Until the Wall, a Wall of Troops. – Stewart Rhodes

Trump Should Deploy U.S. Military “Wall of Troops” to Secure Border.  Latest Shooting of Border Patrol Agent Shows This is a War/Invasion and Requires a Military Response

Tuesday morning, June 12, 2018,  between the hours of 0330 and 0430 Arizona time, a Border Patrol Agent in the Tucson Sector was ambushed and shot repeatedly.  He survived the ambush only because he was wearing rifle plates that protected his torso.  As Breitbart reported:

[T]he Border Patrol agent was shot in the chest and back as well as in the hand and knee, but heavy plate body armor successfully stopped the shots to the chest and back.

http://www.breitbart.com/ texas/2018/06/12/exlusive- border-patrol-agent-shot-in- tucson-sector/

This shooting occurred on the Chilton family cattle ranch, which is on the border with Mexico.   As the Associated Press reported:

An Arizona cattle rancher says that the shooting of a U.S. Border Patrol agent near the boundary with Mexico happened in a remote part of his ranch that is frequently used by drug and migrant smugglers.

Jim Chilton tells The Associated Press in an interview that a Border Patrol official sent him an email Tuesday morning informing him the agent was alone when he was wounded on his ranch, and was struck in the leg and the hand.

First, let us all thank God the Border Patrol agent survived the attack, and let us keep him and his family in our prayers, asking God to grant him a speedy and full recovery.

It just so happens I was on the Chilton ranch the night before (Monday night), along with another Oath Keeper, Kait Hylton, and we were visiting with Jim Chilton and his lovely wife, at their home.  They gave us a very sobering, detailed briefing on just how bad it is on the border.   This horrific attempted murder of a Border Patrol agent on that same ranch the very next morning further confirms just how dire the situation really is.

The Chilton’s are brave, Salt-of-the-earth ranchers who have been sounding the alarm bells for years about how the cartels are essentially taking over our border with Mexico, taking over large parts of U.S. soil, and can bring in anything or anyone they want with impunity.   We also discussed the very real humanitarian crisis of all of the rape, assault, murder and death in the desert that is inflicted on the illegals by the cartels and their coyotes.  The Chiltons showed me a picture of a young couple who were being cared for by Border Patrol after a gang of coyotes had gang raped the wife all night while holding her husband at knife-point and forcing him to watch.   Mrs. Chilton expressed heartfelt concern and deep compassion for the many thousands of illegals who are victimized by the coyotes and cartels, as well as concern for the safety of all the ranchers and their hands, and for the Border Patrol Agents who are so incredibly vulnerable and exposed out there as they work. They told us of two rancher friends of theirs who were murdered by the cartels years ago.


As I talked to the Chilton’s that night, we discussed how vulnerable a lone Border Patrol Agent is to ambush as he drives the lonely roads in the Arizona desert.  As we said goodnight, I told Mr Chilton that, given that reality, as an Airborne infantry veteran it is my opinion that there should be at least a fire-team (four men) sized element of armed Army, Marines, or National Guard infantry going out on patrol with each agent or pair of agents as a security escort to keep them safe as they work along the border.   The Border Patrol Agents would do the law enforcing, but the infantry fire-team would be there to keep the agents safe.  That kind of pairing up has been done in the past, by past Administrations, to a limited degree, but President Trump needs to do it en-mass all along the border.

The New Mexico Army National Guard Liaison Team visited the U.S. Border Patrol El Paso Sector to meet and coordinate preparations for their upcoming deployment in support of border security operations April 7, 2018.

The agent ambushed Tuesday morning is lucky to be alive.  Given the reality of heavily armed, paramilitary cartel drug escorts and the reality of heavily armed “Rip Crews” who raid the drug mule trains, he and his brother agents need direct protection and backup that is ready to engage in a fire-fight with the cartels and WIN.  Those Rip Crews and drug mule trains often have a squad sized element of heavily armed men, with select-fire AKs. This is essentially a war zone along the border, and we are facing an invasion by foreign narco-state paramilitary forces.  The cartels “own” the governmental infrastructure, including politicians and the police, in much of Mexico, especially along the border, with their infamous offer of Plata O Plomo – silver or lead” – and are now taking over towns and counties inside the U.S. using the same strategy.  Under these conditions, our Border Patrol Agents deserve an infantry escort.

What will it take for President Trump to finally take the decisive action he promised us he would take in order to actually secure our border?  He should declare this to be a national security emergency – which it certainly is-as well as a human rights crisis, given the well-documented death toll among illegals, and the equally well documented forced sex trafficking and rape that goes on.

And then President Trump should deploy the U.S. military and the National Guard on the border in significant force to secure the border with a “wall of troops.”   Those troops should be armed.   And the Army Corps of Engineers can get busy building a wall, with a road directly behind it, with joint teams of Border Patrol and military patrolling the road/wall, with effective QRFs also ready to go.   Those joint teams can start patrolling the border even before the wall is built, and they can protect the engineers while they build the wall and road.  That is what it will take to secure the border, and President Trump can do that right now, as Commander-In-Chief.

A wall coupled with aggressive patrolling and aggressive and fast QRFs can flip the paradigm on the cartels, deny them their easy access routes, and put the fear of the American grunt in them.

President Trump, it is time for decisive action.  And you can also count on us military veterans to help if you need us.  Don’t forget that as Commander-in-Chief you can call us up, along with all other able-bodied Americans, as the militia, into federal service to repel this invasion.   Just say the word and we will be there.

