The Duty of Our Oath

12 Sep

I've discovered over the years that there seems to be some confusion regarding the duty of those who take the oath of office for our military. Since the very survival of our Republic hinges on our men and women in the military faithfully performing their duty, I believe it is necessary to review that oath and seek to understand its meaning and implications.

The current oath of office for enlisted personnel...

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

Notice that the first requirement in this oath is to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; setting the stage for the rest of them. The support and defense of the Constitution is the primary duty of those taking this oath and is first in priority. The next item is "that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;" again the focus of our true faith and allegiance is to the Constitution; not the flag, our superior officers, or anyone else under the Constitution, which covers all officers occupying offices created by the Constitution.

I believe the rest of the oath is just a little misunderstood by most people taking it; they tend to put the end at the beginning in priority, making it very easy for enemies of the Constitution in the chain of command to garner support and obedience from those that would otherwise be opposing them.

All officers of the Federal Government that qualify for their office according to the Constitution, have entered into that office through the means defined by the Constitution, and perform their duties within the powers and limitations defined by the Constitution and Bill of Rights, deserve and require respect and obedience by their subordinates in the furtherance of their constitutional duties and responsibilities.

A person who enters into an office failing to meet the qualifications for it is a usurper; a person exercising power unlawfully... such a person by their actions are attempting to overthrow the Constitution. It is the duty of every officer of whatever rank to oppose such usurpers by arresting them or removing them by force if necessary from the office they're usurping; defending the Constitution. Any persons aiding or abetting such usurpation are also enemies of the Constitution at best, if the usurper is an enemy agent, then those aiding the usurpation become traitors by aiding an enemy of the Republic, giving them aid and comfort. US Constitution, Article III, Section 3.

As for the person currently occupying the Office of President, he has failed to present credible evidence of his eligibility and paid millions of dollars to keep his relevant history secret from the American people. The last evidence of his citizenship shows it to be Indonesian, not American... making him a foreign usurper. Every Federal officer since the electoral votes were counted in December 2008, has been enabling a foreign usurper by NOT seeking his removal by any means necessary... making them traitors in my opinion.

Impeachment in this case is not called for since that procedure only applies to officers that are lawfully seated and must be removed. Since Obama has never held his office lawfully according to the qualifications required by the Constitution, his actions while committing his usurpations are not binding on the people of this Republic and there is no legitimate immunity for his actions in office. His signature is invalid on any document he signed and his nominations and appointments are equally so. Everything he's touched officially since entering office has no validity of law... he must be removed as the criminal he is.

"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States." -- Constitution, Article II, paragraph 5.

http://www.wnd.com/2011/12/98546/

http://commonsensetome.com/2013/09/01/impeachment-of-obama-or-arrest/

As you can see... it is the primary duty of all sworn officers of any rank to oppose Obama and those he's inserted into the offices of our Republic. It isn't rocket science, just requires actually reading the Constitution and understanding what the term "Supreme Law of the Land" means in context of our oath.

Enforcement of the oath of office is codified into law…

US Constitution, Article II, Section 1, clause 6 – The oath of the President

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation: — "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

5 USC 3331 - Oath of office

An individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services, shall take the following oath: "I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God." This section does not affect other oaths required by law.

5 USC 3333 - Employee affidavit; loyalty and striking against the Government

(a) Except as provided by subsection (b) of this section, an individual who accepts office or employment in the Government of the United States or in the government of the District of Columbia shall execute an affidavit within 60 days after accepting the office or employment that his acceptance and holding of the office or employment does not or will not violate section 7311 of this title. The affidavit is prima facie evidence that the acceptance and holding of office or employment by the affiant does not or will not violate section 7311 of this title.

(b) An affidavit is not required from an individual employed by the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia for less than 60 days for sudden emergency work involving the loss of human life or the destruction of property. This subsection does not relieve an individual from liability for violation of section 7311 of this title.

