Oathkeepers baby

[bwlibertyman]

msnbc is going to talk about this. It should be on in about 2 mintutes. She said that libertarian are fired up. Make sure to tune in!

[Indy Vidual]

Thanks,
Was (is) the father even an Oathkeeper?
What position does he hold to make him one?

[wizardwatson]

This is a distraction.

Dead civilian babies in Afghanistan/Iraq > Safe libertarians baby in hands of state.

The movement should have its own agenda/priorities instead of ankle biting every popular news story that's related to the movements perceived (as opposed to actual) goals.

These distractions weaken an already weak movement.

[torchbearer]

This is a distraction.

Dead civilian babies in Afghanistan/Iraq > Safe libertarians baby in hands of state.

The movement should have its own agenda/priorities instead of ankle biting every popular news story that's related to the movements perceived (as opposed to actual) goals.

These distractions weaken an already weak movement.

all injustice should be stomped on, all the time.

[wizardwatson]

all injustice should be stomped on, all the time.

Surely.

But following every MSM story and flooding the BB with the "libertarian perspective" on said story is not doing that. It's just chirping to hear ourselves sing.

And this trend is 90% of what our threads are.

Sorry for negative-nancy post, but bitter medicine is about all I have these days.

[bwlibertyman]

This forum is about spreading liberty. When the state takes a baby or child that takes away liberty. I think we should stand up for people when these things happen. I know a lot of people on here care about the issue so I posted the update.

[wizardwatson]

This forum is about spreading liberty. When the state takes a baby or child that takes away liberty. I think we should stand up for people when these things happen. I know a lot of people on here care about the issue so I posted the update.

You're right. Again sorry for the negative post. It just seems that this is like the 3rd or 4th thread I've seen on this topic. The state seizes children quite frequently, it just seems we only care about it because the father was an oathkeeper.

[torchbearer]

You're right. Again sorry for the negative post. It just seems that this is like the 3rd or 4th thread I've seen on this topic. The state seizes children quite frequently, it just seems we only care about it because the father was an oathkeeper.

I've cared about this shit for some time, but people only pay attention when there is an incident that comes to social consciousness. that is why its important for it to be on tv.
if its not on tv, its not happening as far as our populace is concerned.

[squarepusher]

all injustice should be stomped on, all the time.

http://static.hlj.com/images/csp/csp25935.jpg

[Indy Vidual]

...we only care about it because the father was an oathkeeper.

Was (is) the father even an Oathkeeper?
What position does he hold to make him one?

[pcosmar]

They have no case. They are relying on character assassination.
They have been harassing them for 2 years because they have no case. This all started with the first husband (also a real winner) and the divorce.
I am not sure at this point if Irish wasn't the only one protecting her and the kids.

That all is irrelevant. The Oath Keepers were named. Officially. They have both the constitution and political capital. There is a lot wrong here. It is an opportunity .

You Defend the Constitution for Everyone, Regardless of Innocence or Guilt, Regardless of Virtue or Vice


Sadly, so dumbed down is the average American that many just cannot grasp these elemental concepts. In this case, they ask whether the parents are “guilty,” as if that would make it OK to list their political associations or gun owner status as evidence of why they are unfit parents. If people cannot understand why this cannot be allowed to happen, then how can we restore our Republic? That is why, regardless of whether the parents are guilty of any of the alleged abuse; the listing of their association with Oath Keepers is illegitimate and must be fought. And it will.

Either you defend the Constitution for everyone, or we may as well just scrap it and let government agencies and judges do whatever they want to those they deem bad, using whatever arbitrary “reasons” they want, like in some third world junta. The choice is yours. I hope to see you in New Hampshire, the “Live Free or Die” state on Thursday.

Stewart Rhodes
:cool:

[Krugerrand]

You're right. Again sorry for the negative post. It just seems that this is like the 3rd or 4th thread I've seen on this topic. The state seizes children quite frequently, it just seems we only care about it because the father was an oathkeeper.

Taking a child from a mother in the hospital is pretty dramatic and somewhat unique.

[ScoutsHonor]

It's inhuman.
It's tyranny sneering in our faces.

[wizardwatson]

Taking a child from a mother in the hospital is pretty dramatic and somewhat unique.

Well, that may be, but a Google news search turns up only about 6 or so articles. Prison Planet, Christian News, World Net Daily, etc. Not exactly up to Nancy Grace level. And yet we have a thread on RPF with over 1000 replies.

I'm just an observer, observing how this movement displays obvious herd tendencies towards things they consider "in the spotlight", when really they are barely news.