For the Republic,

Stewart Rhodes

NOTE:  Updated 6-20-2018 to improve clarity and to answer an objection in the comments

PS – in answer to some who have objected on the grounds that only the militia of we the people can be used to repel an invasion, I have to say I respectfully disagree.   One of the fundamental purposes of the Constitution was to provide for the common defense, and in furtherance of that purpose, Congress is granted the “power to raise and support Armies,” as well as the “power to provide and maintain a Navy.”  Those military forces are meant for the common defense at all times, whether in peacetime or during a declared war.  For example, if the Chinese were to launch a surprise attack and invasion of the United States tomorrow, the U.S. Navy, Army, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard can, and would, defend the nation against that invasion even before Congress declared war.  Just like they did at Pearl Harbor when the forces of Japan attacked.    Yes, Congress is also granted the power to “provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions” but that does not preclude the President, as Commander-in-Chief, from also using the standing army and Navy to repel that invasion.  They are not mutually exclusive.  He can use both the standing military forces and the militia in defense against a foreign attack and invasion.  And I think he should use both.   Why are we paying billions of dollars for such a massive military establishment that is used to defend the border between North and South Korea, but we can’t use it to defend our own border?   That makes no sense.

I do agree that for internal matters, such as executing the laws of the Union, or suppressing insurrections, or guarding schools, the President must use the militia, which is both the “organized militia” of the National Guard and the “unorganized militia” made up of the rest of us, and that he should not use the U.S. military for such purposes.  The U.S. military is for defense against external threats.  The militia alone is the safe, constitutional method for handling internal threats.   The Mexican drug cartels and their coyotes are an external threat which has invaded the United States, and is bringing in hordes of foreign illegal aliens.   That is an invasion.

The President can, of course, also call forth the militia to repel this invasion.  However, he does not have to wait for Congress to call forth the militia.  Congress has no such authority.  Congress only has the authority to “provide for calling forth the Militia” – which it has, by statute, since the beginning of the Republic, as Dr. Edwin Vieira ably explained here.   It is the President of the United States who actually calls forth the militia, and he does not need any further action by Congress to do so.  Congress has already provided for it by statute.  It is now at the discretion of the President to actually call them forth.

Nor does the President need a declaration of war against Mexico or any other state in central or South America to defend our borders against the invasion by the irregular, paramilitary forces of the drug cartels, MS-13, etc.   Just as the U.S. Navy and Coast Guard routinely interdict and stop unauthorized ships from entering our waters and making land, and just as the U.S. Air Force will interdict suspicious aircraft, our ground forces can also be used to prevent incursion of our border, and they can be used as armed back-up to the Border Patrol agents who enforce our immigration laws.

That is how I see it, but I welcome enlightenment if someone thinks I am wrong.  – Stewart Rhodes

 

IMPORTANT ADDENDUM FROM DR. EDWIN VIEIRA    6-20-2018

I emailed Dr. Vieira a link to my article and my above clarifying note/response to critics, asking him if I was correct, and he replied with the following, and gave me permission to publish it here:

I think you need look no farther than 10 U.S.C. secs. 252 and 253 to see that Congress has already “provide[d] for calling forth the Militia” pursuant to Article I, Section 8, Clause 15 of the Constitution, by specifically authorizing the President to employ both the militia and the armed forces in a situation such as this, even if it were not called (rightly) an “invasion”.  For this is not just a figurative “invasion” by masses of civilians (along with drug cartels and other criminal enterprises such as MS-13), but also a real (if surreptitious) “invasion” because of the notorious complicity of the “government” of Mexico in these matters. As to the constraint of the Posse Comitatus Act, there are (of course) laws of both the United States and the States the enforcement of which would be involved in securing the border; but the situation of such is that these laws are not now being enforced, and apparently cannot be enforced, to the necessary degree without application of Sections 252 and 253, thus obviating the restriction of Posse Comitatus. Moreover, Posse Comitatus obviously does not apply to an “invasion” which should be recognized as such under international law (if only by some diplomatically subtle warning being given to Mexico). And I should think that the historical example of “Black Jack” Pershing and the Mexican expedition against Pancho Villa–in which both the Regular Army and militiamen from various States were involved–should suffice to give the Mexican “government” pause. (I believe that an early version of Posse Comitatus was on the books when Pershing advanced with the Army below the border, and the militiamen were deployed to protect the border on the American side.)
In addition, because certain States are being “actually invaded”, those States could raise their own “Troops, or Ships of War”, and “engage in War” with Mexico to repel the “invasion”, without obtaining “the Consent of Congress” (or anyone else). Article I, Section 10, Clause 3. This would be in addition to the National Guard in those States.  [Dr. Edwin Vieira]

I hope that will answer any objections, but please do post any additional questions or comments below and both Dr. Vieira and I will answer them (provided he has the time).

 

 

Comments

  1. stand a post and defend against the invasion 13 June, 2018, 16:16

    Amen Stewart! If the United States Army cannot secure our borders then it needs to be defunded and the funds go to state militias to do the required job (at a fraction of the cost).

    Reply this comment
    • Von 14 June, 2018, 08:48

      There is too many political games going on for any president to secure the border. Politicians. Like Nancy Pelosi and Hispanic lobbyist have shut down any attempts to secure the border. And what’s worse is these little games with the government’s of Mexico and the United States have been going on for a very long time.

