Members of the Armed Forces are required to disobey un-Constitutional orders, even if given by the CinC.

As are civilian elected officials who take an oath to uphold the Constitution.

__________________
Support The Special Operations Warrior Foundation

Democrat Values: Jail for People Who Don't Buy Insurance, Citizenship for Border Jumpers

Political Correctness Will Be The Death Of Us All

Pray For Obama, Psalm 109:8 "Let his days be few; and let another take office."

I agree, but if you look at Katrina it is frighteningly clear that they are unaware of that.

I have been saying "To disobey an unconstitutional order is not treason, the act of treason lies in whoever gave that order in the first place."

Organizations like the oath keepers are standing behind that very fact, and i commend the brave men and women who are really sticking to their oath, and care about our liberties.

I am not active military, nor have i ever served, but i still joined them just to spread the word. I believe their cause is just, and the very example of what makes our country great. Free men and women who stand up for themselves, and thank the good lord for that.

Very, very true.

__________________

*deleted because I'm just grumpy today and should not have posted that*

__________________

Herein, I think lies the problem: y'see, when we consider another's idea, which is contrary to our own point of view, we tend to think that the other, whose ideas are opposed to our own is using "insane argument"- to wit, our recent discussion regarding 911. One side, believing they have the only correct point of view, will tend to dismiss the other's argument as "insane". On the other hand those of a "questioning" mindset will tend to dismiss the opposing mindset as being simply "blind"
There is no way of telling which of the opposing view is indeed to correct one, (especially in this case) but this "problem" of pre-concieved notions does tend to impede any sort of open minded discussion about any given issue.

So, an insane argument is one which we don't happen to agree with; I think this could be considered basic haman nature- particularly about political matters.
rx

__________________

"Load the wagon boys, the mule's blind" Smokey Yunick

"Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who makes it's laws" Mayer Amschel Rothschild

No, insane means:
[LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Truck Forum Link.

__________________
Support The Special Operations Warrior Foundation

Democrat Values: Jail for People Who Don't Buy Insurance, Citizenship for Border Jumpers

Political Correctness Will Be The Death Of Us All

Pray For Obama, Psalm 109:8 "Let his days be few; and let another take office."

Thank you for posting this! It illustrates my point SO succinctly. The classic definitions of insane describe perfectly the arguments of those with a diametrically opposed point of view to our own.

Oh Professor, you've done it again...
rx

__________________

"Load the wagon boys, the mule's blind" Smokey Yunick

"Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who makes it's laws" Mayer Amschel Rothschild

It does? How so?

__________________
Support The Special Operations Warrior Foundation

Democrat Values: Jail for People Who Don't Buy Insurance, Citizenship for Border Jumpers

Political Correctness Will Be The Death Of Us All

Pray For Obama, Psalm 109:8 "Let his days be few; and let another take office."

The Mind will believe what it wants to believe, based on a persons psychi I believe. There are facts and theories to the support of both conspiracy, and non conspiracy views on 911 or any other event, in reality nobody can say for certain which was the case. There is little point in arguing about it, which is why i backed off of that 911 thread a while ago.

You can't push your beliefs on other people. On that same note, going into things with an open mind doesn't hurt either, nor does it suggest you are leaning into believing either end of the spectrum, it just suggests that you are open to the fact that there is some possibility in either case.

The 911 commission was compromised of people from the Bush Administration, the testimony was not made under oath, nor was it documented or released to the public. The only thing documented was the official report. I think we are all aware of how much of an epic fail FEMA has been on numerous occasions, and frankly I don't trust those idiots as far as I can throw them.

I don't believe either theory, everything comes to light eventually, so there is little point in stressing about, fighting over, or constantly debating. I do have an open mind, and agree that it is possible. It is natural human nature to want to believe in the inherent 'good' of mankind, and we often would rather not see peoples evil side. There are still evil people in this world, and the possibility of people as evil as Hitler, who agree with what he did during the holocaust is still possible, whether we want to believe that or not. I would rather not believe it, personally, but that doesn't mean i'll close my mind off to all probability either.