Response to Oregon Militia Standoff Reveals Stark Double Standards

[tyroneweaver]

RW's want a revolution, but they aren't willing to pay the price it takes to get one and WIN one.

Typical RW's. All mouth no guts.

ya tell that to the Weavers dog that got shot, or the weaver son that was shot in the back by an adult fbi agent. Or tell it to Weavers wife that got her brains blown out while holding a baby.
LOL,
Do you know how close this ranch is to the Weaver compound

 

[koshergrl]

The protest might be legit, but grabbing federal property and not releasing it when demanded to should be considered armed robbery. They are armed. They robbed the property and are holding it hostage.

That's what the Fed's did. The people are taking it back.

 

[koshergrl]

And they aren't going to talk to the enemedia, either.

Tell it to the judge

You can do that the next time you violate your probation.

 

[emilynghiem]

That good ole "liberal media"

If you depend on the corporate media for your news, you may not have heard that 150 gun-toting militia are claiming U.S. government property for themselves. Social media users observing the media’s response to the armed takeover of a federal building by right-wing militia over the weekend are pointing out obvious double standards in how the media is treating white, right-wing militia members compared to black protesters.

Floyd‏@FloydXXI
Men with REAL weapons are being negotiated with, while #TamirRice, a young boy with a fake gun was shot right away...? #OregonUnderAttack

Hey @ABC I fixed that typo for you #OregonStandoff #OregonUnderAttack


How @AP covers the armed takeover of a federal building by white militia members

Glenda TheGoodBitch @jstcallmesweet
So what qualifies you as a "militia"? Cause last time I checked 150 men with semi automatic weapons in my hood is a gang #OregonUnderAttack


D.B.Anderson @DBAnderson1
I demand to see 24 hour/7 day coverage of #OregonUnderAttack on @CNN. Wolf Blitzer needs to use the word "thugs" & "terrorists" repeatedly

Dear ClosedCaption
1. When the Branch Davidians (mostly white and led by a white man David Koresh) got caught in a govt standoff,
they got BURNED UP, including innocent children.

This was similar to the burning and bombing of the MOVE organization in Philadelphia (Black activists and families).

Once political beliefs clash between forces, does it matter if it's race or religion.
It depends how much of a THREAT is perceived. How hostile the forces are.

2. The other standoff over federal land management ended more peacefully.
Bundy standoff - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It really depends how badly the conflict escalates.

Race relations and perception are undeniably a factor in the power conflict in many cases,
but on how BOTH sides deal with each other.

3. One advantage I DO see that the white activists have over the black
are in citing "constitutional violations" as justification -- ie NOT BLAMING RACE.

By sticking to purely Constitutional arguments, this gives ppl authority of law as equal,
where petitioners and protesters are trying to show RESPECT for defending laws NOT VIOLATING THEM
as with the Ferguson protests and other riots that were DESTROYING private property.

Unfortunately the black populations have been taught to avoid Constitutional laws, govt and police as being part of the powers "against them"
Many people were hoping Obama would change this trend, but his take on race and religion just made the existing caste-like class hostilities worse.

Similarly the Liberal arguments for marriage work better when presented in terms of religious freedom, which is a Constitutional principle.
But just resorting to "anti gay" and "homophobic" arguments is what makes the backlash even worse.

If more Blacks, Liberals, Gays, etc. used Constitutional arguments and authority to pursue reforms, that might get more respect.

But if these groups keep distracting for emotional points,
pulling the Race card, the Transgender card, etc. in order to use cries of "racism/phobia" to
paint people as the victim of bigots, well, that's why the issues get sidetracked arguing over differences in racial and gender perception
instead of focusing on the democratic principles at stake in terms of equal respect for people regardless of race or beliefs.

 

[tyroneweaver]

Rwer's tell blacks to obey the law and treat LEO's with respect and nothing will happen..
Then turn around and tell white folks it's okay to take up arms against your own federal government...

yup, black people commit felonies with a gun and obama lets' em out and some white dude burns 140 acres of blm ground and gets 5 years in jail.
Nothing like justice.

 

[sealybobo]

The protest might be legit, but grabbing federal property and not releasing it when demanded to should be considered armed robbery. They are armed. They robbed the property and are holding it hostage.

How can their protest be legit when the reason for it in the first place (the jailing of the Hammonds), don't want them there? Hammond has made sure to make it crystal clear that they don't approve of what Bundy and his ilk are doing.

Neither do the locals.

No, they havent. Everybody said the same shit after the Roseburg shooting...The locals definitely support it. But they aren't going to publicly announce it, they aren't stupid.

We have state land all around my community. We love our state and federal lands and the last thing we want is private citizens destroying that land. You should be shot

 

[tyroneweaver]

sooner or later these BLM heros who insist on playing soldier/hero are going to get their way and a Blackhawk will scrape a bridge or building with 20,000 rounds of .50's and the military hero bullshit will come to a screeching halt.

Government tried that approach here in Idaho. Didn't work out so well. Government got sued for millions

 

[IsaacNewton]

Let's see, someone can ignore the law of the land and the Supreme Court and refuse to do their job and issue a marriage license to citizens based on their religion.

