47 votes

Oathkeepers statement on the July 4th march.

Armed march by Adam Kokesh from the Oathkeepers board of directors ~

James Hanna ~ Oath Keepers does NOT endorse Adam's march. The leadership at Oath Keepers has a wealth of tactical experience, and marching into the enemy's camp, to be captured makes no sense. What is to be accomplished by this action? What could possibly go wrong? These are the questions a responsible leader asks before sending his troops into harm's way. This is either tactical ignorance, or willful endangerment; the latter being the worst of the two choices.

I would say that Adam's choice of the words "Oath Keepers" is no accident. He is VERY familiar with Oath Keepers and our mission. Not only are his tactics questionable, so are his ethics. Not only has he embarrassed himself by announcing a pointless and irresponsible armed march, he has damaged his integrity by using the good name of Oath Keepers to bolster his own agenda.

James Hanna
Oath Keepers
Board of Directors

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The 2nd amendment is valid in ALL places public.

He was marching ( or in this case displaying ) his rights in the face of a unlawful government decree. He IS an Oath Keeper.

It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people that pay no price for being wrong.
Thomas Sowell

Not a fan of Oath and Duty

Blah blah blah.

I'm not a fan of these chest pounding conservatives.

While they could certainly find worse things to swear allegiance to, I'd rather focus on individual/personal liberty and freedom. But, that said, they are an ally against the marxists.

Let's just hope they are as willing to fight against the massive military adventures that violate "foreigners'" God given rights.


Nations are fading away and something else is emerging. Perhaps it is true that liberty is worthwhile but perhaps it is also true that too few people throughout time and place have valued it highly enough and/or had the personal virtues required to win or maintain it. It takes honor, acumen, and courage chiefly.

If you know history and can interpret events which have been in motion for some time, you know that the destination to our journey is a new form of serfdom.

I wish it were not so. I am so biased in favor of liberty that I have a hard time accepting this fate. I have a harder time understanding all those people who do not value their liberty as I value mine.

The hands and feet of the future serfs are already mostly bound. It seems natural to them. They believe they as free as they need to be. There is no shortage of would-be lords. Lord Bloomberg, anybody?

One of the final tasks is to disarm those who would be serfs. Serfs have rights which are recognized and have limited freedom. Being armed is not part of that freedom. You will be legally disarmed by people who will not themselves be disarmed. There is no equality to it. Those Enlightenment ideas are all but forgotten... except by the Remnant.

Serfdom will sadly force people into being serfs or lords. Both positions compromise the individual. I wouldn't wish either on somebody. The only position to be in is that of free person. Free people never comprise more than 10% of the population of a serf society. The percentage rarely shrinks or expands.

The 10% ultimately stay free through a mixture of being productive and having the courage to defend their freedom. Freedom of the individual is only defended through collective action. A collective of individuals working together is the only thing that works.

In the European Middle Ages, there existed royal soldiers, feudal troops owing allegiance to aristocrats, mercenaries, soldiers of holy orders, soldiers employed by trading companies, Vatican troops, and *free companies*. Force was hardly consolidated. The free companies are the freemen working together to guard their freedom. They fight not for king or God or to protect celebrities or trade routes, but only for each other.

Why is this inevitable and how does it ultimately come about? Trust. Trust makes the world go round. If you can't trust, you can't trade and interact. Our institutions of every kind are wholly corrupt and untrustworthy. Its like the words of the Sting song from years ago, "If I ever lose my faith in you"... That song is predictive without trying to be. It predicts that when trust dissolves in institutions, they fade away and crumble and are replaced with PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS. A society wholly constructed on personal relationships is feudal by definition.

Response to y BaneMaler

BaneMaler said: "Finally, this has really allowed some of the "mighty" to have fallen in favor due to their reaction. I hope this can be mended, but this unnecessary statement by OathKeepers seems more about covering their 501 status from scrutiny than convincing their membership about what they think"

Actually, Oath Keepers is not a 501 exempt org. We purposely did NOT seek federal exemption for taxes so we wouldn't be under the Feds thumb in any way. But nice try at a smear.

