the tyrants face, and the possible ramifications.

Anonymous said...

CorbinKale said...
my tactical brain says this was the correct move. Time will tell. I continue to support the Oath Keeper mission.

Exactly my earlier point.

You guys are thinking on a tactical level. OathKeepers has to think strategically.

suek said...

>> You guys are thinking on a tactical level. OathKeepers has to think strategically.>>

I'm not qualified to judge the above, but without doubt, there are those who intend harm to any who plan resistance to their Progressive agenda. They won't - can't - fight an open cause, but they'll certainly infiltrate and cause harm. That's what they do. Tea Partiers certainly are not on the same level of "danger" to them, but they still intend to infiltrate and smear. One thing they're not counting on with the TPers is that those attending are the same ones who's opinion they'll try to sway, but they won't be able to since those folks will have actually been there. OK doesn't have that same protection.

J. Croft said...

Why would you-who regularly twits the ATF-give a damn about a 20 member fringe cult and what they have to say?

Stewart Rhodes has shown a pattern of backstabbing-from July4Patriot who was just acquitted of the grenade launcer charge today:

Now he heard some "threats" and decided to withdraw HIS organization from standing side by side with Patriotic Americans. Believe me there's been a LOT of rage at Stewart Rhodes for this but that's just the tip of that iceberg. The "man" has stifled free speech and effective political action with his cronies, has taken the movement started by July4Patriot and ran it into the ground. Did the same helping Ron Paul with his faux 2008 campaign.

You enable the Oath Traitors in our midst with your endorsement. Shameful. See the situation for what it is; Oath Keepers needs to be cleaned up or the Oath Keeper movement needs to cast off Stewart Rhodes and his fed issued harness so we can actually get somewhere.

J. Croft

Unknown said...

MR. M. V.
A brave man brings his fears under control and a coward submits to them we committed to bring our gov't back under the constitution and already we have rats abandoning the cause due to potential altercations. I would rather get rid of the paper tigers now than have them slowing us down.

Boston T. Party said...

While I can understand why the RTC rally would have loved to have an official Oath Keeper presence, I think that Stewart made the right call.

Last month, I offered Stewart the generic advice to "Keep Oath Keepers pure, and unentangled with all other groups".

Associations are risky, and the last thing OK needs is to be tarbabied with something outside of its mission.

"However, because of published statements by some participants in the upcoming Virginia rally, Oath Keepers as an organization feels that a confrontational stance, such as has been published, places this event, in public perception, outside the terms of our stated and published mission. The mission of Oath Keepers is not to confront the government. Instead, our mission is to reach out to people within government . . . "

Its nonconfrontational stance -- while annoying to some activists -- remains essential to OK's appeal to active duty personnel.

Besides, they don't need to join any OC or 2A or RTC rally for their mission.

I respectfully yet strongly urge folks to leave Oath Keepers be to
do what they are (singularly) accomplishing so well. Anything else is divisive.

Jay Heathman said...

Well, now that K Royce T Party has spoken, we all know what to do.
Just like Moses bringing down the stones, eh?

Anonymous said...

From my uninformed perspective (I didn't even read the OK statement on the matter) as a rank-and-file Irregular and associate OK, I suspect this OK move is a good one.

OK needs to stay clean enough in the eyes of the DoD, and reasonable enough in the eyes of the bulk of its target audience, if it is to grow and become effective. It would be unwise to try undoing the years of school/military programming in one go, for the patient may recoil in confusion and apprehension. Baby steps.

Secondly, I'd like to think this rabbit hole goes deeper than the superficial "OK withdraws from rally".


Anonymous said...

The mission of Oath Keepers is not to confront the government. [...] Confronting the government is not included in the Oath Keepers stated and published mission and as an educational organization focused on the current serving, Oath Keepers refrains from confrontation in deed and rhetoric.

OK said it, why don't you believe it? OK is the new NRA. Sunshine patriots.

Anonymous said...

No need to apologize, moving forward...

Dedicated_Dad said...

While my initial reaction was also negative, after some consideration I understand why they're doing what they're doing - and it's probably a good decision both strategically and tactically.

While I admire the zeal of some of our brethren, we must recognize the different roles played by different people and groups.

In any real fighting organization there are many different roles to play. We can't all be SpecOps or strike troops - someone has to make the food, drive the trucks, push the paper and manage public opinion - and all contribute to the mission at hand.

The same goes for our mission here.

Mike's role is to stick his finger in the tyrants' eyes at every opportunity - a true provocateur.

Our collective role on Monday is to shake our guns in the tyrants' faces - an open show of force.

OK's role is much more subtle, and on a psychological and moral level. To be effective, they can't be seen as "radical" by their target group.

As has been said elsewhere, if they're banned by DOD they're done.

They have not opposed the event(s), they haven't called for their boycott, they haven't done anything but decide it was not in the best interest of their mission to participate.

Ultimately their place is to quietly infiltrate the enemy's forces. They can't do this without some finesse.


Anonymous said...

The message is: Squeaky clean. Sanitary. Bleached.

As if the rally is somehow dirty, filthy … and … contagious. As if … it will rub off on OK’ers and SOIL them with unsanitary organisms. As if the rally is something to be … inoculated against.

“The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended.”

Boston T. Party said...

About all the shrill and silly cries of “Cowards!”:

Let such people begin, from scratch, their own national organization and lead it perfectly through shark-infested waters before they deem themselves competent to judge those who have. (insert lone cricket sound amongst the silence here)

Those of you who feel that OK has somehow detracted from the RTC rally, feel free to take up the slack with your own inestimable presence.

OK does not have to be involved in every (or any) liberty event. What it does is sufficient unto itself. And, if any freedom-oriented org must proceed cautiously, it is Oath Keepers. I'm amazed this isn't more obvious to some commenters here.

While I agree that it may have been (retrospectively) unwise to have originally agreed to attend, I'm sure that the OK Board won't repeat the mistake. ;)

Anonymous said...

OK ... I admit it. Sometimes I am slow.

But just how in the hell is exercising your Right to keep and bear arms ... CONFRONTATIONAL?!

Oh. I get it. It is "confrontational" when the government does not like you exercising your Rights.

Well gosh darn-it! I guess OK'ers needs to stop exercising their ... uh ... er ... the constitution!

Just have some fed puss leak that something is "confrontational" and will be used to "slander" OK'ers ... and they got OK'ers by the balls...