Opinions/Editorials
See other Opinions/Editorials Articles
Title: Chuck Norris Warns of Rebellion, Martial Law if America's COVID Strategy Doesn't Change
Source:
Western Journal/WND
URL Source: https://www.westernjournal.com/chuc ... f_content=conservative-tribune
Published: Mar 27, 2020
Author: Carmine Sabia
Post Date: 2020-03-30 10:55:01 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 5510
Comments: 32
The nation is gripped with coronavirus panic, but there is also fear about what is going to happen to our freedoms and our economy once the crisis is over. This pandemic has taken its toll on the United States and that is not lost on conservative actor Chuck Norris, who published an Op-Ed for WND on Monday wondering how long it would be until we were under martial law. The actor said he believes in “being prudent and also being peaceful” but, he added, he had “tough questions” to ask. Norris said he was concerned by the growing lockdown orders and curfews being enforced by law enforcement limiting citizens’ movements. “If the need for citizen confinement grows, and the restrictions increase, where does it end? And what excessive burden are we then placing upon law enforcement to corral even half of Americans (150 million)?” he asked. TRENDING: Frmr Obamacare Chief Pushes Panic, Tells 360K People Hospital Is Out of Ventilators - It Wasn't “And if even the smallest transgression of confinement restrictions ends up being a misdemeanor, how will officials handle tens of millions of them?” Norris pointed out that if police are expected to enforce the curfews, they too could become stricken with coronavirus And if that were to happen, not only would the hospitals be overrun with police officers, but there would also be fewer people to enforce the lockdown. But what is more frightening, as Norris stated, is that if the lockdown lasts for five weeks or longer, citizens could fight back. “How long can we allow Americans, who are a freedom-loving people and patriots, to be under ‘lockdown’ in their own homes without working?” Norris asked. “Many scientists and specialists are even now calling the federal government to a five-week national lockdown? Do we expect the majority to simply comply? Will they have the resources and wherewithal to go the distance without resistance?” These are frightening questions, but the fact is that American citizens are used to being free and they are now being subjected to draconian restrictions on their liberties. State governments have taken control of the lives of millions of people, telling us where we are allowed to go, what time we have to be home and whose jobs are essential to the state. Normally, taking that kind of control of a nation would take a war, but no one fired a shot and we handed over all of our rights. Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, who you may remember from his promotion of ninth-month abortions or his blackface scandal, has closed churches in his state. Is there any American freedom more fundamental than the right to worship when and where we want to? No one is saying that some restrictions are not needed, but to many, it appears we have given the government too much power too quickly. Americans are playing along for now, but the question is how much longer are they going to allow these infringements to stand? And is the government going to “give” all of our rights back after the nation’s mayors and governors have spent a month acting as kings? That should never be a question we have to ask in America. But it may be the most important one. We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
Chuck's obviously suffering the latter stages of CTE from getting kicked in the head too many times during his career... He's starting to become a slobbering idiot, just like Cassius Clay & Clint Eastwood... probably Rocky Balboa, too
Chuck – Never fear for the Oath Keepers will be Near. Or will they? I have read nothing about the Oath Keepers in years. Have you – Deckard? Please let me know … I distinctly remember at the time that they were your glorious warriors united to protect us all from the immediately impending dastardly actions by the U.S. government when it was preparing to commit all nature of atrocities against we the citizens. You used to give me hell in those olden days for continuing to expose them for what they were and calling the attention to everyone that they had been labeled as one of the largest radical antigovernment groups in the U.S. at that time. Was it you who was spreading the hysteria about the Jade Shield Operation in Texas and how the Oath Keepers would protect us all? I think so … Ah, “those were the days my friend” – a different fear-mongering rumor from you each day. Wait … It’s the same thing you have continued to do throughout these many years – and what you are doing today … Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? And of course – Deckard also knows. And you can bet that he will continue to tell you – each and every day …
Nowhere does that term appear in the article. Chuck Norris wrote the article. Try to stay on topic gramps.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. Nowhere does that term appear in the article. Chuck Norris wrote the article. Try to stay on topic gramps. I was searching for something to save us from his dire prediction. It was then that I thought – Ah Ha – it was you who preached ever so long how the Oath Keepers made a declaration of orders they will not obey. And I remembered they would mobilize against such an imposition. Therefore, if it ever happens that “martial law” is declared – which I believe will not – as Chuck Norris “predicts” will happen during the forthcoming “rebellion” [all topics of discussion] – then will the Oath Keepers [staying on topic and tying into Chuck Norris’s article] refuse to obey all orders pertaining to that declaration of “martial law?” They apparently will – As they so state in other places and in their summation here: See – I definitely was on topic …
From Deckard's thread I did not conclude there was any mention of Oath Keepers. The inferred point of that thread reads here: Norris pointed out that if police are expected to enforce the curfews, they too could become stricken with coronavirus
The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
Thank you for taking time to inform me of the one thing you did not conclude from Deckard’s thread. In your apparent very detailed and comprehensive reading from Deckard’s, in which Deckard stated here that: While Deckard posted in the header that Carmine Sabia wrote the article. … were you not able to conclude that in reading this Deckard thread – one of a multitude of – Deckard’s threads – that Deckard quite often gets confused where he presents the wrong information or presents lies by others. And therefore from reading Deckard’s threads – one cannot always arrive at a proper conclusion. With conclusion being defined at merriam-webster.com as: In concluding your conclusion, you state: That of course was only one. Perhaps you overlooked a more imported stated – not inferred – point in the article which was the lead in premise: With premise being defined here as: I did follow the stated proposition: … with “another premise” which was also “inferred to follow” and “lead to a conclusion.” Now it is quite obvious – or it most definitely should be – that you came on this thread to chastise me and point out that I committed a wrong. Consequently, I now politely ask you to please tell me exactly how you feel I did that. Thank you …
Definitely not true at all. What I stated from the thread was what I believe the author (Norris) was trying to confer to the reader in that his concern about the officers getting this virus was of great concern. What becomes of society when the officers are in a hold due to their inability to perform their duties as they become seriously ill? You have got to come to the realization that this virus spares noone regardless of their social standing.
Goldilucky: Definitely not true at all. Okay – I can accept that. Furthermore, officers [police] are already getting this virus and more will continue to do so eah day – as also will be the States’ National Guard called up and the U.S. Army personnel from the Corps of Engineers. How much more under “Martial Law” – something I believe will not happen – can the virus be a threat than it is already” I will listen … Realizing that the summary is used for most important emphasis of a point, I am therefore going repost for you here the last four sentences in this article authored by Carmine Sabia and then ask questions. Now, after careful consideration, will you please tell me if martial law is the primary concern expressed or is Norris’ “concern about the officers getting this virus” the primary concern of this article? Then I will ask you again to explain to me why you felt me bringing up the Oath Keeps and their pledge to deal with martial law was uncalled for. Rspectfully …
The full op-ed by Norris makes no mention of it either. Will coronavirus lead to martial law? Gatlin is desperately trying to discredit Norris as well as the author who wrote about him. Why? Who knows - but it is SOP for the disinfo-bot Tater.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. Goldilucky: From Deckard's thread I did not conclude there was any mention of Oath Keepers. Deckard: The full op-ed by Norris makes no mention of it either. The full Op-Ed by Norris also makes absolutely no mention either of what she said: Nowhere in the full Op-Ed by Norris did he point that out. Did it, Deckard? And I tried to point out to her that Norris did not point that out and remind her that what the full Op-Ed mentioned throughout its entirety was merely “martial law.” What Gatlin is “desperately” trying to do is find out if the Oath Keepers are still active to “protect us.” And I figured if anyone would know, then you would. I asked that of you because I remember that you once knew all about them and fully supported their strong stance and willingness to fight against “martial law.” So, I ask: Is it as that we should “never fear for the Oath Keppers will be near” or not? And as I said to you, “I have read nothing about the Oath Keepers in years” and I ask you again: “Have you.” I ask this in no way to “desperately discredit Norris as well as the author who wrote about him.” Consequently, Deckard, I continue to ask if you know if we can rest assuredly that the Other Keepers will be here to fight against martial law as you once so desperately tried to assure everyone that they would? Is the reason you will not answer the question that you don’t you know if they are still around, or is it that you are too embarrassed to answer or find out? Or “all of the above?” Why do you find it so difficult to address my desperate cry out for assistance to find out who will protect us against the martial law that Chuck Norris sees may be looming in a not too distant future? A fear that he so strongly holds in that he had to write an Op-Ed on WND to share with everyone. So, sport, if Chuck Norris fears it – then … Open Question: Respectfully … BTW – Good morning to you both.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. What Gatlin is “desperately” trying to do is find out if the Oath Keepers are still active to “protect us.” And I figured if anyone would know, then you would. Gatlin could easily look up that information on his own. We all know that.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. So says the leftist baby murderer. Sick.