We don't support his march because it is bad strategy, and also because it is really not even civil disobedience. Last description of it says they will stop well short of the police line, declare the government illegitimate, and then disperse. So, what is the point? How is that some grand, glorious, hard stand? It isn't. But even if it were, it is still bad strategy as it puts the liberty movement in the posture of the aggressor. Captain Parker and his men did not march on Boston. They made general Gage come to them on April 19, 1775, as the clear aggressor. They used sound strategy to retain the moral high ground as the victims, which made all the difference when it came to how other Americans saw it. It was essential for the other colonies to see Massachusetts as the victim, so they would unite along side Massachusetts, and by adopting a defensive posture that forced Gage to be the aggressor, they also won over many in England and in the rest of the world.

This is the exact opposite. And Adams rhetoric has not been confined to talk of peaceful civil disobedience.

Adam has clearly, on Alex Jones, stated that the intent is to overthrow the government. Now, of course, he is not actually going to try to do that on July 4, as he is actually not even planning on engaging in real civil disobedience and getting arrested, but his rhetoric is all about overthrowing the government. And that alone makes it something we cannot support or take part in because we have active duty military members who cannot belong to an organization that supports or advocates overthrowing the US government. There are specific DOD regulations on that. So, you would prefer that we just tell our active duty that we don't care about their exposure to punishment and harassment by the DOD, and let Adam inaccurately tie us to his march by repeatedly using the term "oath keepers", without us saying anything?

We were originally not going to make a public statement about his march, and it is our standard policy to not criticize what others do, and just let them do their thing while we do ours, but Adam has gone out of his way to try to recruit our membership to attend his march, while making public statements that directly violate our bylaws, and giving many people the false impression that this is an Oath Keepers sanctioned event.

That is why we had to make a statement. Adam forced us to. I will post a longer statement on our main site today, and you can read why we think it is also spectacularly bad strategy.

Now, if you want to question my personal integrity, by suggesting we are somehow worried about our tax status, then please have the personal courage to do it to my face. I travel all over the country. No doubt we can arrange the eyeball to eyeball meeting.

Stewart Rhodes

You Swore an Oath to the Constitution ... Not the Politicians.

Guardians of the Republic, Honor Your Oath. Join Us.


I have a question for Stewart Rhodes

I will use the terms Oath Keeper(organization) and oath keeper(action) so as not to confuse anyone.

Did not the founders say it is the right of the people to alter or abolish a government that is not working in our best interest? Contemplating the "overthrow" of government is our right as a people, and as an oath keeper protecting our rights is your job is it not?

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

Is it your right, for Oath Keepers as an organization, to condemn his actions? To personally disagree is one thing, but to announce it as a group, seems irresponsible to me, especially because that means you speak for everyone in your organization, and you don't.

This concept of "overthrow" government speaks of violence, which is where the stigma comes from, however, is that not what the founders spoke of when they wrote the Declaration of Independence.

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies;"

They suffered as long as they could before they fought physically, they exhausted all ends first, and still only started the war in self-defense.

Jefferson also said this:

"Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusetts? And can history produce an instance of a rebellion so honourably conducted? I say nothing of it's motives. And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."

I am an oath keeper, I will always be, and I supported this peaceful march as the rights of the citizens to protest. The citizen's would've been responsible for their own safety, as well as taking down provocateurs and ensuring the safety of others around them, to deny them this, is to say they are not responsible enough to be carrying firearms, and now you sound like Peirs Morgan.

Also, being an oath keeper does not mean you are loyal to government or this nation, it means you are loyal to the citizen masters that individually rule this government.

robot999's picture

Thank You

for stepping up and clarifying the OathKeepers position so poignantly Stewart.

"Government is the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex". - Frank Zappa

Question For You Stewart

Have you contacted Adam with your rationale? I have to say I haven't been sure what to think about it but what you wrote is both very clear and very sensible. Possibly Adam would see it the same way? In the interviews I heard, he seemed like a thoughtful guy. Maybe it's just a difference in opinion that could be worked out?

