January 30, 2009
|If true, Obama’s loyalty pledge would be little different than the one used by Hitler to extract loyalty from the German Wehrmacht.|
Under the dictatorship of Adolf Hitler, German Wehrmacht officers and soldiers as well as civil servants pledged personal loyalty to the Führer, not the German constitution. It appears Obama has taken a page from Hitler’s authoritarian playbook, according to Michele Chang. “A spokesman for General James Cartwright, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, states that the Obama Administration wants to have soldiers and officers pledge a loyalty oath directly to the office of the President, and no longer to the Constitution,” Chang writes.
Chang’s assertion is not corroborated by the corporate media and other news sources.
The claim falls on the heels of Obama’s supposed flub of the oath of office, as explicitly prescribed in the Constitution, Article II, Section 1, which begins by saying the president shall take the oath “before he enter on the execution of his office.” Chief Justice John Roberts misplaced the word “faithfully.” In a technical sense, Obama did not take the oath or affirmation required by the United States Constitution, a fact widely dismissed by scholars and the corporate media. On the following day, Obama retook the oath in the privacy of the White House, sans not only the presence of television cameras, but a bible as well.
“What appears to be the authentic inauguration took place in a basement, and was an elite rather than a populist rite, with just nine witnesses,” writes Michael Hoffman. “It occurred in former President Franklin Roosevelt’s secretive, war-era ‘map room.’ Before FDR, under presidents from Chester Arthur through Wilson and Coolidge, it was reputedly used to play the game of billiards.”
“We believe the oath of office was administered effectively and that the president was sworn in appropriately yesterday,” White House Counsel Greg Craig said in a statement. “But the oath appears in the Constitution itself. And out of abundance of caution, because there was one word out of sequence, Chief Justice Roberts administered the oath a second time.”
If Obama did indeed instruct the Pentagon to have soldiers and officers pledge a loyalty oath directly to the office of the President, this would be in keeping with earlier unconstitutional usurpations, most notably the issuance of executive orders, memorandums, proclamations, regulations and other flexing of presidential power. Executive orders are not mentioned in the Constitution. “Executive orders issued by the Bush administration have sparked fear in the minds of many Americans (professors, academics, and non-academics) who have reason to believe such executive orders could be used to make Bush a de facto dictator since many of these orders allow Bush to side-step the other branches of government and make autocratic laws,” explains Dahlia Lithwick.
In keeping with this tradition, Obama plans to issue his own spate of executive orders. “Some of the first executive orders will no doubt be pleasing to some of Barack Obama’s feminist supporters and will anger pro life supporters. Barack Obama will lift the restrictions on foreign aid to abortions that were imposed by President George W. Bush. Obama will also lift restrictions for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research,” writes Mark Whittington of Associated Content. It is expected Obama will also issue an executive order to reverse Bush’s opening of offshore areas and certain land areas such as Utah to oil exploration.
“The President feels that the military has been too indoctrinated by the old harbingers of hate: nationalism, racism, and classism. By removing an oath to the American society, the soldiers are less likely to commit atrocities like those at Abu Ghraib,” Michele Chang claims White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs stated in a classified memo. “We expect a lot of flak over this. But those that would be most against it are those looking either for attention or control.”
Again, there is no independent corroboration on the existence of this classified memo. However, the tenor of the alleged memo does not come as a surprise in the wake of previous systematic unconstitutional actions, in particular Bush’s issuance of Executive Order 12919 allowing the president to declare martial law, Executive Order 12656, Executive Order 11921, Executive Order 13074, and a subsequent amendment to EO 12656. Add to these executive orders and others the John W. Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2006, the Military Commissions Act of 2006, and the National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive, also known as PDD51, and you have the framework for martial law and a military dictatorship.
Obama’s version of the Wehrmacht oath, if indeed true, would be required not to eliminate the “old harbingers of hate,” but establish fidelity on the part of the military to a bankster imposed dictator, especially after martial law is declared.
This article was posted: Friday, January 30, 2009 at 12:53 pm