Sunday marked the one-year anniversary of the death of Michael Brown, an 18-year-old black man shot and killed by a white police officer in Ferguson, MI. Four heavily armed “Oath Keepers” entered the city on Tuesday morning, allegedly there to protect Infowars reporters.
Ferguson erupted into violence Sunday night as protests and demonstrations commenced in Michael Brown’s name. Gunshots rang out as a civilian opened fire on a police officer; the criminal was shot and remains in critical condition. The following morning, police officers were forced to arrest 63 individuals when they managed to block a highway. That night, an additional 22 civilians were arrested for throwing rocks and trash at policemen.
Ferguson was in a state of emergency when the Oath Keepers arrived early Tuesday morning. The group consisted of four heavily-armed men outfitted in bulletproof vests and camo gear.
The Oath Keepers are a small group of former policemen, military, and first responders that have sworn to defend the constitution against all enemies – foreign and domestic. When questioned, the four men told police they were in town to protect Infowars reporters.
The Oath Keepers were better received last year when they appeared to protect black business owners and their property from destruction during riots. This time the group is being attacked by #BlackLivesMatter.
According to prominent BLM leader Deray McKesson: “The Oathkeepers in Ferguson have said they are there to protect Info Wars, a conspiracy theory site against #BlackLivesMatter.” Many believe that Infowars.com, operated by conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, has a secret agenda to bring down #BlackLivesMatter.
BLM activist Talal Ahmad considers the Oath Keepers’ actions “disrespectful” and asks why “white citizens” were even allowed to enter the “black community.”
As to whether or not the controversial group broke any laws, Professor of Law Marcia McCormick says: “Clearly the people who are carrying these weapons are trying to send a message that some might see as threatening but it’s probably not a violation of the statute.” According to McCormick, it is only illegal to carry a weapon the person does so in an “angry or threatening manner.”
Infowars later confirmed that they did not ask the Oath Keepers for protection.