      There is way too much money to be made from the imports of slave labor and illicit narcotics that hit the American streets . Law enforcement profits from these activities as does the health care industry and the prison system. Law enforcement profits by the amount of arrests which gains access to federal grants and other forms of funding by both state and local governments. The health care industry profits from insurance claims for addiction treatment and again federal grants and state funding increases. And the prison system profits from the same types of funding to keep beds filled in jails and prison.

      The problems along the border are not a national security issue as the corruption of illicit narcotics has spread to all aspects of our government, but a money issue. Take away the money for funding of programs that enable building a border wall or increases of miitary personnel along the border, and funding for treatment for illicit narcotics usage and the majority of activities along the border would stop.

      Reply this comment
  2. MUX 13 June, 2018, 16:26

    This is what I have said from the beginning. Put troops the border. If ” posse comitatis is a problem, put them just across the boarder.
    LIFE MEMBER

    Reply this comment
  3. Mark 13 June, 2018, 16:33

    Stewart – there needs to be an automated way here on the OK web site to deliver a pre-written message to the President on this and other issues as they arise. Gun Owners of America has what I consider to be the model for this. Might you investigate and implement this? It would greatly increase our influence with the President and with Congress if we had a system like this in place.

    Reply this comment
  4. Obbop 13 June, 2018, 16:35

    Powerful forces want conditions to continue as they are.

    Reply this comment
  5. Mr. ED 513 13 June, 2018, 16:47

    Several years ago I recruited my son into the Oathkeepers and I’m proud to say that he’s the Vice-President of one of out State Chapters. I’m a little prejudiced, but I think he’s got the best group of young and old men, completely trained and ready to handle any mission our President : “Stewart Rhodes” or Our Commander In Chief : “President Donald Trump” should issue to them, as are all of the rest of us. Of course, we’re not quite as ready, or organizing as them.

    Reply this comment
    • Cal 13 June, 2018, 23:04

      “… or Our Commander In Chief : “President Donald Trump” should issue to them, as are all of the rest of us.”

      This is important to know, and let me show you why. No US President is a Commander in Chief UNTIL the Congress either declares war or calls up the Militia of the several states which is NOT a military governmental unit. Nor can he or anyone EXCEPT THOSE WHO ACTUALLY SERVE within the House of Representatives or within the Senate declare war, send Americans to fight in foreign nations or for foreign entities. There must be a real and legitimate defense of our nation needed (such as what is now going on with the invasions of ILLEGALS).

      US Constitution, Article 2, Section 2: “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, WHEN CALLED INTO THE ACTUAL SERVICE OF THE UNITED STATES;”

      Another reason the wording is important to know is there is a similar wording in the legislative branch regarding their powers/authority.

      As James Wilson explained: “I leave it to every gentleman to say whether the enumerated powers are not as accurately and MINUTELY DEFINED, as can be well done on the same subject, in the same language…nor does it, in any degree, go beyond the particular enumeration; for, when it is said that Congress shall have power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper, those words are LIMITED AND DEFINED by the following, “for carrying into execution the foregoing powers”, it is saying no more than that the powers we have already particularly given (enumerated), shall be effectually carried into execution.”

      SECURE FENCE ACT OF 2006. Ratified by Congress, signed into law in 2006. (Oct 26, 2006 signed by G. Bush) Supported and voted for by Dems & Repubs. DHS received 1.2 Billion to fund the wall that was never built. Where is the money? So why was this already planned in, voted for, funded but not built wall used to agitate the people?

      “This bill will help protect the American people. This bill will make our borders more secure. It is an important step toward immigration reform.” President George W. Bush, 10/26/06

      Today, President Bush Signed The Secure Fence Act – An Important Step Forward In Our Nation’s Efforts To Control Our Borders And Reform Our Immigration System. Earlier this year, the President laid out a strategy for comprehensive immigration reform. The Secure Fence Act is one part of this reform, and the President will work with Congress to finish the job and pass the remaining elements of this strategy.

      The Secure Fence Act Builds On Progress Securing The Border
      By Making Wise Use Of Physical Barriers And Deploying 21st Century Technology, We Can Help Our Border Patrol Agents Do Their Job And Make Our Border More Secure.

      The Secure Fence Act:
      Authorizes the construction of hundreds of miles of additional fencing along our Southern border;
      Authorizes more vehicle barriers, checkpoints, and lighting to help prevent people from entering our country illegally;
      Authorizes the Department of Homeland Security to increase the use of advanced technology like cameras, satellites, and unmanned aerial vehicles to reinforce our infrastructure at the border.

      Comprehensive Immigration Reform Begins With Securing The Border. Since President Bush took office, we have:
      More than doubled funding for border security – from $4.6 billion in 2001 to $10.4 billion this year;
      Increased the number of Border Patrol agents from about 9,000 to more than 12,000 – and by the end of 2008, we will have doubled the number of Border Patrol agents since the President took office;
      Deployed thousands of National Guard members to assist the Border Patrol;
      Upgraded technology at our borders and added infrastructure, including new fencing and vehicle barriers;
      Apprehended and sent home more than 6 million people entering America illegally; and
      We are adding thousands of new beds in our detention facilities, so we can continue working to end “catch and release” at our Southern border.