Now it appears anyone that has a difference with the law or the local, state, or federal government can arm themselves and threaten to shoot government agents.

Conservatives you are a people without a country. You reject everything America is.

Why don't you leave and go be happy. This place isn't perfect, never was, but we do have laws.

 

[sealybobo]

Rwer's tell blacks to obey the law and treat LEO's with respect and nothing will happen..
Then turn around and tell white folks it's okay to take up arms against your own federal government...

yup, black people commit felonies with a gun and obama lets' em out and some white dude burns 140 acres of blm ground and gets 5 years in jail.
Nothing like justice.

Everyone knows its worse to break a federal law than a state law. You traitors shouldn't **** with our federal government.

But the federal prisons are filled with rich people like kwami kilpatrick

 

[emilynghiem]

The protest might be legit, but grabbing federal property and not releasing it when demanded to should be considered armed robbery. They are armed. They robbed the property and are holding it hostage.

Unfortunately Gracie the govt has long abused authority to grab land where nothing works to stop this trend.

A. Hawaii was illegitmately annexed by abuse of military force to coerce the Kingdom of Hawaii to give up under duress,
and they only recently received an APOLOGY provided it was clear that no status would change.
That is like apologizing for theft, but getting to keep what was taken.

B. Eminent Domain has been abused over and over, where the legal system is so monopolized, political powers that be can get whatever they want.
When the KELO decision woke people up, then more laws were written to prevent certain abuses.
But past decisions made to take land by force of govt are never corrected.

Is it any wonder that people resort to using force?

I don't agree with that, but neither do I agree with govt taking land and rights without consent, and/or without due process to show a crime
or abuse was committed and the loss is for the purpose of restitution.

C. I don't mean to be disrespectful by leaving out other cases of abuse.
* Freedmen's Town in Houston has multiple cases of Eminent Domain abused to take land because people did not have equal legal resources to defend their interests against govt abuses.
* The Native Americans have lost land, or had toxic waste dumps purposely located on their land for lack of legal and political representation to stop this.
* Japanese citizens were still seeking restitution for the detainment camps and other extreme measures taken during World War II.
* countless cases of property taken by "legalized" abuses of judges, probate courts, etc. -- so many I would leave some out if I tried to go back and list these.

 

[tyroneweaver]

The protest might be legit, but grabbing federal property and not releasing it when demanded to should be considered armed robbery. They are armed. They robbed the property and are holding it hostage.

How can their protest be legit when the reason for it in the first place (the jailing of the Hammonds), don't want them there? Hammond has made sure to make it crystal clear that they don't approve of what Bundy and his ilk are doing.

Neither do the locals.

No, they havent. Everybody said the same shit after the Roseburg shooting...The locals definitely support it. But they aren't going to publicly announce it, they aren't stupid.

We have state land all around my community. We love our state and federal lands and the last thing we want is private citizens destroying that land. You should be shot

Dawwmm, Lon Horiuchi is now posting on USMB

 

[emilynghiem]

Let's see, someone can ignore the law of the land and the Supreme Court and refuse to do their job and issue a marriage license to citizens based on their religion.

Now it appears anyone that has a difference with the law or the local, state, or federal government can arm themselves and threaten to shoot government agents.

Conservatives you are a people without a country. You reject everything America is.

Why don't you leave and go be happy. This place isn't perfect, never was, but we do have laws.

What? IsaacNewton
As many Conservatives complain about liberals being unamerican, booing God at political conventions,
and trying to demonize and tear down anything "Christian" or "Constitutionalist" when these traditions
have been the driving force behind church and state history in America.

Seems both sides are too busy tearing down and blaming each other.
How is that rebuilding anything to do that?

 

[sealybobo]

The protest might be legit, but grabbing federal property and not releasing it when demanded to should be considered armed robbery. They are armed. They robbed the property and are holding it hostage.

How can their protest be legit when the reason for it in the first place (the jailing of the Hammonds), don't want them there? Hammond has made sure to make it crystal clear that they don't approve of what Bundy and his ilk are doing.

Neither do the locals.

No, they havent. Everybody said the same shit after the Roseburg shooting...The locals definitely support it. But they aren't going to publicly announce it, they aren't stupid.

We have state land all around my community. We love our state and federal lands and the last thing we want is private citizens destroying that land. You should be shot

Dawwmm, Lon Horiuchi is now posting on USMB

We'd be pissed if some stupid rednecks burned our woods down.

And don't cry if you can't graze your cattle on the peoples land. It's protected

 

[OKTexas]

Exactly who are they terrorizing? They are citizens, on public land, petitioning their government for a redress of grievances. From what I've seen so far they are simply exercising their 1st and 2nd Amendment rights, no matter how you pantywaists are trying to spin it. I guess you regressives only support civil disobedience for causes you support, that's, so you.

But it is nice of you to admit they have merit to their point.

Capturing federal property with arms and daring law enforcement to go at them is domestic terrorism. You cowardly, terrorist nutjob.

Keep it up, your entertainment value is priceless. You hypocritical regressives should go on the road.