Stewart, I, for one, see why

Stewart, I, for one, see why you wrote this and I think it is not only a sensible stance, but a darned good piece of writing. I also applaud your group, and know where u stand when the time comes.

I hope Adam at least has an open carry 4th barbque

on private land somewhere. A lot of people already bought plane tickets. COME ON ADAM BRING ON SOME HOG MEAT AND BEER!

Release the Sandy Hook video.

Adam has said he will stop at the city limits if asked

and obey all laws, so he won't be marching into their encampment. I think the OK's problem is that he implied an endorsement. It may be Adam's thing, but it's not their thing, so they had to distance themselves.

What will happen is Adam will march to the city line, cops will say stop and turn back. Adam says fine start the barbeques and get the cases of beer out of the coolers. Mission accomplished.

Now it's party time and we got to see the spectacle of thousands of cops lined up in trembling fear of well-armed American citizens. Beautiful. I support the march. Adam's no dummy he won't get anybody shot up. He just likes to make a point.

Release the Sandy Hook video.


Many of the veteran marches in our nation's past were organized based on grievances that veterans had about military benefits.

I don't know of a single case where a legion of veterans marched on DC to support the rights of all.

Some of the people who are marching will be older. Considerably older. I know a number of surviving WW2 and Korea vets that are showing up to events in my area and who would happily join this march if they had transportation and a little company.

I think the older people marching alongside younger people makes a strong statement.

If we are afraid to march in our own capital to exercise our rights then we have already lost our rights.

You do realize in my home state of NY it is now illegal to privately sell *any* type of firearm to another private individual. They have not only trashed the right to bear arms, but more importantly have destroyed the ability for two adults to voluntarily contract with each other to trade. People are being arrested here already for attempting to privately sell firearms. At least one person was arrested for having more than 7 rounds in a magazine. We have already lost our rights.

These weak ass protests that are going on here are just like the lame protests that the British people staged after it was too late. Nothing short of something like Adam's march is even worthwhile at this point. Just pissing in the wind. The media and politicians ignoring it all.

Cyril's picture

I BEG whoever can hear to consider one statement & two questions

I BEG whoever can hear to consider this one statement and these two questions:


The 2nd amendment of the Bill of Rights protects the 1st amendment of the Bill of Rights.

(NO guns = shut up, bend over, line up)



Question 1:

Isn't the 1st amendment of the Bill of Rights the ONLY ONE protecting the OTHER NINE amendments of the Bill of Rights?

Question 2:

If so, isn't this 1st amendment of the Bill of Rights the MOST POWERFUL defensive weapon - DE FACTO - for the People TO ACTIVATE when the Bill of Rights is being threatened AS A WHOLE?

This is, anyway, the weapon I have chosen to activate FIRST, before too late, to do the most damages against this rampant tyranny, as early as I can, BEFORE - God forbid - that I have no other choice than to activate the 2nd amendment, and not just for the show:

Open Letter To Senator Ted Cruz


For the republic.

For liberty.

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

Cyril's picture

As some here may know

As some here may know already, I respectfully disagree with Adam's initiative.

My point of view may be unusual though:

I only beg to argue that, if we consider his traction, popularity, etc (whether we like his loud mouth or not; personally, I'm fine with it), we could in fact aim higher with more "violence" in the truth:

instead of counting a few thousands or dozens thousands people to assemble, I'd go for gathering HUNDREDS thousands or a million around and using something to HIT HARDER, TO DO MORE DAMAGES...

I would use "only" the 1st Amendment TO ACCUSE.

To list all the infamies, betrayals, grievances, we can think of AND SHOUT OUT LOUD.

We have those by legions.


On the point of concern making an unlawful protest in the context of DC's perverted laws re: unwelcome open carry and weapons, when it's by the people...

CHECK THIS OUT - even I, myself, am going DRY to make the argument against Adam on the matter...