18 USC 1918 - Disloyalty and asserting the right to strike against the Government

Whoever violates the provision of section 7311 of title 5 that an individual may not accept or hold a position in the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia if he—

(1) advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government;

(2) is a member of an organization that he knows advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government;

(3) participates in a strike, or asserts the right to strike, against the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia; or

(4) is a member of an organization of employees of the Government of the United States or of individuals employed by the government of the District of Columbia that he knows asserts the right to strike against the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia;
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year and a day, or both.

5 USC 7311 - Loyalty and striking

An individual may not accept or hold a position in the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia if he—

(1) advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government;

(2) is a member of an organization that he knows advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government;

(3) participates in a strike, or asserts the right to strike, against the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia; or

(4) is a member of an organization of employees of the Government of the United States or of individuals employed by the government of the District of Columbia that he knows asserts the right to strike against the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia.

In conclusion, the oath of office taken by officers in government, from the lowliest rank in the armed forces to the highest offices in the land, State or Federal, is not just a formality. It defines the duty you assume when taking the oath and the performance of your job must conform to that duty, even if you must resist usurpations by your superiors at the cost of your own life; the future of your family’s liberty depends upon it.

©2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 by Thomas Mick, All Rights Reserved.
Permission to distribute for non-commercial purposes is hereby granted, in whole or part, provided attribution and a link to this article is included. Commercial distribution without the written permission of the author is prohibited.

Those of you who wish to materially support my efforts to restore the American Republic, please do so by sending contributions to http://paypal.me/ThomasMick.

0 Replies to “The Duty of Our Oath

  1. I am in total agreement with you. I am so confused as to why our congress is not also believers of what you wrote. Aren’t they mostly lawyers? And they don’t understand the law of the land! We are indeed in much deeper trouble than appears at the surface.

  2. Strong, solid article. Please submit it to The New York Times or Wall Street Journal. People need to read the truth.

  3. Finally an article of Constitutional Truth. Very well written Thomas Mick. I agree 100% and would gladly be a member of the Patriots that go to Washington to effect the arrest and imprisonment of this Muslim Brotherhood Commander.. You sir, are a Patriot of who I would be proud to stand beside with the smell of gun powder in the air.

    • I have no need for ghost writers, since this is my personal blog and create most of the content myself. Thank you for the kind complements… coming from a fellow writer, that means a lot.

  4. You are making the accusation that he is not eligible. A simple reading of the Constitution proves you wrong. Article II: “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President.” The US Citizenship and Immigration Service defines a citizen born out of the U.S., but born to one parent who is a citizen. “One parent is a U.S. citizen at the time of birth and the birthdate is before November 14, 1986 but after October 10, 1952.”
    Now, prove me wrong.

    • Yes they do… would have though it would have been those that have take the oath to support and defend the Constitution… the ones in uniform that are guarding the tyrants instead of opposing them.

  5. Regardless of what Pinochet (Chile) did while in power, what he did to overthrow the socialist usurper Alllende provides a perfect blueprint for our military generals who were booted recently. Everything that Obama has done, Allende did including gutting the military. It was all done in secret and with the help of the CIA a.k.a. the USA… from the water and the air. The military took their positions back and (intimidated?) the replacement wuss-military replacements back away from their official posts — took over security — and got Allende’s a$$ out – all in a matter of hours. They took care of business and reclaimed their democracy. At the end of the day those generals thought they owed a speech to the public and went on TV to explain how they were sad they had to do it but it had to be done. I think Chile kept their democracy for another 30-40 years and i think are back to Progressive Socialist now

  6. The US Citizenship and Immigration Service does NOT define who is eligible to hold the office of President of these United States. ONLY the constitution defines this eligibility: Nature born or a Citizen at the time of the Constitution.

    • A Natural Born Citizen (one born in the Republic of citizen parents) or a citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution in 1789.

      The Federal Government has become lawless and no longer concerns itself with the limitations of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. It is long past time to reboot the American Republic and return it to its proper role in our lives… only to secure OUR God-given natural rights.

      http://commonsensetome.com/2014/01/02/a-plan-of-action/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *