It is, however, sad that action had to be taken by a low level civilian contractor rather than by a commissioned or non-commissioned officer who would have been in a position to do real political damage to the Chekists.
I still await some documentation of an Oath Keeper actually doing something concrete.
2 comments:
That statement, if authentic is a good start.
It is, however, sad that action had to be taken by a low level civilian contractor rather than by a commissioned or non-commissioned officer who would have been in a position to do real political damage to the Chekists.
I still await some documentation of an Oath Keeper actually doing something concrete.
Who gives a rat's ass about the "oath keepers"? They've failed in keeping their oath. What more dowe need to kknow?
Post a Comment