Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Right-Wing Extremist Group on Active Military Duty?

By Rob Waters, Southern Poverty Law Center. Posted October 26, 2009.


Extremists continue to get free military training in the U.S. armed forces.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
What if People Actually Treated Religion as Just a Metaphor (Like Trekkies and Secular Jews)?
Greta Christina

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Why Can't Prosecutors Even Come Close to Taking Down Wall Street Thugs?
Sam Pizzigati

DrugReporter:
When It’s Crunch Time at College, Students Turn to Adderall
Erik Hayden

Environment:
Is Obama's Latest Agriculture Nominee a Textbook Pesticide-Pusher?
Kate Sheppard

Food:
8 Steps Obama Could Take to Save Food
Robyn O'Brien

Health and Wellness:
Pharmaceutical Giant Paid $500,000 to Psychiatrist Who Used Chicago's Poor as Guinea Pigs
Christina Jewett and Sam Roe

Immigration:
Organizers Fire up Grassroots for Immigration Reform Fight Ahead
Marcelo Ballve

Media and Technology:
Maddow: Anti-Muslim 'McCarthyism' Making Us Less Safe
David Edwards

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
New Right-Wing Craze: Using Bible Quote to Pray That Obama’s 'Days Be Few'
Amanda Terkel

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Hey Guys, Don't Want Kids? A Vascetomy Is Probably the Way to Go
Anna Clark

Rights and Liberties:
Economic Crisis Is Getting Bloody -- Violent Deaths Are Now Following Evictions, Foreclosures and Job Losses
Nick Turse

Sex and Relationships:
How Abstinence-Only Programs Perpetuate Dangerous Stereotypes
Martha Kempner

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Poseidon's Financial Shell Game: Why Is a Private Desalination Plant Asking for Public Money?
Peter Gleick

World:
Reagan Didn't End the Cold War -- Leftist Intellectuals Did
Stephen Zunes

More stories by Rob Waters

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Oath Keepers, the militia/“Patriot” extremist group made up of law enforcement officers, military personnel and veterans, has posted a photo on its site showing (it says) “an active duty Oath Keeper in Mosul, Iraq” wearing two Velcro-attached “tabs” or patches, one saying “Oath Keeper” and the other “Three percent.” The flag patch beneath them is also an insignia of the “Three Percenters,” an informal alliance of hard-line gun owners.

The Oath Keepers figured prominently in a recent special report by the Southern Poverty Law Center on the resurgence of the antigovernment militia movement. The report described the group as “a particularly worrisome example of the Patriot revival.” Oath Keepers is fully on board with all the standard right-wing conspiracy theories, as evidenced by its official list of 10 “Orders We Will Not Obey,” in which it vows to resist any government efforts to “disarm the American people” or turn cities into “giant concentration camps.”

In July, the SPLC also presented Congress with growing evidence that extremists are infiltrating the U.S. military and urged Congress and the military to take steps to ensure that the armed forces are not inadvertently training future domestic terrorists.

A spokesman for the Defense Department, Lt. Col. Les Melnyk, confirmed that the uniform shown in the photo is an Army combat uniform, the kind worn by soldiers in Iraq. Army regulations stipulate that any uniform item not expressly authorized for wear is prohibited. But Melnyk noted that a Velcro-attached tab can be put on quickly for a photo-op and just as quickly removed. We’re guessing that not many soldiers are really parading around Mosul or anywhere else with these things on display.

Oath Keepers has scheduled a national conference this weekend in Las Vegas, hometown of the group’s founder, Stewart Rhodes. The Las Vegas Review-Journal profiled Rhodes and the organization in a story on Sunday. The story included this quote from the SPLC’s Mark Potok: “I’m not accusing Stewart Rhodes or any member of his group of being Timothy McVeigh or a future Timothy McVeigh. But these kinds of conspiracy theories are what drive a small number of people to criminal violence. … What’s troubling about Oath Keepers is the idea that men and women armed and ordered to protect the public in this country are clearly being drawn into a world of false conspiracy theory.”