      This Act Is One Part Of Our Effort To Reform Our Immigration System, And We Have More Work To Do.“ https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061026-1.html

      Reply this comment
  6. Silver fox 13 June, 2018, 17:17

    Perhaps an oath Keepers militia supported by our constitutional government and commanded by local officers.

    Reply this comment
  7. Big Boss Hog 13 June, 2018, 17:52

    I will volunteer to defend our border! 20+ year law enforcement vet with extensive experience. Where do I sign up?
    Regarding sending the active duty military, unfortunately it not that simple due to the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 which restricts the military from engaging in civil law enforcement. As you stated, congress could possibly authorize it in a state of emergency but with so many RINO’s, that may be a tough sell. Send is! The OATH KEEPERS!

    Reply this comment
    • Barb G. 13 June, 2018, 19:12

      Big Boss,
      There is another pressing problem on the border I found out about few weeks ago that Hamas as well as ISIS are alive a well in the South American countries. They use the Cartels to escort them across our border anytime they want. They have been setting up Mosques in every country since the 80’s. Obama new all about this but he was trying to set up his insane deal with Iran an refused to allow any USA Law enforcement to go after them. More than a decade ago a US congressional report warned that Venezuela was providing support to radical Islamic groups, including the supply of identity documents. Venezuelan territory is being used to advance Iran’s solid rocket-fuel production. If Iran can produce enough rocket fuel to power one of their ICBM’s the first place they will hit is the Israeli’s and then the USA. A lot of this information came from Judicial Watch as well writer Judith Bergman.
      You can read her article at Https//www.gateatoneinstitute.org/12268/iran-latin-america

      Reply this comment
    • Ron Bass 13 June, 2018, 19:45

      The international border is not civil law enforcement
      The Posse Comitatus Act does not prohibit US Military on our borders.
      http://www.unitedpatriotsofamerica.com/index.php?s=posse+comitatus

      Reply this comment
      • Cal 13 June, 2018, 23:16

        The US Constitution requires that it is the Militia of the several states that defends our borders, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15. There is a real reason that the framers did NOT want us to have, forbid us to have a “standing military”, but to use the PEOPLE, trained as the Congress requires the military to be trained, armed with weapons of war – any, all, and as many as is needed.

        The reason is, as is happening today with law enforcement/etc, they end up being USED against their own country, and with todays “dumbing down” that is easily done. When one is trained to “just follow orders” and to “just do their jobs” instead of being heavily trained in the Oath to the US Constitution and what is required of them, along with the other. That is deliberately done so that our nation can be destroyed from within, with their willing assistance.

        Think I am wrong? Once again, look at how law enforcement is being used, and are not (neither is military) understanding and keeping their Oath to the documents that are the governments of our country, while those that SERVE WITHIN are to do their duties as the Constitution requires of them, take and KEEP their Oath to them (US Constitution, and whichever state Constitution applies).

        The Militia has as its constitutionally assigned duties to:
        — Enforce the US Constitution (supreme Law of this nation and all who serve are Oath bound to it) and each state’s Constitution (highest Law of the state, and those who serve within the state are Oath bound to both),
        — Enforce and keep the “Laws of the Union” (which are constitutional laws ONLY),
        — Protect the country against all enemies both domestic and foreign, and
        — “to suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”.

        Clause 15: “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel invasions.“

        Do NOT be used against us. BTW, if acting Militia is being used, and LAWFULLY it MUST be used, either/or the pay comes from the state and general (federal) government.

        Reply this comment
    • Bigfoot 33 13 June, 2018, 20:01

      Read Article IV Section 4 U.S. Constitution.

      Reply this comment
      • Cal 13 June, 2018, 23:19

        Per Section 4.

        The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence. It seems as if it is the general (federal) government that is the payee to the Militia that it is REQUIRED in writing within its contract to use to stop Invasions.

        Reply this comment
    • Stretch 14 June, 2018, 13:41

      The Posse Comitatus Act, passed on June 16, 1878 prohibits most members of the federal uniformed services from exercising state law enforcement powers that maintain “law and order” on non-federal property.

      Let the local sheriffs deputize them.

      Reply this comment
      • Cal 15 June, 2018, 08:37

        IF you are talking about having the local sheriffs deputize those SERVING in the military then you are suggesting another way to break the Oath (felonies/Perjury), and to work against our LEGITIMATE government from the inside,

        IF you are suggesting that they deputize veterans then understand that as long as veterans at the very least know the Bill of Rights, and are working to know what those who serve within the three branches are delegated to do; plus same on their own state’s Constitution then you are talking about the Militia of the Several states.

        Yes, those are the already trained as the Congress requires the military to be trained. Why do you think that returning veterans are put on the terrorist watch list? Because they, with a bit of reading/study, ARE the REQUIRED Militia of the several states ready and trained to do the duties delegated to them, plus can train others to meet those qualifications.

        Veterans! They are the biggest LAWFUL threat to the traitors who serve within our governments, to the deep state because they are the constitutionally required to be used by the state and feds in writing, as the Militia of the Several States. Yep, VETS! Well, healthy vets – a “conspiracy” theory I have is the VA is assisting in the destruction of our nation from the inside, but that is another article I am still researching.

        Reply this comment
        • WGP 16 June, 2018, 09:34

          You are spot on regsrding the VA. It’s an agency that does more harm than good. Stsrting with psycho drugs and false diagosis that harms otherwise healthy men for life.

          Reply this comment
        • Tuaca 18 June, 2018, 21:05

          Yo Cal, We haven’t had a legitimate government for 200 years. United States is a corporation, acting in a proprietary capacity. .

