Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

Comment Archives: stories: News & Features: Features: Last 30 Days

Re: “Pipelines and Battle Lines

I am one of those tribal members (Coos) that opposes this project. The pipeline would go through forests and under the Umpqua, Rogue, Coquille and Coos rivers. It would ultimately be bad for fish and wildlife and impact archaeological sites.

3 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by P. Phillips on 06/15/2017 at 5:16 PM

Re: “Out, But Not Down

After being in relationship with Wilson for seven years,he broke up with me, I did everything possible to bring him back but all was in vain, I wanted him back so much because of the love I have for him, I begged him with everything, I made promises but he refused. I explained my problem to someone online and she suggested that I should contact a spell caster that could help me cast a spell to bring him back. But I am the type that don't believed in spell, I had no choice than to try it, I meant a spell caster called Dr Adoda and I email him, and he told me there was no problem that everything will be okay before three days, that my ex will return to me before three days, he cast the spell and surprisingly in the second day, it was around 4pm. My ex called me, I was so surprised, I answered the call and all he said was that he was so sorry for everything that happened, that he wanted me to return to him, that he loves me so much. I was so happy and went to him, that was how we started living together happily again. Since then, I have made promise that anybody I know that have a relationship problem, I would be of help to such person by referring him or her to the only real and powerful spell caster who helped me with my own problem and who is different from all the fake ones out there. Anybody could need the help of this spell caster, his email: ( ) you can email him if you need his assistance in your relationship or anything. CONTACT HIM NOW FOR SOLUTION..

Posted by Maria sanchez on 06/10/2017 at 7:44 AM

Re: “The Outback in Our Backyard

My Name is clinton john i work with Quick loans finance a legitimate and reliable loan company located in Detroit,Us. We currently give out loans at low interest rate of 2.5% and with no credit check,we offer personal loans, debt consolidation loans,venture capital, business loans, education, home loans or loans for any reason, from $ 1,000 to $ 1 million range. However, our method allows you to specify the loan amount needed and duration you can afford it, it gives you a real chance to get the funds you need! If you are interested, contact via Email:( Thanks...

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by anderson smith on 06/05/2017 at 4:42 PM

Re: “Everything but the Anarchists

Responding to the article, the reporter, and the posts above.
Firstly, I am a former bay area police officer (San Francisco suburb).
Secondly, I am a member of OathKeepers.

To directly address Leslie2's post above, I voted for Obama, and then I voted for Trump. You just found your "non-fringe". I identify myself as a constitutionalist now, although I was raised heavily liberal/democrat and identified as such in my youth all the way through college (my dad went to Berkeley and was part of the crowd during the riots and National Guard incident, my cousins are named Sunshine and Rainbow, I was almost named Free, and I spent my youth travelling around in a Volkswagon Bus, occasionally painted like hippies, and my first degree was behavioral science). As a police officer, I was republican, as was expected of my cadre. So there is some grounding information.

I debated joining Oathkeepers for many years. Partly because of the stigma imposed upon the organization by the mainstream media and leftist journalists. Oathkeepers are NOT an "alt-right" organization. Contrary to implications above and elsewhere. And, just for the record, Oathkeepers members were critical of the republican establishment under Bush as well as Obama, and Trump. Oathkeepers is a distinctly non-partisan/political organization. I found this out when, once a member, I began reading internal forums and discovered that when occasionally someone posted about Oathkeepers should attend so-and-so's rally or whatever, they were shot down because the organization refused to be associated with a particular political leaning and does not wish to be affiliated with either political wing. I am NOT saying its a neutral organization. But, they try very hard to prevent the organization itself from the appearance of association with any political party. When you see turnouts, or when there is an organizational call to action or mobilization, the purpose is to defend the constitutional rights of those who are being threatened. NOT to protect the political party involved. There is a very distinct difference there that is often overlooked. I believe this difference is intentionally overlooked to help demonize the organization. Showing up to protect peoples right to speak is far different from showing up to support their perspective or political group. It doesn't mean we agree with them. It means we believe in their right to say it and will help protect their ability to do so whether we agree with it or not. I monitor all of the internal state boards, and this is a universal truth from inside the organization. The people, like me, who were sworn officers, overwhelming joined Oathkeepers because we believe strongly in the constitution and the rights outlined therein. If we wanted to join a more "alt-right" group, or something that inserts itself a little more boisterously into politics, we'd join the three-pers (III-pers or 3%-ers) or one of the numerous militias. Many Oathkeepers, in fact, are members of both. They join Oathkeepers because they believe in their oath to protect and defend the constitution, and support the organization and its attempt to be moderately apolitical to protect the rights of all, and then they also join alt-right organizations or militias that they believe in for their ability to express their political views more openly and with open support of others (because Oathkeepers tends to shut down these types of expressions).

Myself, I joined no other groups. I am not a part of a militia. I am not a part of any alt-right organization. I hold no other membership, other than the union I am a mandated member of (I moved on from police work and into medicine, where I am now an emergency department nurse). Because my belief and my efforts are entirely directed toward supporting the constitution, I joined this organization, which is the only organization I found which also does this, and only does this. I am not even a member of the NRA or other 2A groups, because there are politics mixed up in those organizations that I don't necessarily agree with. Oathkeepers is just about the constitution, no add on junk. On a personal note, I have been a critic of every president since I turned 18, from Clinton to Bush to Obama to Trump. I have been critical of every presidential move that was antithetical to constitution, regardless of their political party. I have been very critical of Trump over some of his moves as well. This is not about party politics or right wing alignment.

So, it is wrong to portray the entire organization in a political slant, and it is wrong to portray its members likewise. I am not a hold out or a loner in the organization. In fact, I'd say, I am probably more of the average in my political leanings and beliefs. It is interesting seeing reactions from people finding out I am an Oathkeeper, and in realizing how the organization to which I belong is considered by many to be anti-government, or sovereign-citizen (as alleged by the articles' author above) which is absolutely NOT true. We are former and current law enforcement and military, we love our country, our government. We have all been trained in the risks/dangers sovereign citizens may pose. We are NOT associated with them, and it is disingenuous to state or even imply otherwise. We are not a racist organization either. But we definitely are shy around media, simply because of how wrongly we are represented in the media, even by people who state they will not "throw us under the bus". Its hard to trust journalists when they keep perpetuating blatant lies about you. I am not saying what was done was correct (trying to take the journalists notes/recorder, as alleged above), as I do not believe in secrecy on behalf of organizations or government. Everything an organization does should be public light, and that is partly why the groups meetings are public and open to everyone. We do not hide who we are or what we believe. This reporter may have had a bad experience. If so, I am sorry. That experience is NOT representative of who we are or what we stand for. As an Oathkeeper, if I had been in that meeting, I would have stood with you in the back of the room and protected your recording device and your notepad and your right to be there. I have done so for others, and will do so continuing on in the future. I don't care if you are smearing us, I don't even care if you are directly verbally insulting me, you still have a right to be there, even if I don't like you or what you say, and I will still fight to defend your right to do so.

That is who we are, and what we stand for. THAT is Oathkeepers.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by JoshAegis on 06/04/2017 at 10:46 PM

Facebook Activity

This Week's Issue

June 21-27, 2017
Issue Cover

Copyright © 2017 Metro Newspapers. All rights reserved.

Website powered by Foundation