Rhodes and Potok also faced off last night on MSNBC’s “Hardball with Chris Matthews.”

And how does the Pentagon feel about Oath Keepers? “I don’t have a formal assessment of Oath Keepers for you,” Melnyk, the Pentagon spokesman, said in an E-mail. He noted that it is “a fairly new group” and said the Defense Department would defer to the judgment of the Department of Justice and the FBI. “Certainly if they were on an FBI list of gangs or groups espousing hate, DoD would find this a compelling reason for prohibiting membership.”

Melnyk provided the specific Defense Department regulation regarding prohibited extremist groups, and it clearly is aimed more at groups that discriminate based on such things as race, ethnicity or religion. Simple conspiracy theorists, for now, might get a free pass. The regulation reads as follows:

Prohibited Activities. Military personnel must reject participation in organizations that espouse supremacist causes; attempt to create illegal discrimination based on race, creed, color, sex, religion, or national origin; advocate the use of force or violence; or otherwise engage in efforts to deprive individuals of their civil rights. Active participation, such as publicly demonstrating or rallying, fund raising, recruiting and training members, organizing or leading such organizations, or otherwise engaging in activities in relation to such organizations or in furtherance of the objectives of such organizations that are viewed by command to be detrimental to the good order, discipline, or mission accomplishment of the unit, is incompatible with Military Service, and is, therefore, prohibited.

As the SPLC noted in its July report, however, the military services’ track record when it comes to disciplining or purging extremists in their ranks has been spotty. Here’s a story from Stars and Stripes, the independent military paper, based on the SPLC report.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: iraq, right-wing, conspiracy theory, militia, oath keepers

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Tools: [Post a new comment] [Login] [Signup] View:
The Oath Keepers, are not keeping their Oath
Posted by: EncinoM on Oct 26, 2009 3:03 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They are not defending the Constitution or protecting the republic. Theay are a bunch of scared gun owners and wanna be revolutionaries who spend to much time listening to Alex Jones and other conspiracy theorists.

They are a breeding ground for the future McVie's to come from.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

sorry morry, the're, legal, -like kosher intestines
Posted by: johnwinthrop on Oct 26, 2009 3:26 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oathkeepers don't break the law. But Putz Potok and the nosy bunch at SPCL don't like them and want em banned. Like Hamas. Oathkeepers are for individual, not Stalinist freedom. Drink some chicken soup you crazy anteaters you, and let real American patriots do their duty.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Confederates??? Posted by: Axiom69
» RE: Confederates??? Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: Confederates??? Posted by: Axiom69
» RE: Confederates??? Posted by: freshlemon
» Confederates = Traitor!!! Posted by: Karlh
They will create what they fear most.
Posted by: zipper696 on Oct 26, 2009 4:37 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If just a small group of these pinheads do decide to make their fantasies reality and stage some kind of armed insurrection they will create exactly the right atmosphere for the harsh gun control they fear so much.

If it happens I'm betting on it being in Texas.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» mebbe, but why not Posted by: aislinnluv
Frustrated Farmer
Posted by: Frustrated Farmer on Oct 26, 2009 4:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hate to let you all know this, but the military is training us Left Wing Extremists too! (And doing a great job of it.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Frustrated Farmer Posted by: DaBear
Little info
Posted by: Axiom69 on Oct 26, 2009 5:36 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Before you form an opinion do a little research. I can't figure out how the Oath Keepers rate the "extremist" label. Not from the article or visiting their website. From what I read they are a group of military and law enforcement officers that have pledged to uphold their oath to defend the Constitution. A little redundant but isn't that a good thing? This group only lists things that they will NOT do. Like lock up their fellow citizens or disarm them.
Both left and right have both screamed Fascism and have warned their followers about the loss of our freedoms. The only difference is who each group believes will be holding the keys to the concentration camps.
Do your own research. An article should just be the beginning of your understanding of an issue.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Little info Posted by: pawheel
» RE: Little info Posted by: Axiom69
» RE: Little info Posted by: Frustrated Farmer
» RE: Little info Posted by: Crazy H
No surprises here
Posted by: ETSpoon on Oct 26, 2009 5:57 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Since the end of World War II and the beginning of the Cold War the US armed forces has long been a breeding ground for right wing extremism.