They are right that statement. Those who disagree are like red coats.
Gatlin could easily look up that information on his own. We all know that. Gatlin know this. But Gatlin would find no humor in doing that on his own whereas he would fail to continually point out that you support this anti-government American organization associated with the militia movement and once viewed them as your almighty Savior. Respectfully …
That is an easy one. From Deckards link to Norris's actual article. He says "most critical" So it is primarily about martial law. And most critical of all, as I'm sure it is being pondered in the rooms of the White House as well as the corridors of Congress: How long can we allow Americans, who are a freedom-loving people and patriots, to be under "lockdown" in their own homes without working? Many scientists and specialists are even now calling the federal government to a five-week national lockdown? Do we expect the majority to simply comply? Will they have the resources and wherewithal to go the distance without resistance? Do we not eventually expect small rebellions or even massive ones to occur in the not-so-distant future if growing requests for lockdowns and deprivations persist? And what will it take for state officials to tip over the morphing milieu of chaos to create the need themselves (based upon the pretense of protection) to call on military intervention and enact martial law? Does that really sound so far-fetched when freedom-loving Americans across our union are being asked to sacrifice their wages, their welfare and stay confined to their homes for weeks on end?
They are right that statement. Those who disagree are like red coats. Extracted as a complete “stand alone” statement – They are totally right in that statement. I have no absolutely disagreement. Ergo, I am not “like a red coat” – Correct? Respectfully …
Of course, to you they are anti-government - to you and the SPLC. Any person or group who stands for the Constitution must be a suspected terrorist hell-bent on taking over the country, right? Groups like Oathkeepers exist thanks in part due to cowering sheep like you. As far as viewing them as my almighty Savior...Just more of your delusional bullshit.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. Well if you have absolutely no disagreement then the question is answered.
Stone: That is an easy one. From Deckards link to Norris's actual article. He says "most critical" So it is primarily about martial law. Thank you – That is what started this whole exchange when I tried to explain this to goldilucky. It’s all about martial law and not the cops getting the virus. Do we not eventually expect small rebellions or even massive ones to occur in the not-so-distant future if growing requests for lockdowns and deprivations persist? And what will it take for state officials to tip over the morphing milieu of chaos to create the need themselves (based upon the pretense of protection) to call on military intervention and enact martial law? Does that really sound so far-fetched when freedom-loving Americans across our union are being asked to sacrifice their wages, their welfare and stay confined to their homes for weeks on end? “… to call on military intervention and enact martial law? Does that really sound so far-fetched …” It does to me. Military intervention is now already occurring in numerous instances across the country without “enacting martial law.” There is evidence of this everyplace. Martial law has not been needed for military intervention. I am in agreement with Marco Rubio on this. Does this make me a “red coat?” 😊 Respectfully
WRONG …
Well if you have absolutely no disagreement then the question is answered. Whew. Thanks …
You have a great day ... I am going to now become busy ... Later ...
Those are YOUR words from Post #3. When you tried t kick my ass for bringing up the Oath Keepers. I just substituted SPLC for Oath Keepers and fed them back to you. And now here you go bringing up the SPLC which again, appears no place in the article. Touché – A word “used as an acknowledgment during a discussion of a good or clever point made at one's expense by another person.” Moving along … Where have I ever said that the Oath Keepers are anti-government – Show me. You cannot – you definitely cannot because I have never stated that. You are of course right about the SPLC – Only saying that the Oath Keepers are anti-government is probably the nicest thing the SPLC could ever say about them. The ADL has equally as bad thngs to say about the Oath Keepers. But who cares what these slimy groups have to say about anything – Anybody? Not me! But … Let’s take a moment and see what the Fort Worth Star-Telegram has to say about the Oath Keeps. Specifically one of the members. Now mind you, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram is not some asinine SPLC or ADL shooting of at the mouth. The Star-Telegram in an article published on 2/28/2020 had this to say about the Oath Keepers – Shocking – Absolutely shocking … There other damning stories out there …
Then I will ask you again to explain to me why you felt me bringing up the Oath Keeps and their pledge to deal with martial law was uncalled for. From this article I sensed the primary concern was martial law. I never said anything about bringing up the oath keepers as being uncalled for. Who are the real oath keepers anyways? When the President shuts down the country due to dire situations like this, he has the power to designate such powers and duties to the governors of the United States to deploy troops (National Guards) to keep the peace.
Your quote: You used to give me hell in those olden days for continuing to expose them for what they were and calling the attention to everyone that they had been labeled as one of the largest radical antigovernment groups in the U.S. at that time. ***** Perhaps the most preposterous accusation is calling the Oath Keepers “anti-government”. When the organization was founded, only actual Oath Takers (law enforcement & military) were considered full members. By their very nature, the body of Oath Keepers was made up of men and women who still are or were EMPLOYED BY THE GOVERNMENT. I am the current Constable of Hood County, Texas – Precinct 2. I am a public servant OF the government. Neither I, nor the Oath Keepers as an organization, are anti-government. The U.S. Constitution, the document this organization holds as sacrosanct, is the foundational document of our GOVERNMENT. The definition of Militia, according to Webster’s Dictionary is: a. a part of the organized armed forces of a country liable to call only in emergency b. a body of citizens organized for military service 2. the whole body of able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to military service The Oath Keepers is not a militia organization. Most members of the organization could be considered as potential members of the Constitutional Militia, but it has no association to their membership in Oath Keepers. All able-bodied male citizens in our country make up the Constitutional Militia, to be called upon in times of need. There are also many members of Oath Keepers that would NOT be considered potential members of the Constitutional Militia, because we welcome many disabled veterans and peace officers among our membership. While the Oath Keepers, as an organization, is not part of the Militia, we don’t consider a legally organized militia as a negative. Militia is not a bad word. The founders considered the Militia as an integral part of the defensive structure of our nation. Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. You must be clear when you state … … that it was not I who made that statement. And I have absolutely no reason to support or condemn the article published in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. Furthermore, I must say that your “copy and paste” benign effort to defend the Oath Keepers was actually “Piss-Poor” – It did nothing to support their cause and performed no purpose. However, some would say that you deserve a “thank you” for your “futile” attempt. I will still get back to you with a follow-up on the other post when I can find time – Be patient. Respectfully …
Merely injecting some facts into the mix. I will still get back to you with a follow-up on the other post when I can find time – Be patient. No thanks - you've completely taken over the thread with your own agenda.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. I was reading back through you post here and while doing so, some questions came to mind. I will now share those questions with you in hopes of getting some sincere and factual answers. You posted: 1a. a part of the organized armed forces of a country liable to call only in emergency. I find that: You posted: 1b. a body of citizens organized for military service There are different types of military service. Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force and Coast Guard are the armed forces of the United States. Tell me, please – which part of these “armed forces” is the Oath Keepers organization a part of. You posted: 2. the whole body of able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to military service The Selective Service System is authorized by the Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution which says Congress … Under current law, all male U.S. citizens between 18–25 (inclusive) years of age are required to register within 30 days of their 18th birthday. In addition, certain categories of non-US citizen men between 18–25 living in the United States must register, particularly permanent residents, refugees, asylum seekers, and illegal immigrants.[2] Foreign men lawfully present in the United States who are non-immigrants, such as international students, visitors, and diplomats, are not required to register, so long as they remain in that status. [2] If an alien's non-immigrant status lapses while he is in the United States, he will be required to register.[43] Failure to register as required is grounds for denying a petition for U.S. citizenship. Currently, citizens who are as young as 17 years and 3 months old can pre-register so when they turn 18 their information will automatically be added into the system. The current Act states: “Under current law, all male U.S. citizens between 18–25 (inclusive) years of age are required …” Tell me, please – That the Oath Keepers organization is “composed [only of] the whole body of able-bodied male citizens [declared by law all male U.S. citizens between 18–25 (inclusive) years of age] as being subject to call to military service. Maybe you neo should stop … Respectfully …
Merely injecting some facts into the mix. See where I injected those so-called facts of your in my Post #30 … Respectfully …
No thanks - you've completely taken over the thread with your own agenda. You should feel to offer your most sincere gratitude to me for that – For keeping this thread alive since no one else seems to have much interest in “Chuck Norris waring of rebellion and martial law” or any desire to keep it open. Respectfully …
#2. To: Deckard (#0)
(Edited)
#3. To: Gatlin (#2)
Oath Keepers
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#4. To: Deckard (#3)
(Edited)
Oath Keepers - This old gramps definitely “stayed on topic.” The topic by Chuck Norris: “Martial Law” is coming during an impending “rebellion.” 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 Keepers.Source So …
#5. To: Gatlin (#2)
#6. To: Deckard (#0)
#7. To: goldilucky (#5)
(Edited)
Goldilucky: From Deckard's thread I did not conclude there was any mention of Oath Keepers. Chuck Norris wrote the article. Author: Carmine Sabia a reasoned judgment. goldilucky: The inferred point of that thread reads here:
Norris pointed out that if police are expected to enforce the curfews, they too could become stricken with coronavirus The nation is gripped with coronavirus panic, but there is also fear about what is going to happen to our freedoms … A proposition from which another is inferred or follows as a conclusion. The nation is gripped with coronavirus panic, but there is also fear about what is going to happen to our freedoms …
#8. To: Gatlin (#7)
(Edited)
Now it is quite obvious – or it most definitely should be – that you came on this thread to chastise me and point out that I committed a wrong.
#9. To: goldilucky (#8)
(Edited)
Gatlin: Now it is quite obvious – or it most definitely should be – that you came on this thread to chastise me and point out that I committed a wrong.
Goldilucky: What I stated from the thread was what I believe the author (Norris) was trying to confer to the reader in that his concern about the officers getting this virus was of great concern.
I have posted at least three times that Norris is not the author of the article that is the subject of this thread. I will now again repeat: Carmine Sabia was the author of this article. She provided a link to an Op-Ed that Norris has published in WND. This article by Carmine Sabia is about Rebellion and Martial Law [The Title]. Goldilucky: What becomes of society when the officers are in a hold due to their inability to perform their duties as they become seriously ill?
Since you posed the question, you obviously have considered a possible answer. So, I probably have no different one than you arrived at. Goldilucky: You have got to come to the realization that this virus spares none regardless of their social standing.
You are reaching extremely far out there with your supposition here, Lady – Whatever makes you think I have not? Is there any American freedom more fundamental than the right to worship when and where we want to?
No one is saying that some restrictions are not needed, but to many, it appears we have given the government too much power too quickly.
Americans are playing along for now, but the question is how much longer are they going to allow these infringements to stand?
And is the government going to “give” all of our rights back after the nation’s mayors and governors have spent a month acting as kings?
That should never be a question we have to ask in America.
But it may be the most important one.
#10. To: goldilucky (#5)
From Deckard's thread I did not conclude there was any mention of Oath Keepers.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#11. To: Deckard, goldilucky (#10)
(Edited)
Norris pointed out that if police are expected to enforce the curfews, they too could become stricken with coronavirus Gatlin is desperately trying to discredit Norris as well as the author who wrote about him. Does anyone know if the Oath Keepers are still active and ready to perform their declared duty?
#12. To: goldilucky (#10)
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#13. To: Gatlin, goldilucky (#11)
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#14. To: Willie Green (#1)
Chuck's obviously suffering the latter stages
#15. To: Gatlin (#4)
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.
#16. To: Deckard (#13)
What Gatlin is “desperately” trying to do is find out if the Oath Keepers are still active to “protect us.” And I figured if anyone would know, then you would. A person who saves someone or something (especially a country or cause) from danger, and who is regarded with the veneration of a religious figure.