          Reply this comment
  8. AZ 13 June, 2018, 19:01

    BEST BORDER WALL DESIGN – PAYS FOR ITSELF, Solar Power Plant/Multi-Purpose Rail Cars…BUILD THIS WALL! BUILD THIS WALL! BUILD THIS WALL! BUILD THIS WALL!
    Please share this… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UacG9sh0INc

    Reply this comment
  9. DAV 13 June, 2018, 19:04

    Guarding our borders should be the job of the National GUARD ! They should not be overseas. If we cannot spare them, then bring back the draft.

    Reply this comment
    • Cal 13 June, 2018, 23:29

      “Guarding our borders should be the job of the National GUARD ! They should not be overseas.”

      You’re correct, they should NOT be overseas. But they are also NOT a Militia no matter what those domestic enemies and traitors who serve within our governments decree. BTW, there is NO LAWFUL draft here either. Does anyone ever study the document to which they are Oathbound? Or even study it as our type of government?

      Daniel Webster: “Where is it written in the Constitution, in what article or section is it contained, that you may take children from their parents and parents from their children, and compel them to fight the battles of any war in which the folly and wickedness of the government may engage itself? Under what concealment has this power lain hidden, which now for the first time comes forth, with a tremendous and baleful aspect, to trample down and destroy the dearest right of personal liberty? Who will show me any Constitutional injunction which makes it the duty of the American people to surrender everything valuable in life, and even life, itself, whenever the purposes of an ambitious and mischievous government may require it? … A free government with an uncontrolled power of military conscription is the most ridiculous and abominable contradiction and nonsense that ever entered into the heads of men.”

      Read this and tell me if we are not there – – > Justice Story, Associate Justice, Supreme Court wrote: “The next amendment is: “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”.
      “The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them”.

      Joseph Stalin, 1933: ”The United States should get rid of its militias”. Anyone wonder why he said that?

      Maybe because of this –> James Madison: “… large and permanent military establishments … are forbidden by the principles of free government, and against the necessity of which the militia were meant to be a constitutional bulwark.”

      Reply this comment
    • WGP 16 June, 2018, 09:30

      And all who live on the borders whether water or land.

      Reply this comment
  10. RonBass 13 June, 2018, 19:40

    Stewart i agree. Nations maintain military forces to protect their International borders. It is the #1 priority for any nation to protect it’s borders.

    The Posse Comitatus Act does not prohibit US Military on our borders.
    http://www.unitedpatriotsofamerica.com/index.php?s=posse+comitatus

    Reply this comment
    • Cal 13 June, 2018, 23:34

      You left out a word… OTHER “Nations maintain military forces to protect their International borders.”

      Yes it is a priority, but it is REQUIRED in the US Constitution , you know the document that created our government, that all of us here are supposed to be Oath bound to SUPPORT AND DEFEND it; that those who are trained as the Congress requires the military be trained be the Militia of the several states are the Militia that can do those duties, are REQUIRED to do those duties and to be paid for it ( Posse Comitatus Act) and that is who it also REQUIRES in writing to defend our states, our country against invasions unless it becomes so serious that a war is on our borders.

      Reply this comment
  11. WGP 13 June, 2018, 20:51

    Recently, there were some here who were having exploding heads rhat Trump was deploying troops to secure our borders. It’s our duty and right to secure our borders as well as our government to provide whst is necessary to protect our borders.

    Reply this comment
    • Cal 13 June, 2018, 23:39

      Do you understand why this site is called Oathkeepers? Do you understand WHAT Oath they are required to keep?

      ” It’s our duty and right to secure our borders as well as our government to provide whst is necessary to protect our borders.”

      Yes, it is our duty as the MILITIA, not as a MILITARY. Go read Article 1, Section 8, all of it as it is ALL important. Then Article 2, Section 2 where the President becomes the Commander in Chief WHEN the MILITIA is called into service of the general government (federal); or when the Congress declares war.

      Reply this comment
      • WGP 15 June, 2018, 19:14

        Cal…thanks, but I don’t require a lesson on keeping my oath. I merely pointed out there are some about face hypocrisy hete when Trump ordered the national guard to protect our borders. Some here, includibg you went vural at Trump for deploying troops within our borders. Or am I mistaken? I recall we are to protect our borders which we do with every branch plus some agencies plus everyday citizens. So msybe lighten up on the trigger. Otherwise love your devotion to our constitution. Cheers

        Reply this comment
    • Cal 13 June, 2018, 23:43

      “… was deploying troops to secure our borders. It’s our duty and right to secure our borders as well as our government to provide whst is necessary to protect our borders.”

      READ the US Constitution, the document you are supposed to be Oath bound to. You know, the document that is the FIRST thing you are REQUIRED to “support and defend” before anything else INCLUDING orders of superiors/US Presidents, etc, and before the duties of the position you occupy/ied.

      How about actually serving our nation instead of assisting – knowingly or unknowingly – in its destruction from within?????? Is that too difficult to ask?

      Reply this comment
      • WGP 16 June, 2018, 09:26

        Cal, we are serving…more than you might imagine in your frustrations pointed as us veterans who with passion take real actional ownership to uphold the truths we abide by. An element of common sense needs to be injected. I’ve patrolled our borders in dark night. In addition to a malitia, it requires heavy armor and fire power and modern war technology. We are dealing with elements beyond some yoyo tyoes crossing our borders. I assume you live in California, thus Cal. A commercial ship enters our waters (border now crossed) loaded with missiles, and atomic weapons. Your definition of militia does not have the tools to prevent this entry nor act upon it’s offense. Same with what is crossing our north and south borders. Expand your thinking beyond people trafficking and drugs.

        We’ve needed a military presence on our borders since day one. We use the Navy, Air Force, and Coast Guard, as well as Customs, DEA, BATF, Border Patrol and now National Guard. Remember, there are many border land owners as well watching with vigilance. A total effort only lacking political support on our southern border for political gain and treachery.

        Your words and rhetoric can by as right all day long, but we are talking 1776 fire power anymore. These invaders along our waterways and land borders are beyond what we civilians can cope.

        The invading sleepers along with deep state globalists are setting tge stage….only one thing remains in the way….the man with a gun.

        Reply this comment
  12. Notoriousdad 13 June, 2018, 21:23

    The border is a war zone. A few years ago, DHS told us that there were people coming accross that weren’t from South and Central America (I said, ‘thanks for the hot tip, morons!’). Now its the cartels WORKING WITH THE ISLAMISTS, besides every fool that wants a ‘Better life’ for normal problems. We cant take them all, and it equates to a multiple invasion and purposeful intent to destroy the USA! Troops, armed and ready, is always on a border like that, ALL OVER THE WORLD, so why not here!?

    Reply this comment
    • Cal 14 June, 2018, 00:14

      OMG! Okay, here is why we do NOT use the military on US soil. First, all able-bodied Americans are REQUIRED to be trained as the US Military is trained (yes, that IS in writing) for a reason. But first and foremost to retain our freedom, of which we have little left. We are currently in a police state, and we are heading to a military takeover.

      Think not? Let me shine some light on the lies and propaganda you have been spoon fed for decades. Let’s start here… with James Madison: “… large and permanent military establishments … are FORBIDDEN by the principles of free government, and against the necessity of which the militia were meant to be a constitutional bulwark.”

      Here is what the National Guard is when it is misnamed “Militia” – > John Smilie warned: “Congress may give us a select militia which will, in fact, be a standing army– or Congress, afraid of a general militia, may say there shall be no militia at all. When a select militia is formed; the people in general may be disarmed.” The disarming they are working on diligently.

      Tench Coxe, ‘Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution’, in the Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789, on the Second Amendment where he asserts that it’s the people with arms, who serve as the ultimate check on government: “As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, AND AS THE MILITARY FORCES WHICH MUST BE OCCASIONALLY RAISED TO DEFEND OUR COUNTRY, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow-citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms”.

      We are NOT supposed to have a permanent military, it is why every able-bodied person is required to be trained and armed – yes, REQUIRED. We are required to have Militias of the several states made up of the PEOPLE, not anyone who serves within our governments.

      MILI’TIA, noun [Latin from miles, a soldier; Gr. war, to fight, combat, contention. The primary sense of fighting is to strive, struggle, drive, or to strike, to beat, Eng. moil, Latin molior; Heb. to labor or toil.] The body of soldiers in a state enrolled for discipline, but not engaged in actual service except in emergencies; as distinguished from regular troops, whose sole occupation is war or military service. The militia of a country are the able bodied men organized into companies, regiments and brigades, with officers of all grades, and required by law to attend military exercises on certain days only, but at other times left to pursue their usual occupations.

      Tench Coxe, Delegate to the Constitutional Convention of 1787: “Who are the militia? are they not ourselves. Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. THEIR SWORDS, AND EVERY OTHER TERRIBLE IMPLEMENT OF THE SOLDIER, ARE THE BIRTH-RIGHT OF AN AMERICAN… THE UNLIMITED POWER OF THE SWORD IS NOT IN THE HANDS OF EITHER THE FEDERAL OR STATE GOVERNMENTS BUT, where I trust in God it will ever remain, IN THE HANDS OF THE PEOPLE.”

      Daniel Webster: “Where is it written in the Constitution, in what article or section is it contained, that you may take children from their parents and parents from their children, and compel them to fight the battles of any war in which the folly and wickedness of the government may engage itself? Under what concealment has this power lain hidden, which now for the first time comes forth, with a tremendous and baleful aspect, to trample down and destroy the dearest right of personal liberty? Who will show me any Constitutional injunction which makes it the duty of the American people to surrender everything valuable in life, and even life, itself, whenever the purposes of an ambitious and mischievous government may require it? … A free government with an uncontrolled power of military conscription is the most ridiculous and abominable contradiction and nonsense that ever entered into the heads of men”.

      (1800’s Dictionary http://webstersdictionary1828.com is where most of this is from, except quotes, etc.)
      Standing Armies (definition) – A well-regulated Militia is not a “standing army” but is antagonistic to any “standing army”. adjective Settled; established, either by law or by custom, etc.; continually existing; permanent; not temporary; as a standing army.

      “Standing Armies” – America’s Founders were philosophically, politically, and legally committed to the proposition that “the Constitution must either break the Army, or the Army will destroy the Constitution: for it is universally true, that where-ever the [military power] is, there is or will be the Government in a short time”

      “Standing Armies”: Abhorred and Denounced the Founding Era and Founding Documents – Because “[w]e are bound to interpret the Constitution in the light of the law as it existed at the time it was adopted”, (footnote 2) the condemnation of “standing armies” in the Declaration of Independence and various State laws of that period must always be kept first and foremost in mind. (footnote 3) Certainly the Framers of the Constitution evinced no lessor a strong aversion to “standing armies”.