Nail, meet Hammer - who is still willing to nitpick on the "unlawful" side of the argument, now, re: showing weapons, locations, and prior consent ?

Well, not I :


"Unlawful"? Yeah, right. Two flavors of it, apparently.

Yet, I still think we could do better using if only our 1A FOR GOOD to the face of the traitors in their lair; just IMO.


"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.


"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius

A bad idea in general.

Look, even if you are 100% pro-gun, and think everyone in Manhattan should be carrying AK-47's, this is not the way to go about it. Potentially thousands of people showing up in Washington, DC with loaded magazines is a security threat to all branches of the federal government and our elected representatives. Ron Paul's goals have been to change the system from the inside, and not to run amock. Just because the 2nd amendment is there, doesn't mean it needs to be abused wildly. Besides, new gun control legislation failed in Congress, so what is this really all about?

Well Adam spells it out, that he wants to take down the federal government altogether. That's a bad idea if you ask me, because he is just going to get a lot of people either arrested, or, if not 100% careful, seriously injured. Yes, everyone in the country could decide to storm Washington, DC and overthrow the government, but they haven't. The reason being is that the alternative to representative government, even if it is a cesspool in D.C., is the total chaos which would quickly ensue.

Violence begets violence and the American Revolution is held in such high regard because it is one of the few that didn't actually end with a despot controlling the contested territories. Most revolutions end in an extremely bad way, historically.

Once his mission fails and the protesters are arrested, it will not bring anyone's attention to the problems in Washington. It will be spun as a bunch of Ron Paul and Oathkeeper / Tea Party nutcases, walking around, open carry, in the nation's capitol, like its the Wild West. And there will be a point to this spin! Very bad idea all around. Nothing will be accomplished but peoples lives being ruined and further justification for "increased security". Oh well, don't say I didn't warn you.

By the way, according to Adam, we are complicit if we actually enjoy the 4th of July with our families, by, you know, being free and enjoying the day.

There were two elements to this march

The actual march and the announcement of the march.

Each has exposed the knee jerk reaction people have to gun advocacy on levels of:
1. tactics
2. principles
3. organization

I understand the tactical disagreement with this, people always have tactical differences.

I am very surprised at the limits to ones principles when faced with this reality. Just thought we could at least united to some degree that this is eventually the right thing to do or something we should work toward at least. Maybe I am more comfortable with guns being a military guy. You know, "an armed society is a polite society", still think that can work in DC.

Finally, this has really allowed some of the "mighty" to have fallen in favor due to their reaction. I hope this can be mended, but this unnecessary statement by OathKeepers seems more about covering their 501 status from scrutiny than convincing their membership about what they think. I am surrounded by some big talkers in my state who are just learning about Adam from this announcement and they support him. Big conservative types that would join O.K. They would be good allies to have when SHTF but are being open to liberty really for the first time. But, when I talk to liberty folk, they seem to be the ones who splintered about this. Interesting.

It's unfortunate that things like the Alex Jones incident and now Adam Kokesh have shown many of us how far people are wiling to go for this and lose sight of all the folks that were awakened by these events.

The announcement alone has helped to plant the seed. Tactically that was 70% of the battle. No march required. Wish everyone could see that.

Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
www.yaliberty.org - Young Americans for Liberty
www.ivaw.org/operation-recovery - Stop Deploying Traumatized Troops

I will assume that those who downvoted me will be at the march..

putting your money where your mouth's are. For those who may be actually going, I respect you for your opinion and your choice of action and wish you a safe return. For those of you down-voting me who won't be actually attending the march, please keep you opinions to yourselves...anyone can sit on the couch and spout bravado...where's the danger in that!

"Liberty tastes sweetest to those who fight for it, and most bitter to those who work to deny it!"


So why are you spouting

So why are you spouting bullshit then if your not going and you are claiming those not going should keep their mouth shut?

End The Fat
70 pounds lost and counting! Get in shape for the revolution!

Get Prepared!

henry9's picture

"please keep your opinions to yourselves"????

Um--How interesting!

