Military to Pledge Oath to Obama, Not Constitution

Michele Chang – Jumping in Pools January 28, 2009

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates is extremely frustrated with orders that the White House is contemplating. According to sources at the Pentagon, including all branches of the armed forces, the Obama Administration may break with a centuries-old tradition.

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.

"The oath to the Constitution is as old as the document itself." the spokesman said, "At no time in American history, not even in the Civil War, did the oath change or the subject of the oath differ. It has always been to the Constitution."

The back-and-forth between the White House and the Defense Department was expected as President George W. Bush left office. President Obama has already signed orders to close Guantanamo and to pull combat troops from Iraq. But, this, say many at the Defense Department, goes too far.

"Technically, we can't talk about it before it becomes official policy." the spokesman continued. "However, the Defense Department, including the Secretary, will not take this laying down. Expect a fight from the bureaucracy and the brass."

Sources at the White House had a different point of view. In a circular distributed by White


House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, the rationale for the change was made more clear.

"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."

"We expect a lot of flak over this," the classified memo continues. "But those that would be most against it are those looking either for attention or control."

The time frame for the changes are unknown. However, it is more likely that the changes will be made around the July 4th holiday, in order to dampen any potential backlash. The difference in the oath will actually only be slight. The main differences will be the new phrasing. It is expected that the oath to the Constitution will be entirely phased out within two years.

Recession is the birth pangs of a New Global Order, says Brown

New World Order man. Britain’s Prime Minister Gordon Brown gives a speech in front of a painting of Britain’s Queen Elizabeth I at 10 Downing Street in London, Monday, Jan. 26, 2009. AP Photo by Kirsty Wigglesworth

Daily Mail | Jan 27, 2009

By Kirsty Walker

Gordon Brown has insisted that the recession was just the ‘difficult birth pangs of a new global order’.

As a poll showed more voters are turning against him, the Prime Minister warned that countries must see the financial crisis as the chance to forge a new financial system.

Setting the scene for April’s G20 talks in London, Mr Brown said: ‘If what happens to a bank in one country can within minutes have devastating effects for banks on a different continent, then only a truly international response of policy and governance can be effective.’

He said current ‘threats and challenges’ to the world economy should be seen as ‘the difficult birth pangs of a new global order’.

‘Our task now is nothing less than making the transition to a new internationalism with the benefits of an expanding global economy, not muddling through as pessimists, but making the necessary adjustment to a better future and setting new rules for this new global order’, he said.

Mr Brown and Chancellor Alistair Darling are aware the G20 summit of developing countries and business leaders on April 4, could decide further stimulus measures that could alter the of this year’s Budget. The Prime Ministeris pinning his hopes on other countries, in particular the U.S., following Britain’s lead by pumping cash into their economies.

The Treasury rejected suggestions that Mr Darling is already working on a third economic rescue. Ministers want to give the Government time to see if its £410billion rescue plan has had any impact on the economy. But a poll last night found most voters believe Labour’s attempts to kick-start the economy are doomed to failure.

The Guardian/ICM poll found that two-thirds of voters believe that the banking bailout packages will achieve nothing or make things worse.

It also shows more signs that David Cameron has seen off the ‘Brown bounce’. The Conservatives have opened up a 12-point margin on 44 per cent, up six on last month, while Labour is on 32 and the Liberal Democrats are on 16.

The poll, carried out after last week’s bank bailouts and sharp falls in share values, found that public confidence in Labour’s economic team has plunged by 11 per cent since November, with the Conservatives seen as more trusted on the economy by a margin of two points.

There is support for the VAT cut (63 per cent) and a programme of public works (85 per cent). But only 43 per cent support the decision to buy large stakes in some banks and only 40 per cent back outright nationalisation. Voters are slightly more enthusiastic about Labour attempts to underwrite bank lending, backed by 52 per cent.

If the poll were replicated at a General Election, the Tories would win 360 seats - a majority of 70. The LibDems will be disturbed by their fall to the lowest level in any ICM poll since August.

Wake up Obama is NOT an American NWO deception

Obama Lies

Obama without his teleprompter

Escaping the System