[Pericles]

Well, that may be, but a Google news search turns up only about 6 or so articles. Prison Planet, Christian News, World Net Daily, etc. Not exactly up to Nancy Grace level. And yet we have a thread on RPF with over 1000 replies.

I'm just an observer, observing how this movement displays obvious herd tendencies towards things they consider "in the spotlight", when really they are barely news.

Those intent on doing evil are probably not issuing press releases to get coverage on the network news.

It used to be the job of the press to watch that stuff, now the likes of us have to do it and post it on the NET - thus the "alternative press".

[wizardwatson]

Those intent on doing evil are probably not issuing press releases to get coverage on the network news.

It used to be the job of the press to watch that stuff, now the likes of us have to do it and post it on the NET - thus the "alternative press".

It is precisely the self-identification with serving a "cause" that I take issue with.

If I say this isn't "as" newsworthy as other things, those who self-identify with the "movement" say, "well we're the "alternative press."

If I say we aren't "as" organized as we should be, those same people say "well the movement is decentralized, top down structure and centralization is the way of the state."

If I say we need to "know" who's who and who's doing what in the movement, those people say "I don't want to give up my anonymity, I have a right to privacy."

Point is, everyone self-identifies with whatever archetype of the "movement" they can come up with at the moment to rationalize why they are doing "this thing" rather than something more important. For most people who are really just lurking the various liberty-flavored BB's, the "movement" is whatever they want it to be that fits their chosen course of action, because the movement in reality does not really exist in any form except an old mailing list from the RP '08 campaign.

This baby-snatching case is no more important to the liberty movement than the couple jet-skiing that got gunned down by mexican drug thugs, or the lady hostage who got blown up when the US military tried to save her, or the countless innocents that get blown up in military activity. In all cases its simply "criminal" injustice happening all around us.

I'm not against 1000 post threads, I just question what is it that fires people up about news stories so much? Why can't people get fired up about organizing in more concrete and permanent ways? Are we interested in organizing or are we addicted to "being part of the latest liberty fad"?

Anyway, it doesn't matter. This post thread will eventually go down the memory hole, and even if I hit a nerve with some reader or two, they'll think I'm taking a jab at them and simply ignore the points brought up. I'm just trying to point the finger at ourselves, but it seems to be a failing strategy even to point to failing strategy as a problem. I can only assume no one is genuinely interested in the answer.

[Bern]

you're right. Again sorry for the negative post. It just seems that this is like the 3rd or 4th thread i've seen on this topic. The state seizes children quite frequently, it just seems we only care about it because the father was an oathkeeper the state listed an affiliation with the oathkeepers as part of their justification for taking his child.

fify

[Pericles]

It is precisely the self-identification with serving a "cause" that I take issue with.

If I say this isn't "as" newsworthy as other things, those who self-identify with the "movement" say, "well we're the "alternative press."

If I say we aren't "as" organized as we should be, those same people say "well the movement is decentralized, top down structure and centralization is the way of the state."

If I say we need to "know" who's who and who's doing what in the movement, those people say "I don't want to give up my anonymity, I have a right to privacy."

Point is, everyone self-identifies with whatever archetype of the "movement" they can come up with at the moment to rationalize why they are doing "this thing" rather than something more important. For most people who are really just lurking the various liberty-flavored BB's, the "movement" is whatever they want it to be that fits their chosen course of action, because the movement in reality does not really exist in any form except an old mailing list from the RP '08 campaign.

This baby-snatching case is no more important to the liberty movement than the couple jet-skiing that got gunned down by mexican drug thugs, or the lady hostage who got blown up when the US military tried to save her, or the countless innocents that get blown up in military activity. In all cases its simply "criminal" injustice happening all around us.

I'm not against 1000 post threads, I just question what is it that fires people up about news stories so much? Why can't people get fired up about organizing in more concrete and permanent ways? Are we interested in organizing or are we addicted to "being part of the latest liberty fad"?

Anyway, it doesn't matter. This post thread will eventually go down the memory hole, and even if I hit a nerve with some reader or two, they'll think I'm taking a jab at them and simply ignore the points brought up. I'm just trying to point the finger at ourselves, but it seems to be a failing strategy even to point to failing strategy as a problem. I can only assume no one is genuinely interested in the answer.

Kind of like the Anne Frank story - there were thousands more cases just like her's in the process of murdering millions. What makes her story so special that almost every high school kid reads it?

Some case catch the sympathy of the group, and other more deserving cases don't. The free market decided.