Is it danger you are looking for or intelligent ways to bring about change?

No bravado here--just a little common sense.

I have demonstrated in DC with 300,000 anti-war folks and absolutely nothing was reported in MSM.

Believe me when I tell you, if one shot is fired or anyone at all is hurt it will be headlines. And it would not be the sort that would continue to help our cause.

I wish you luck and Peace.

PS- Please leave the RP T-shirt at home.


Look at the pro-life march. You can argue that they have 500K to a Million and growing every year. 0 mainstream coverage to their cause. These events are never about the media though, they are about empowering activists year after year.

People march on Washington all the time, its not news.

However, remind me the last time there was an armed march on the capitol.

That is the entire tactical advantage of this march. It will make news. It will be covered. And if not, it will still capture the interest of millions nationwide.

If this was a stock I would be buying it regardless of the outcome it will be a big deal and get the country talking. I mean all the way down to the lowest common denominator. There in is the next opportunity to spread the message.

Like yelling at Piers Morgan. Moral indignation is a heck of a political device.

Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
www.yaliberty.org - Young Americans for Liberty
www.ivaw.org/operation-recovery - Stop Deploying Traumatized Troops

To each their own

If you wish to participate...do so.
If not...don't.
I don't believe there has been any arm twisting.
Adam IS an "Oath Keeper" I believe.
So to use the name is not some big deception.


robot999's picture

It is deceptive

it's like saying I'm an "Doctor" when I'm not.
(I don't have the credentials, therefore I'm not a doctor - no matter how much I claim otherwise.)

OathKeepers is an organization with "brand recognition". To use the term together makes an implication that is disingenuous and detracts from those who are members. If he wanted to be a member he could be so easily, but (i guess) he chooses not to. Good, fine, stick with your decision but don't try to confuse people.

"Government is the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex". - Frank Zappa

Adam served he took the oath

Adam served he took the oath genius Stewart Roads group does not have exclusive right to the term "oath keepers" Adam is a real oath keeper willing to combat domestic enemies which the oath mandates unlike the all talk crowd making poor excuses for their inaction while disparaging Adam. I don;t recall any part of the oath saying you can exclude the domestic enemies part if it is dangerous and inconvenient...

I don't care if people choose to go or not that is their business but when those who chose not to go come on here and throw stones at Adam and those who chose to go then they become cowards trying to justify their cowardice in their own minds.

Nothing wrong with being scared of what might happen anyone who is not is not human. The question is will you do whats right despite the fear?

End The Fat
70 pounds lost and counting! Get in shape for the revolution!

Get Prepared!

Let's see now. Here was his

Let's see now. Here was his last statement of intent on the march, before Adam canceled it:

"There are only two ways this goes down. 1) Obama issues an order to the DC Chief of Police who has pledged to violate the Constitution and we execute our plan with a police escort. 2) We are not allowed to enter the District and will halt the formation well before the line at which point, with the whole world watching, we will declare the federal government illegitimate, and peacefully disperse"

Wow, such a hard-core stand! Walk toward the police, but halt well before the line, run your mouths, and then go home. And we are cowards for not wanting to participate in that non-event?

That is what was so weird about this whole thing. The rhetoric was hard-core and all about revolution and overthrowing the government, but the actual plan was to not even engage in civil disobedience, and to not even risk arrest.

But because of the strident rhetoric, guys like you run around and act as if it was going to be some great courageous stand against tyranny, when it wasn't, and because of the heated rhetoric, it would have been spun by the media as an attempted, but failed, overthrow of the government. The most likely headlines afterwards would have been:

"Armed extremists, intent on overthrowing US government, puss out and don't even walk up to the police lines. Our brave DC police make the extremists blink"

Worst of both worlds. They would quote what Adam said in his interview with Alex Jones, about going there to overthrow the government, but because you would have actually taken a meek walk and then stopped short of the lines, you would have been seen as both violent extremists AND as weak and ineffectual because you failed to attain the goal as stated by the organizer.

But go ahead and keep thumping your chest and labeling anyone who doesn't jump at Adam's command a coward.

Stewart Rhodes

You Swore an Oath to the Constitution ... Not the Politicians.

Guardians of the Republic, Honor Your Oath. Join Us.


If it was not such a big deal

If it was not such a big deal nor courageous then why all the whining and gnashing of teeth and fear mongering over it and how dangerous it would be?

What is your plan for standing for freedom? Sit on the internet and throw stones at people who are actually taking some action? No one is thumping their chest here people are fed up at some point we have to draw a line or bow down and lick the boots of our masters. No one was saying this was the balloon going up but is is a definite putting of the foot down.

So either do something you think is better or quit whining!

PS are you the Stewart Rhodes who started Oath Keepers are are you just using his name?

End The Fat
70 pounds lost and counting! Get in shape for the revolution!

Get Prepared!

One perspective

I think what Oath Keepers fails to understand is that this is not a military operation. "tactical experience" as far as warmaking is meaningless.

They ask what the point is of marching into the enemy camp to be captured. To ask the question is to answer it.

Adam clearly is not afraid of being arrested. Civil disobedience means accepting the consequences of ones actions. Adam has decided to engage in an activity which should be perfectly lawful but is not. If he is willing to suffer the legal consequences of breaking the DC gun laws then his civil disobedience will draw attention to the injustice of the system.

He puts the power structure in the position of prosecuting an Iraq war veteran for standing up for the very rights the veterans are fighting for. This is an amazing stand that I would think would resonate with our military.

Exactly! the supreme court

Exactly! the supreme court ruled the DC gun laws were to restrictive therefore unconstitutional and rifles or handguns could not be prohibited from being ready for use in self defense and DC has ignored them. They are the law breakers not Adam and those who go...

"(“A statute which, under the pretence of regulating, amounts to a destruction of the right, or which requires arms to be so borne as to render them wholly useless for the purpose of defence, would be clearly unconstitutional”)." Justice Scalia Majority Opinion in DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER (No. 07-290)
478 F. 3d 370, affirmed.


End The Fat
70 pounds lost and counting! Get in shape for the revolution!

Get Prepared!

robot999's picture

You might

think that unless you were actually in the military. Were/are you?

"Government is the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex". - Frank Zappa

Was in the military

and so was Adam.

By taking an oath and standing by it makes you an oath keeper. Add $25 and a certificate and it gets you a t-shirt and on the mailing list, whoop-dee-freakin'-do.

To be honest, a guy like me has a hard time with the oath keepers because they pick and choose what they will and will not uphold their oath to. Where are they on the illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? Huh? What? Oh yeah, they don't talk about stuff like that. Just about FEMA camps and Tea Party interests. Fair enough, not what I would expect though. Got to get that conservative money like Campaign for Liberty I guess.

But that's fine, its their angle to get people thinking about liberty. I get it. When however does the rubber meet the road?

The problem with conservative groups is that they do not radicalize themselves like progressives groups. You know the groups that seem to win everything and are taking over this country one idiot at a time. Good luck with the strategy guys.

Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
www.yaliberty.org - Young Americans for Liberty
www.ivaw.org/operation-recovery - Stop Deploying Traumatized Troops

Becoming what you detest

By doing this on July 4 when loads of visitors are there and with an army of hotheads is a recipe for innocent bystanders to be hurt. God forbid that it be a child. At best it will fix in people the worst stereotypes about libertarian anarchists.

You want to be brave, to march with guns, March up to the next police station where goons have killed some poor waif that they have just arrested. March on the DC DA's office for prosecuting the guy who is being charged with gun crime for protecting people from a vicious dog.


Sadly, many here have more testosterone that brains!

It's funny how those with the brains can so easily manipulate those with the high testosterone issue. Been going on since the beginning of civilization...and here lies the problem...some will always die for the nasty deeds of those who would never put themselves in that position in the first place...that is so ironic.

"Liberty tastes sweetest to those who fight for it, and most bitter to those who work to deny it!"