The vast majority of the post-Vietnam veterans, reservists and National Guardsmen I worked with at the Post Office held decidedly reactionary political and religious views.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

News Flash
Posted by: tjg1984 on Oct 26, 2009 6:03 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lots of people believe things that aren't true. Most of the world's religions (at a minimum) have to be wrong because of the extent to which they contradict each other. Lots of people believe conspiracy theories of various sorts. What is wrong with Oath Keepers' beliefs that probably aren't true? They don't appear to espouse aggression of any sort; on the contrary, they refuse to participate in certain types of aggression against the American people. Unless you want these orders to be given to and followed by military and law enforcement, what is the big deal here?

For reference, here are some of their 10 orders, with likely sources.

1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people. - 2nd amendment, US Constitution (yes, I know interpretations vary)

2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people. - 4th Amendment, US Constitution

3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal. - 5th and 6th amendments, US Constitution; criticism of Bush administration policy, which came primarily from the left at the time

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. - 1st Amendment, US Constitution

There may seem to be some conspiracy theory thrown in, with the talk of detention camps and foreign troops on American soil. But have none of you ever had a concern about the government that turned out to be unfounded? I see no promotion of aggressive violence here, and therefore no real cause for concern. Come back with more evidence. Thanks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» What about non-Americans? Posted by: ETSpoon
» Well... Posted by: tjg1984
» RE: Guns is #1?? Says volumes. Posted by: Purple Girl
» Digging a little deeper... Posted by: Crazy H
» Your history is off Posted by: brunowe
» No cause for concern... Posted by: EncinoM
» succesion? Posted by: tjg1984
» RE: succesion? Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: succesion? Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: succesion? Posted by: EncinoM
mmmarie
Posted by: jillipooh on Oct 26, 2009 6:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So if you espouse change it's a happy thing, but if I espouse change, then I'm an anarchist?? Because I still believe in the Bill of Rights?? Ludicrous!! Seriously, how does wanting to support our constitution make me "anti-government"??? This is article is so inexcusably, heinously, reprehensibly backwards, that I want to make sure everyone sees it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Can't see the problem
Posted by: Obijuan on Oct 26, 2009 6:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's just too bad these guys weren't around when the Bush administration was busy attacking America from within.

I wholeheartedly support any organization of military and law enforcement officials that support the constitutional rights of citizens. I am only skeptical as to how far this supposed belief in the constitutional rights of citizens actually goes.

For example, I'd be interested in their opinions on the use of tazers against citizen. How about sound cannons or microwave crowd control weapons? These are issues where my idea of RIGHTS and their idea of 'rights' breaks down.

Too bad the author seems only interested in the black and white version of the 'story' rather than also acknowledging the parallel causes here.

obi

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Great Comment Posted by: Axiom69
» RE: Great Comment... not Posted by: DaBear
As much respect as I have for the SPLC's work,...
Posted by: leafsong1 on Oct 26, 2009 7:00 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...it is sloppy at best to lump Oath Keepers in with white supremacist gangs. Aside from their refusal to put down secession, there is nothing particulary rightist about their list of prohibited orders. We would hope that leftist soldiers would refuse such orders as a matter of course. Many of us on the left have been urging military personell to refuse orders to take part in aggressive wars. Replace the one about seceding states with one about aggressive war, and the Oath Keeper's list starts to look like a leftist manifesto. Certainly, the SPLC is right to note that suspicion of the government among racists is at an all time high because of the skin tone of the President, but it should also be noted that suspicion of the government is at an all time high in general. The government's irremediable corruption is evident in the bailout, the military budget, the health care "reform." A lot of people are talking about rebellion and revolution, and only a small fraction of them are racists. The plutocracy would very much like it if we on the left were to develop a habit of equating just rebellion against rightist corruption with attempts by evil rightist racists to take over the country, just as they would like the right to equate reform with a slippery slope into communist gloom. I don't think this article helped matters.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The oaths
Posted by: Crazy H on Oct 26, 2009 7:06 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hey - I agree with their oaths. Too bad more of our "law" enforcement folks didn't take these oaths during the Bush maladministration.