Thanks for the concession terrorist.

What, I'm not the one that refused to answer a simple question and ran like a little girl.

Your question had zero relevance to the topic of the thread terrorist.

Right, except that is the very clause they cited claiming a government overreach, a point where they are correct. But no, no relevance at all, damn you're ignorant.

 

[OKTexas]

Exactly who are they terrorizing? They are citizens, on public land, petitioning their government for a redress of grievances. From what I've seen so far they are simply exercising their 1st and 2nd Amendment rights, no matter how you pantywaists are trying to spin it. I guess you regressives only support civil disobedience for causes you support, that's, so you.

But it is nice of you to admit they have merit to their point.

Capturing federal property with arms and daring law enforcement to go at them is domestic terrorism. You cowardly, terrorist nutjob.

Keep it up, your entertainment value is priceless. You hypocritical regressives should go on the road.

Thanks for the concession terrorist.

What, I'm not the one that refused to answer a simple question and ran like a little girl.

You sound like a member of Y'allQuada alright.

I'm sorry you have no problem with the federal government ignoring the Constitution, I do. You regressives only cite the Constitution for convenience, I actually believe the people we elect should follow it ALL THE TIME. not just when it's convenient.

 

[LeftofLeft]

What do righties say in all the black lives threads ? "Just shut up and do what the cops say ."

You people fucked the police in Ferguson and Baltimore.

 

[Timmy]

What do righties say in all the black lives threads ? "Just shut up and do what the cops say ."

You people fucked the police in Ferguson and Baltimore.

The police in ferguson fucked over their own people. Ever read the ferguson report? They were the gestapo !

 

[Eaglewings]

It seems that this has been a long ongoing fight and the flames took off when the Hammonds pissed off the BLM for getting the legal rights for the water supply..It almost looks like the BLM bullied people to leave their ranches.

In the early 1990’s the Hammonds filed on a livestock water source and obtained a deed for the water right from the State of Oregon. When the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) found out the Hammonds obtained new water rights near the Malhuer Wildlife Refuge, they were agitated and became belligerent and vindictive toward the Hammonds. The US Fish and Wildlife Service challenged the Hammonds right to the water in an Oregon State Circuit Court. The court found the Hammonds legally obtained rights to the water in accordance to State law and therefore the use of the water belongs to the Hammonds.*

WTF Is Happening in the Oregon Militia Standoff, Explained

 

[Old Rocks]

I read an article that said people are calling those nutters Yallqaeda and that they are committing Yeehawd. Funny stuff.

So why are you regressives refusing to acknowledge the constitutional issues these folks are bring up? Have you ever bothered to read Article 1, Section 8, clause 17 which describes the lands and for what purposes the congress may exercise its legislative authority over? The concerns these citizens are bring up are legitimate and ones I have been talking to my congresscritters about for years.

The issue here is that they have invaded Federal lands carrying weapons. They have threatened local law officers with the same. What should be done is that the Refuge be surrounded with National Guard and appropriate law officials, no one in or out until the crazies surrender. Cameras should be set up, and any that point a weapon at the National Guard or law officers should face assault with a deadly charges. All weapons should be confiscated and destroyed, and their vehicles confiscated and sold to cover costs.

So you have no problem with the feds having land that they have no constitutional right to have?

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of Particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--

This clause defines the rightful use of land by the federal government, where do they get the authority within this definition to have wildlife refuges or national parks or any other lands not necessary to the function of the government itself?

Ah, shut it up, you mindless asshole. That Refuge has been there since Teddy Roosevelt and is loved by all that have ever visited it. Stupid bastards like you would sell off our National Parks for idiot Disneyland imitations. You, and the other nihilistic bastards have no say. The sane Americans will continue to enjoy the special places that are preserved for our descendents.

The sane Americans are enjoying it now. Why don't you head over there, statist, and blab your stupidity in the streets of burns?

I have been on the streets of Burns many times. And the surrounding country, from the Silvies Valley to Long Draw. Burns is one of my favorite places, and I really like the people there. Now as for what they think of this, the Sheriff of Harney County, and the head of the City Council of Burns were just on television stating that the militia need to get out of their county now.

 

[PredFan]

Occupy Wall Street does it, the OP is ok with that, union terrorists do it in Wisconsin, the OP is ok with that, the black panthers do it at a POLLING BOOTH, and that's ok too.

There is a glaring double standard here and it isn't the stupid point that the OP is trying to make.

OWS does what?

Is this where you attempt to call an armed takeover the same thing as an unarmed protest?

Aw yiss! The same thing fairy strikes again

It's the same thing. They are protesting. I know, it doesn't fit what you want it to be but your desire doesn't change the facts. Unlike the unions and the BLM and the OWS, no one is destroying anything.

Being armed to the teeth is not a peaceful protest .

Neither is damaging property. The Bundy gang aren't firing their weapons or damaging property. They are more peaceful than the OWS idiots were.

What bullshit . It's only "peaceful" cause the Feds arent moving in . Why do they even bother having guns then ?

That is still peaceful. A lot more peaceful than OWS or BLM. The only bull shit here is what you are typing, idiot.