#17. To: Gatlin (#9)
Now, after careful consideration, will you please tell me if martial law is the primary concern expressed or is Norris’ “concern about the officers getting this virus” the primary concern of this article?
#18. To: A K A Stone (#15)
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.
#19. To: Gatlin (#16)
But Gatlin would find no humor in doing that on his own whereas he would fail to continually point out that you support this anti-government American organization associated with the militia movement and once viewed them as your almighty Savior.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#20. To: Gatlin (#18)
I have no absolutely disagreement. Ergo, I am not “like a red coat” – Correct?
#21. To: A K A Stone (#17)
Gatlin: Now, after careful consideration, will you please tell me if martial law is the primary concern expressed or is Norris’ “concern about the officers getting this virus” the primary concern of this article? And most critical of all, as I'm sure it is being pondered in the rooms of the White House as well as the corridors of Congress: How long can we allow Americans, who are a freedom-loving people and patriots, to be under "lockdown" in their own homes without working? Many scientists and specialists are even now calling the federal government to a five-week national lockdown? Do we expect the majority to simply comply? Will they have the resources and wherewithal to go the distance without resistance? On Monday, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio tweeted, albeit with a spelling error, requesting everyone stop sharing misinformation about the use of martial law to maintain stability in this ongoing crisis. He wrote, “Please stop spreading stupid rumors about marshall law. COMPLETELY FALSE. We will continue to see closings & restrictions on hours of non-essential businesses in certain cities & states. But that is NOT marshall law.”
#22. To: Deckard (#19)
Any person or group who stands for the Constitution must be a suspected terrorist hell-bent on taking over the country, right?
#23. To: A K A Stone (#20)
(Edited)
I have no absolutely disagreement. Ergo, I am not “like a red coat” – Correct? 
#24. To: A K A Stone (#23)
#25. To: Deckard (#19)
(Edited)
… and the SPLC.
Nowhere does that term appear in the article. Chuck Norris wrote the article.
Try to stay on topic … Of course, to you they [the Oath Keepers] are anti-government - to you and the SPLC. The Fort Worth Star- Telegram is a large U.S. daily newspaper serving Fort Worth and Tarrant County, the western half of the North Texas area known as the Metroplex. It is owned by The McClatchy Company. The Star-Telegram’s circulation area is the Fort Worth/Arlington metro area (four counties) and 14 surrounding counties. The newspaper's primary market is the four-county Fort Worth/Arlington metro area, as well as the Dallas and Fort Worth suburb of Grand Prairie. The Fort Worth/Arlington metro area is the western part of the fourth-largest U.S. metropolitan area, the Dallas/Fort Worth/Arlington Combined Statistical Area. Fort Worth/Arlington ranks 29th most populous as a metro area. A paranoid militia [Oath Keepers] infiltrating Texas police is bent on rebellion, ‘ready to rise up’ –
#26. To: Gatlin (#9)
Now, after careful consideration, will you please tell me if martial law is the primary concern expressed or is Norris’ “concern about the officers getting this virus” the primary concern of this article?
#27. To: Gatlin (#25)
(Edited)
Where have I ever said that the Oath Keepers are anti-government – Show me. You cannot – you definitely cannot because I have never stated that. You are of course right about the SPLC – Only saying that the Oath Keepers are anti-
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#28. To: Deckard (#27)
(Edited)
Perhaps the most preposterous accusation is calling the Oath Keepers “anti- government”.
#29. To: Gatlin (#28)
Furthermore, I must say that your “copy and paste” benign effort to defend the Oath Keepers
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#30. To: Deckard (#27)
The definition of Militia, according to Webster’s Dictionary is:
The Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force and Coast Guard are the armed forces of the United States. So tell me, please – which part of these “armed forces” is the Oath Keepers organization a part of.
The definition of Militia, according to Webster’s Dictionary is:
The definition of Militia, according to Webster’s Dictionary is:
"shall have Power To ... provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union;" The Selective Service Act is the law which established the Selective Service System under these provisions.
#31. To: Deckard (#29)
Furthermore, I must say that your “copy and paste” benign effort to defend the Oath Keepers
#32. To: Deckard (#29)
I will still get back to you with a follow-up on the other post when I can find time – Be patient.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]