That said, it is worrisome that they put gun ownership at the top.

1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people.

2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people

3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as "unlawful enemy combatants" or to subject them to military tribunal.

4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a "state of emergency" on a state.

5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.

6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.

7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.

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."

9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.

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.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The oaths Posted by: Axiom69
» RE: The oaths Posted by: clvngodess
» RE: The oaths Posted by: Axiom69
» RE: The oaths -the Problem Posted by: EncinoM
Can only Pledge Alliegence to One 'Consititution'.
Posted by: Purple Girl on Oct 26, 2009 7:41 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If these military people truely felt America was perfect- they would not be inclined to alter their uniform. What it stands for is Testiment enough to the loyality one feels and committment to serving and protecting it.
What is more indictive of their split allegience is the fact they have focused on the Second Amendment, superceding our Right to Free Speech and Assembly. According to another commentor The First Amendment ranks lowest in priorities- behind 9 other 'Rights'. Literally the Antithesis of Our Founders vision and intent. Our Founders chose Freedom of Speech and assembly as #1 for a reason. That "minor" re ranking of priorities and Rights alone makes this doctrine innately UnAmerican.
Seems they are more interested in protecting their right to wage an armed conspiratorial coupe d'tate than protecting and defending the Constitution of the US, or the citizens of this country.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Where is it stated... Posted by: tjg1984
Fascism American Style
Posted by: Tom Degan on Oct 26, 2009 7:44 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And on a star-spangled night, my love
You can place your rights in the fireplace
And by the dawn's early light, my love
Your Constitution's turned to dust
Fascism American style - that's me and you!

How close we have come to a police state in recent years is really troubling. And to think that most people are ignorant of this fact.

Just wait intil Blackwater makes its way into any American city in order to "restore order" after an "emergency". Just you wait, 'Enry 'Iggins....

http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Conspiracy??
Posted by: Romantic Violence on Oct 26, 2009 7:54 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"What’s troubling about Oath Keepers is the idea that men and women armed and ordered to protect the public in this country are clearly being drawn into a world of false conspiracy theory". What conspiracy? The political events that have been occuring in the US for the past 30 years are not conspiratorial; the events are actual. True beleivers in personal freedom KNOW who the culprits are and what they are attempting to do. Gun control laws in this country have become more restrictive since 1968 and anybody that has one hemisphere in order can see that. Loook at Holder's new bullshit called HR 645 and whatever else government is sneaking in while the rest of the population; is too busy watching American I-dol or the weekly Stupid Bowl. This issue and the issue of the economy, I believe will start a mass of violent confrontations between the Obamamites and the rest of the population that doesn't share the impositional fascist sentiment of government.

1789

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Conspiracy?? Posted by: brunowe
» RE: Conspiracy?? Posted by: Romantic Violence
» RE: Conspiracy?? Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: Conspiracy?? Posted by: Romantic Violence
» RE: Conspiracy?? Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: Conspiracy?? Posted by: Romantic Violence
» RE: Conspiracy?? Posted by: EncinoM
Conspiranoids with guns
Posted by: brunowe on Oct 26, 2009 9:08 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First, the oaths indicate a belief that such actions are in the offing. For example, the reference the deliberate starvation of millions, the use of foreign troops on US soil, the Warsaw Ghetto and the Rape of Nanking. The idea that there is a government plot to do stuff like this is typical right-wing conspiranoid nonsense.