      These attitudes carried over into the drafting of the Constitution of the United States. For, as Virginia’s Governor Edmund Randolph reported to that State’s Convention, “[w]ith respect to a standing army * * * there was not a member in the federal Convention, who did not feel indignation at such an institution”. This aversion and animosity were the products, not simply of historical erudition and acumen, but of profound political prescience. For although the Founders were never exposed to modern totalitarianism, they would have agreed that “according to the Marxist theory of the state, the army is the chief component of state power”.

      Against this background, the original Constitution incorporated and relied upon “the Militia of the several States”, not for the practical reason that America’s pre-constitutional Militia had always proven themselves perfectly efficient military forces (which in many instances they had not), but for the more important political reason that, being composed of WE THE PEOPLE en masse, the Militia promised to provide the most reliable “checks and balances” against the excesses of “standing armies” and the aspirations of usurpers and tyrants who would rely upon such forces to seize and abuse excessive political power. For, no matter how well organized, armed, and disciplined THE PEOPLE’S Militia may be, they will never function as “standing armies” in aid of usurpation and tyranny aimed at THE PEOPLE themselves. And the better organized, armed, and disciplined the Militia are, the better they can deter, and if necessary resist and overcome, “standing armies” raised by aspiring usurpers and tyrants in order to overawe THE PEOPLE.

      Justice Joseph Story later summarized Americans’ dominant objections to “standing armies”—and identified the Militia alone as capable of providing the necessary “checks and balances” against their excesses:

      “The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses with which they are attended and the facile means which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers to subvert the government or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic, since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers, and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”

      “Standing armies”—whether of the traditional type, or composed of ostensibly “civilian” but para-militarized “police departments” and other “law-enforcement agencies”—cannot be trusted, because they tend to attract to, mold within, and advance through their ranks the very types of men and women who can be expected to side with and even egg on “ambitious and unprincipled rulers” against “the rights of the people”—to attempt to become such “rulers” themselves—and to exclude and weed out all other individuals who exhibit contrary inclinations.

      Militia, MILI’TIA, noun [Latin from miles, a soldier; Gr. war, to fight, combat, contention. The primary sense of fighting is to strive, struggle, drive, or to strike, to beat, Eng. moil, Latin molior; Heb. to labor or toil.] The body of soldiers in a state enrolled for discipline, but not engaged in actual service except in emergencies; as distinguished from regular troops, whose sole occupation is war or military service. The militia of a country are the able bodied men organized into companies, regiments and brigades, with officers of all grades, and required by law to attend military exercises on certain days only, but at other times left to pursue their usual occupations.”

      Patrick Henry: “If you have given up your militia, and Congress shall refuse to arm them, you have lost every thing. Your existence will be precarious, because you depend on others, whose interests are not affected by your infelicity.”

      Article 1, Section 8, Clause 12: “To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years”.

      See the word “raise” and the words “no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years”?

      Armies are supposed to be raised from the already trained, Militias when they are needed.

      Reply this comment
  13. jarhead 13 June, 2018, 22:18

    Our Military should have been placed at our Southern Border LONG AGO……they could call it a “Training Exercise”…. but they could also assist the building of the wall, help depot the illegals and STOP THE INVASION.

    Reply this comment
  14. Seela 13 June, 2018, 22:48

    I live 7 miles north of the border and I now see more activity from illegals than I’ve seen in ages. Time for troops on the border until the wall gets built.

    Reply this comment
  15. SeaBee 13 June, 2018, 23:16

    Stew,
    I am glad that the Oath Keepers are finally seeing the border issue as a serious problem that needs to be addressed.
    I have worked with no less than 6 different Minuteman and border watch groups since 2005.
    We worked our hearts out trying to get this countries attention, all these years to no avail. Occasionally there would be a momentary bit of interest but that soon ended each time..
    I personally made 10 month long self deployments to the border in CA, AZ, and TX. I spent tens of thousands of dollars in the process, because no one would help any of us, we were on our own.
    My brother made a statement that has been on my mind for years also, he said, “you are a fool for risking your life and fortune on a lost cause!” I watched as the entire SW was totally taken over by Mexico without firing a shot. I made a personal survey each time I went and noted the take over of my country by foreign forces as it advanced further north. Now as predicted, there isn’t a city or town in the once proud United States that isn’t touched by this invasion of foreigners from most nations of the world. I had given up finally and made my last trip in Oct. of 2016 as I kept hearing my brothers words, spoken years before.
    Finally, now, we have a real President who appears to have America’s interest at heart and is trying to do something about it. I hope and pray it isn’t to late, but he has millions of enemies who do not want him to succeed in trying to save this country and will try to stop him at every turn.

    Let me remind you of reality as you plan your efforts to help on the border, talk is damn cheap, we planned many operations where we had commitments of up to 600 personnel to attend them. When the operations started we would have 6 to maybe 16 people show up. We had thousands of volunteers in the Minuteman movement but when it comes to operations in the field they were few and far between. We did have some good ops and we thought that all we had to do was bring the problem to the attention of the American people and there would be this great ground swell of public opinion demanding we secure our borders and deport all illegals, boy were we wrong! Very few people give a shit and you can see how far it has come to this point.

    Just like yourselves, where were you the last 20 years as this crisis developed and we nearly lost this nation. I was called a “Johnie come lately” by the people who had been working the issue back in 2005. It is now 2018 and very little has changed. The BS about there being 12 million illegals in this country, is the same story the Government has been putting out since 2000. I went to school when we actually learned to count, there have been 3 to 5 million illegals coming into this country every year since then and they still say there are 12 million illegals here. Somebody is full of shit or they are lying! They lie about everything, in reality they catch one in 10 of the people crossing over if even that. I have seen “congo lines” of illegals numbering 100 and watched the border patrol catch zero of them! On one of our small ops in AZ, 6 of us called in 3,000 illegals in three weeks, Border Patrol admitted to catching 240. Washington’s answer to our efforts was to stop all BP operations in the Altar Valley because we were overwhelming them with OTMs, from China and other countries. Another example of Washington’s efficiency was to order the removal of all thermal night vision equipment from all air assets in the Tucson sector for for fuel savings and operation cost savings. They didn’t want to many of the illegals to get captured. This was all during the Bush administration.

    I wish everyone luck in this renewed interest in the border crisis. I hope something can be done this time but it is unlikely much can be accomplished unless we can ban Democrats, Muslims, communist, socialists, and more.
    SeaBee

    Reply this comment
    • Tim Allen 14 June, 2018, 08:46

      Seabee, thanks for your 11 additional years of Can Do!

      Reply this comment
    • WGP 16 June, 2018, 09:48

      Well, not to be a me too, but I started flying missions on borders after Vietnam. The crap entering this country has been intentionally allowed. It’s all part of the Rothschild cabal Global agenda to disarm us then rule us. That boils it down. Personally I’d have high bird drones providing movement locals with A10 gunships and gunships turning the border activity into a death wish. It would end in a week.

      Reply this comment
  16. Jack Hinson 14 June, 2018, 04:47

    Since the US is actively training, arming, and providing CAS to ISIS in Syria, is it possible that the US actually WANTS the border chaos that it turns a blind eye to?

    Reply this comment
  17. Bigfoot33 14 June, 2018, 09:21

    Right on the money Cal! Good comment SeaBee.

    As a 2005 Minuteman, I’ve only seen, in addition to the wall, one system that works because it provides more exact numbers of bodies crossing our border and therefore a measurement of how effective our defense. Everyone do a search engine on: Border Technology,Inc. Glen Spencer or Mike King). E-mail info@bordertechnology.com.

    Reply this comment
  18. Sabre22 14 June, 2018, 11:28

    Posse Comitatus Specifically allow “The president, under his or her constitutional powers to put down insurrection, rebellion, or invasion, may declare martial law when local law enforcement and court systems have ceased to function. Note or INVASION the Immigration courts are backed up for years and non-functional as the ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT refuses to show up. Simple Declare Martial LAW on the border 50,000 in a month is an INVASION and in the illegal NARCOTICS. Put 50,000-100,000 Troops on the Border Immediately. BUILD POW CAMPS similar to what sheriff Arpaio did with his tent camps they get the absolute minimum . Ship them back ASAP Any citizens of a country that receives foreign aid show up here ILLEGALLY deduct their costs from the Foreign Aid. One the word gets out that the sugar tit is no more they will stop coming. Some that is stupid enough to shoot at them return fire. Get Intel on the drug cartels and immigrant smugglers HQ and use Excalibur Artillery rounds or laser guided munitions to level the places. Use Navy CBs, Army Engineers, and air force construction Units to build the Walls. .

    Reply this comment
    • Cal 15 June, 2018, 09:32

      “Posse Comitatus Specifically allow “The president, under his or her constitutional powers to put down insurrection, rebellion, or invasion, may declare martial law when local law enforcement and court systems have ceased to function.”

      Yes, and all US Presidents are required in writing to use the Militia of the several states for those purposes.

      “Simple Declare Martial LAW …”

      No, anyone who declares “Martial Law” here in the USA under our constitutional republic form of government is openly declaring themselves a traitor to our nation. The US Constitution does NOT allow martial law or emergency powers (different from a state of emergency”), that “power” was given by the courts who were NEVER delegated any authority to raise powers, give new powers, etc to the other branches or to themselves.

      “The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism.” The Supreme Court of the United States, 1866

      “Emergency does not create power. Emergency DOES NOT INCREASE GRANTED POWER OR REMOVE OR DIMINISH THE RESTRICTIONS UPON POWER GRANTED OR RESERVED. THE CONSTITUTION WAS ADOPTED IN A PERIOD OF GRAVE EMERGENCY. Its grants of power to the Federal Government and its limitations of the power of the States were determined in the light of emergency and THEY ARE NOT ALTERED BY EMERGENCY.” Home Building & Loan Association v. Blaisdell, 290 U.S. 398, 425 (1934)

      Dr. Edwin Vieira: “This has nothing to do with personalities or subjective ideas. It’s a matter of what the Constitution provides… The government of the United States has never violated anyone’s constitutional rights… The government of the United States will never violate anyone constitutional rights, because it cannot violate anyone’s constitutional rights. The reason for that is: The government of the United States is that set of actions by public officials that are consistent with the Constitution. Outside of its constitutional powers, the government of the United States has no legitimacy. It has no authority; and, it really even has no existence. It is what lawyers call a legal fiction.”

      Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Your e-mail address will not be published.
Required fields are marked*