The possibility that this group is a breeding ground for future Tim McVeighs is a real one. He was a trained soldier who also bought into this template of conspiracy theories; for instance comparing Waco to the Warsaw Ghetto.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You mean this Timothy McVeigh? Posted by: Prophit0
Dan Botsford
Posted by: freetoast on Oct 26, 2009 10:50 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As an Oath Keeper and an Obama voter I would point out Oath Keepers does nothing more than attempt to remind oath takers to be oath keepers in obeying and defending the U.S Constitution.

Our membership spans the entire political spectrum and we have a very vocal right wing. We honor the first amendment by allowing our members to voice their opinions even when we don't agree with them, what a novel concept.

Now lets be honest, I absolutely hated the Bush administration but I hated the 20% that supported them even more. Is Obama doing what he was elected to do? Has he put an end to torture, rendition, or illegal wire tapping? Hard to say without that transparency he promised. Has he done anything to end the illegal wars in Iraq or Afghanistan and bring those that started them to justice? How about those bank bailouts, is that "Change we can believe in?"

Joining Oath Keepers may prove to be an exercise in futility, maybe its our country's turn to fail, I hope not. At least we're trying to do something besides bitch and its better then spending another minute reading the snivelling of Obama's 20%.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wake Up America
Posted by: Awakened1 on Oct 26, 2009 11:38 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Calling the Oath Keepers "Right Wing" or any other group that doesnt agree with the corruption in DC by the Liberals and the Obama Admin / DHS is like the Bush Admin. calling people "left wing" , its really DIVIDE AND CONQUER at its best, Both sides have been bought and paid for by central banking, think tank, corporate special interests.

I find it funny how PUPPET Obama is continuing the PUPPET Bush policies, and how at the UN and G20 meetings they are now openly calling for their "New World Order" and yet people are too ignorant to see whats happening right in front of them

This has been going on for YEARS... time to wake up America

To the Revolution

We are not "right or left" wing, we are Citizens who care about Liberty and Truth and are not blinded by political divide and conquer rhetoric, not fooled by the "D" or the "R" politicians use... ALL PUPPETS

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Good luck with that Posted by: Axiom69
Among Liberals & Progressives, Constitutional Law is EXTREMISM
Posted by: EmilyCragg on Oct 26, 2009 1:19 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These articles on "Extremism of the Right Wing" make me furious. How STUPID do "Liberals" have to be to ignore Judicial broadside attacks on "governance by consent of the governed," and "taxation without representation."

If Oath-keepers commit to following Constitutional Law and not Executive Orders of madmen, what's it to ya?

If citizens are alarmed due to the totalitarian thrust of the Control freaks in Washington, why does this body need to ridicule?

"Divide and conquer!" That's ALL LIBERALS KNOW. Take your ideological rantings and shove them, please!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I understand your anger but... Posted by: dan10opa
Oath Keepers commandments sound like Patriotism to me
Posted by: dan10opa on Oct 26, 2009 2:39 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people.
2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people
3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal.
4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state.
5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.
6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.
7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.
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."
9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.
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.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What?
Posted by: throck on Oct 26, 2009 6:42 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It sounds like the Oath Keepers are defending Alternet's right to exist and still they are bashed for being "right wing." Get it together people!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is the U.S. military banning its own members from membership?
Posted by: RedAaron on Oct 28, 2009 5:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Prohibited Activities. Military personnel must reject participation in organizations that [...] advocate the use of force or violence;

Am I the only one who broke out laughing upon reading that one?

Maybe the next Nobel Peace Prize will be given to the U.S. armed forces as an institution, bringing to a glorious culmination the tradition established by its award to such worthy individuals as Henry Kissinger, Menachem Begin and Barack Obama.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement