So, a group of armed terrorists has occupied a federal building

[poppy]

 

gently:   

 

flout, verb

gerund or present participle: flouting

openly disregard (a rule, law or convention).

"these same companies still flout basic ethical practices"

synonyms: defy, refuse to obey, disobey, break, violate, fail to comply with, fail to observe, contravene, infringe, breach, commit a breach of, transgress against; More

 

 

I'm sorry but this whizzed right over my head. Why did you post this in reply to me?

[Lady Florida.]

Link?  (Not that I have 2 1/2 hours, but someone else might be interested...)

 

Sorry about that. I forgot to add the link. I fixed it and it's there now. So you don't have to go back and find my post, here it is again. If you don't want to listen to each one's opening statements (which are long), go to about 1:17 where they begin to actually talk back and forth to each other.

 

[Lady Florida.]

Ted = disturbing

These guys = funny

 

Yeah. I knew one of his sorority victims in Tallahassee. :(

[Word Nerd]

 

gently:   

 

flout, verb

gerund or present participle: flouting

openly disregard (a rule, law or convention).

"these same companies still flout basic ethical practices"

synonyms: defy, refuse to obey, disobey, break, violate, fail to comply with, fail to observe, contravene, infringe, breach, commit a breach of, transgress against; More

 

 

There was nothing wrong with that sentence. They may be flouting the law, but they are flaunting their actions.

[TracyP]

...

 

 

It sounds like law enforcement have been harassed by these guys. The sheriff said his wife's tires were slashed, some law enforcement families have left town for the duration of this etc.

 

 

http://www.buzzfeed.com/salvadorhernandez/patience-frays-in-oregon-town-paralyzed-by-militias-protest?utm_term=.rc9oMEyRq#.vhdVBE13K

 

 

That article is by the same reporter whose twitter feed I posted.

 

To add to this...

 

I found this link interesting, especially for those who want to talk about how peaceful these guys are. At least 3 bombs have been set off in BLM buildings since 1995 (nobody knows if it was the Bundys, but there is definitely a violent element in the area). Around that same time, BLM workers had to start traveling in pairs and keeping constant radio contact because they were (and are) worried for their safety. In the last standoff, these guys planned to put women in the front line if any shooting started, so that women being killed would be what got televised.

 

I'm not even sure I disagree with the Bundy's complaint, but their tactics are disgusting and wrong. They got the govt' to give in to them last time, and I'm sure they are hoping they can again. They brought guns because they are ready to fight. What they are doing here is *not* a peaceful protest.

 

And because I find this whole thing incredibly depressing, I have to add one lighthearted bit from the story. At the entrance to their last armed standoff a sign read: Militia Sighn In. Or maybe that should make me more depressed....

[Ravin]

The police who shot the kid with the toy gun were not indicted by the grand jury.   Tamir Rice.  Because when LEO see a gun, it is reasonable for them to react with deadly force (said the grand jury).  

 

 

 

The guns aren't incidental. 

They have the right to bear arms.

They have the right to protest.

They do not have the right to put LEO in danger.  

Protesting with guns that they have indicated they will USE.

They are threatening to kill cops, basically, or to martyr themselves. 

Patriots?

 

I have read up a bit about the definition of terrorist.  It usually involves willingness to use violence against non-combatants, or directly targeting non-combatants.  These guys don't appear to have any desire to do that. So I guess they are not terrorists.  

 

It's not about not attacking noncombatants. The 9/11 assault on the Pentagon? The U.S.S. Cole? Those were military targets and still terror attacks.

 

Earlier in the thread the legal definition of terrorism was quoted. It doesn't specify attacking noncombatants.

[Bluegoat]

In my daily life, in the real, my Facebook groups, and other online board, the idea from people of color is basically the same. No other group is afford the right to express grievances against the government to this way. It doesn't happen. And if it does happen, the end result is more than likely tragic.

 

The fact the the media is going out their way to present nuances to their grievances is amazing.

 

Of course, I don't speak for all people of color but of my wide circle of Asains, Latinos, Africans and African Americans the thoughts are the same on this issue.

 

I think it might well be treated differently if it was a different sort of group.  In some cases that might have some legitimacy - it is probably not surprising that the possibility of Islamic terrorism is more relevant to people than the possibility of Mormon terrorism, since we haven't really seen much of the latter.  In other cases, its just people being prejudiced.  In some cases people feel that a minority or marginalized group is given more leeway in order to avoid painting a bad picture.  All of these kinds of things can affect perception.

 

However - I would not ever say "authorities would treat these people like crap if they were black/Muslim/whatever so we should treat these guys the same way." 

[Ravin]

Bundy did a phone interview with The Oregonian a couple of days ago where he stated that they want the Hammonds released from prison and the refuge under local control.  I can't find a direct quote of what he said but it seems pretty clear that they told that to The Oregonian.  He said again today that they want the refuge to be under local control.  

 

They want it under local control? How about giving it back to the Paiutes?

[Dmmetler]

I've visited Pyramid Lake (which the Paiute fought the Department of Interior for control over, and won). I think giving the refuge to the Paiutes would be a good thing :)

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_Lake_(Nevada)

[KathyBC]

.

Edited January 7, 2016 by KathyBC

[Guest]

I kept wanting to add this when I read your earlier posts about eminent domain. The government (general, all levels of government) has a lousy track record and this decision simply made the malfeasance newly lawful.

 

My SIL's family had a lovely little beachfront ranch house, with a biiiiiig yard, half-way up the eastern coast of FL. Their family had bought it in the '40s, so three generations of family had used it. All the other homes in the row had slowly been sold off and each property had been developed as condos or hotels; the least dense was the property that had a handful of tiny vacation cottages on it.

 

Over the years (90s) SIL's grandfather was contacted numerous times by developers and he always rebuffed their offers, wanting to keep the house in the family. In the early 2000s, a city commissioner quietly took her granddad aside and told him he needed to get out while he could, before the city moved action against them to its front burner. (Note: this property was owned lawfully, no taxes were in arrears, it was simply that the city wanted to develop the land for greater tax revenue.)

 

When Kelo was taken up by the Supreme Court, the family threw in the towel and sold the property to a developer, since their understanding was that if they did not, the city would seize the property under eminent domain and then resell it to a developer for the purposes of increasing the tax base.

 

Now there is a three or four story condo building on the property. At least SIL's family was paid handsomely by the developer rather than being paid "fair market value" (not) by the city.

 

One should not have to sell off a beach home that is in the family, just so the city can reap more tax revenue from the property. That whole episode may have been lawful, but it was wrong.

If this was rare you'd have a lot less people furious about eminent domain! That's so unjust.

[Halftime Hope]

I'm sorry but this whizzed right over my head. Why did you post this in reply to me?

 

Because your first post using flaunt was incorrect (I left it alone but then reacted to the second one), and I didn't read the second post--which was reasonable--closely enough.  Oops on me. 

 

I really appreciated it one year when the hive educated me on flout vs flaunt.  Today, at work, I learned the difference between premier and premiere (spelling changes the meaning, it's not just that some days one might be feeling more Parisian-- LOL!).  I'm a bit of a word nerd, so I'm glad to keep learning.  I intended no offense.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

If this was rare you'd have a lot less people furious about eminent domain! That's so unjust.

 

 

The use of eminent domain to force the sale of property is relatively rare, and over 40 states have legislation limiting its use for economic/private development (most in response to Kelo vs New London).

As always, the best way to combat the issue is simply changing state laws.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

These idiots are the gift that keeps giving.

Cliffs: the boneheads send one of their buddies to get food.  He instead spends it on beer.

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/1/7/1467083/-Trouble-in-Oregon-as-one-member-of-Y-all-Qaeda-went-AWOL-and-allegedly-drank-away-their-donations

[redsquirrel]

Here is more from the local paper by a local reporter

 

http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2016/01/sheriff_bundy_meet_face_to_fac.html#incart_big-photo

 

My favorite part? The end of the article:

 

"The short huddle happened in one of the most remote spots in Oregon, not far from where Highway 78 intersects with Lava Bed Road. This is largely flat terrain – sage country that hosts few people and sustains thousands of cattle. There has probably been no more unlikely place for the work of ending a confrontation that has turned life upside down in Harney County.

 

Law enforcement officials deliberately picked a location with an open expanse. They rejected any plan to meet the militants at the refuge, mindful of a tall watch tower that is manned round the clock by the protesters.

 

Ward said he has tried every tactic he knows to end the occupation.

 

"I want to give them every opportunity to leave peacefully," he said. He sensed Bundy and the others weren't interested.

 

"I don't feel like they think they're getting enough attention yet," Ward said."

 

 

 

[Xuzi]

Here is more from the local paper by a local reporter

 

http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2016/01/sheriff_bundy_meet_face_to_fac.html#incart_big-photo

 

My favorite part? The end of the article:

 

"The short huddle happened in one of the most remote spots in Oregon, not far from where Highway 78 intersects with Lava Bed Road. This is largely flat terrain – sage country that hosts few people and sustains thousands of cattle. There has probably been no more unlikely place for the work of ending a confrontation that has turned life upside down in Harney County.

 

Law enforcement officials deliberately picked a location with an open expanse. They rejected any plan to meet the militants at the refuge, mindful of a tall watch tower that is manned round the clock by the protesters.

 

Ward said he has tried every tactic he knows to end the occupation.

 

"I want to give them every opportunity to leave peacefully," he said. He sensed Bundy and the others weren't interested.

 

"I don't feel like they think they're getting enough attention yet," Ward said."

I wonder if they realize what kind of attention they *are* getting... Do they have Wi-Fi up there? Have they seen Twitter?

[redsquirrel]

I wonder if they realize what kind of attention they *are* getting... Do they have Wi-Fi up there? Have they seen Twitter?

 

According to that reporter, as of yesterday they have power and phones etc.  There is noting stopping them from getting supplies and deliveries

 

http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2016/01/police_shut_off_power_at_far_e.html

 

"Frenchglen residents said they saw police disconnecting power from the U.S. Bureau of Land Management Fire Guard Station, which is on the south end of the reserve. The fire station is about 40 miles from the headquarters, where members of the Bundy family and other militants have occupied buildings since Saturday.

 

Electricity remained on at the refuge, where protesters are using various buildings including the museum and the bunkhouse"

 

and even without electricity it is easy to keep a cell phone powered. I own a cheap solar power panel for my cell phone. I got it for camping and it works really well. I kept my kindle and my cell phone powered for a week.

 

What is concerning to me is that more people are showing up. He rolled out the welcome mat to every extremist around, so who knows who is going to show up and what they have planned. And he told them to bring more guns!

 

Again, if these were not a bunch of white guys, this would be over by now.

 

I keep wondering if this is going to spur more violence from other protest groups.  After all, if these guys can do something like this, why not take over city hall in downtown whatever town? Apparently if you bring a bunch of guns and make it clear you are willing to use them, no one does anything about it.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I wonder if they realize what kind of attention they *are* getting... Do they have Wi-Fi up there? Have they seen Twitter?

Decent chance some of them can't read.

[redsquirrel]

Decent chance some of them can't read.

 

I sincerely doubt that.

 

Are they lacking in the ability to see the irony in what they are doing? Yep.

 

Do I think they aren't intelligent or are uneducated? Nope. I'm not willing to let them off that easily.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I sincerely doubt that.

 

Are they lacking in the ability to see the irony in what they are doing? Yep.

 

Do I think they aren't intelligent or are uneducated? Nope. I'm not willing to let them off that easily.

It would not shock me if the bottom rung were uneducated.

 

The top end not so much - although much of their reading is done with a tinfoil hat in place.

Edited January 8, 2016 by ChocolateReignRemix

[EmseB]

Again, if these were not a bunch of white guys, this would be over by now.

I'm not sure why you think that? There have been longer lasting protests and riots that have been much more disruptive to the general public than this in recent history.

[EmseB]

After all, if these guys can do something like this, why not take over city hall in downtown whatever town?

Maybe people would just take over the state house in Madison! And then occupy Wall Street! Maybe downtown Baltimore next. Just think of the implications! Or are you saying because those people weren't (visibly) armed that business wasn't disruputed?

Edited January 8, 2016 by JodiSue

[poppy]

Maybe people would just take over the state house in Madison! And then occupy Wall Street! Maybe downtown Baltimore next. Just think of the implications! Or are you saying because those people weren't (visibly) armed that business wasn't disruputed?

You cut off the part about "if you bring a bunch of guns and make clear you are willing to use them". That explicit threat of violence makes this absolutely different than nonviolent protests.

[Pam in CT]

From the OregonLive consolidated articles (thank you, Amira, for pointing us to that source -- there's a lot there) it appears that the local sheriff Dave Ward  is a calm man with solid judgment, who is looking to defuse the confrontation peacefully.  That is good news.

 

After yesterday's unsuccessful effort, I do fear it's headed toward a "face issue," where the occupiers can't back down and come out without "getting" what they "want"... but to the extent that they have articulated what they want, there is no one partner on the other side who is in a position to DO it even if willing.

 

Bundy's statement to the press: "We do have a plan," protest leader Ammon Bundy told reporters at the refuge. "We see a time coming very soon when the community will begin ... to take that over, so they can claim their own rights, so that they can stand strong enough to defend them. And then we will go home."

 

Two difficulties with this statement, that makes peaceful de-escalation look improbable, that Ward appears to recognize even if the occupiers don't, are that 1) "the community" is not of a single mind that that is indeed the goal; and 2) even if it is, its execution has many moving parts that would require an extensive pollitical process.  No.one.is.in.a.position.to.give.them.that.

 

• The Hammonds have disassociated themselves from the occupation.  Although as Ravin detailed above, the Hammond issue is directly tied to mandatory federal sentencing rules, no one (not the Hammonds, not the occupiers, nor the US Representative of the region Greg Walden ® in his address to Congress on Tuesday), has even suggested that such mandatory rules be amended.  (Which, FTR, I personally think should happen, although it would be a long political slog that would require new legislation through the US Congress).

 

• The land under debate has been federally held and managed since 1908.  Transitioning it to any other control would, again, require legislation through the US Congress.  Transitioning it to the State of Oregon would in addition require legislation (and likely budget appropriations) from the State of Oregon.

 

• It is not at all clear that the various political constituencies within the state and local levels in Oregon actually support a transition even if the federal government were willing to make it.  Some do, some don't.  Governor Kate Brown has strongly urged that the occupiers step down and depart.  The leadership of the Pauite tribe have disavowed the occupation, made clear that Bundy & Co do not speak for them, and that federal management is protecting their access to ancestral lands.  At Wednesday's town meeting of local citizens, many people expressed sympathy for some aspects of the message but nonetheless indicated it was time for the occupiers to go.  The outcome of that town meeting was that the sheriff try to persuade the occupiers to leave peacefully.  

 

• Which Ward did then attempt (sounds like he made sound choices in the open-space venue, *not* requesting that they come unarmed although that sure did take a lot of courage on his part, didn't it, and offering safe passage).  The occupiers (and everyone involved) are lucky that such a level-headed guy happened to be at the helm.  But after consideration they refused (through the press, rather than the followup phone call to which they agreed, FWIW) the offer of safe passage.

 

I am truly worried about a "losing face" standoff.  It's hard to see what could be done within the legal process that the occupiers could count as a "success."  It's not like even if he wanted to the President could sign a postcard and sign away BLM lands in Oregon over to a bunch of ranchers from Nevada.  (?)  They truly seem not to understand the process.

 

 

[Bluegoat]

These idiots are the gift that keeps giving.

Cliffs: the boneheads send one of their buddies to get food.  He instead spends it on beer.

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/1/7/1467083/-Trouble-in-Oregon-as-one-member-of-Y-all-Qaeda-went-AWOL-and-allegedly-drank-away-their-donations

 

Wait, are you saying that beer isn't food?!

[Ravin]

It seems to me that the simplest thing to do would be to blockade the roads in and out of the reserve, not allow deliveries to the place, and when any of them come out to try and get supplies, arrest him.

[Halftime Hope]

Ha!  I'm not up to speed on this, but is it clear that the Paiutes had been in possession of the land in question until 1908?  If so, just hypothetically, I wonder what Bundy and Co. would do if the president used an executive order to appoint a board from the Paiute nation (?) to manage the lands.  I have a feeling that's not what they had in mind.

[Mergath]

Ha! I'm not up to speed on this, but is it clear that the Paiutes had been in possession of the land in question until 1908? If so, just hypothetically, I wonder what Bundy and Co. would do if the president used an executive order to appoint a board from the Paiute nation (?) to manage the lands. I have a feeling that's not what they had in mind.

I was just thinking that myself. He can't exactly say, "Listen, I know I said I want the lands under local control, but I meant white control..."

 

Or maybe they are dumb enough to come out and say that.

[redsquirrel]

I was just thinking that myself. He can't exactly say, "Listen, I know I said I want the lands under local control, but I meant white control..."

 

Or maybe they are dumb enough to come out and say that.

 

Well, this is their father

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/24/cliven-bundy-racist_n_5204821.html

[poppy]

Ha!  I'm not up to speed on this, but is it clear that the Paiutes had been in possession of the land in question until 1908?  If so, just hypothetically, I wonder what Bundy and Co. would do if the president used an executive order to appoint a board from the Paiute nation (?) to manage the lands.  I have a feeling that's not what they had in mind.

 

You know what, that could be a way to save face.   Just have the land giving to the Paiutes, who would then give it back to the federal government's stewardship. That would diffuse the situation peacefully.  Just cost an incredible amount of money and would require the Commander in Chief to negotiate with, and give  concessions to.............. well, whether or not they are terrorists, I think most of us agreed they are armed militants?

 

But that's almost the best case scenario here without bloodshed.

That or the blockade.

Or these protesters saying  "I think we've made our point" and go home quietly, where they would likely face some minor charges only.

 

Given what I've read I am 65% confident that this whole thing can end without bloodshed.

No matter what, I am convinced that these 'patriots' will help inspire other 'patriots' to bring their guns to "nonviolent"  "civil" disobedience actions which will at some point lead to violence.  That's the tragedy. 

[Ravin]

Based on what their tribal leadership has said, the Paiutes are fine with BLM management of the land. They have a good relationship with the BLM, which has helped preserve their archaeological sites, and ensured their access to and helped protect sacred sites. That doesn't always happen, but this is one of many cases where the Feds actually do a good job of balancing competing interests (well, in everyone's opinion,it would seem, except the ranchers who lost their grazing permits).

 

There are other cases where they don't, (Oak Flat), but also a whole lot of even worse case where State control of land causes far more land conflict problems for tribes (Think Bear Mountain/Devil's Peak).

 

Also, if the land WAS handed over to the Paiutes, it would most likely be by placing it in trust for them--which would mean it was still technically Federal land, as Indian Reservations generally are. I doubt the ranchers would be satisfied, even though it WOULD put the land in original, local control.

[redsquirrel]

It seems to me that the simplest thing to do would be to blockade the roads in and out of the reserve, not allow deliveries to the place, and when any of them come out to try and get supplies, arrest him.

 

I am guessing at this point not doing just that is a tactic.  That would require round the clock armed government forces, a visual that I bet the FBI is trying to avoid. It would also require armed law enforcement in the woods to keep them from going off land, it's a LOT of land to monitor. So, you are going to end up with a bunch of wacko militia types finally getting to use all their camouflage to battle with the gov'ment, running around in the dark trying to get to a drop spot so they can get their jerky.  At some point, someone is going to get shot out there.

 

And allowing them media access, internet, phone etc also minimizes the number of actual reporters who have to be on the spot to get a story. They can continue to contract with the local people and the militia don't get as much attention.

 

They are treating them as something that can be ignored.

 

However, the local people are going to get frustrated with that, so I don't know how long it will last.

 

The sheriff did say that at some point "at some point this is all going to have to be resolved" so he knows this can't go on forever.

 

At bare minimum, these armed radicals are posse comitatus, at least philosophically, and that means they don't recognize any authority other than a locally elected sheriff. That is why they kept urging the Hammond boys to turn themselves into the local sheriff and ask for sanctuary from the federal government. That is also why they only parlay with the sheriff.  Their own philosophy says that is the only true legal authority..at least as far as my understanding of posse comitatus stretches. 

 

However, the radicals have made it clear that they don't like the sheriff, he isn't  on their side. The sheriff says that his wife's tires have been slashed, other law enforcement have been threatened by these guys.  Some local law enforcement have sent their families out of town to keep them safe. 

 

I am guessing the FBI is working with the sheriff, trying to keep their presence on the DL,  b/c the sheriff has a small 'in' with the radicals, but at some point, that is going to end. Turns out he's not their kind of sheriff. 

[Pam in CT]

Well, this is their father

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/24/cliven-bundy-racist_n_5204821.html

 

That is truly troubling.

[Ravin]

That is truly troubling.

 

Also not all that shocking coming from a Mormon redneck who refuses to recognize the authority of the Federal government.

[Butter]

These idiots are the gift that keeps giving.

Cliffs: the boneheads send one of their buddies to get food.  He instead spends it on beer.

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/1/7/1467083/-Trouble-in-Oregon-as-one-member-of-Y-all-Qaeda-went-AWOL-and-allegedly-drank-away-their-donations

 

The most amusing part of this to me is the Bundys are Mormon and have claimed this is like Captain Moroni and scripturally they are doing the right thing (never mind the Church itself said not even sorta) so it's a religious thing in their minds.  Mormons don't drink alcohol.  So not only did this buddy spend their donation money, he spent it on something the Bundys don't consume.

 

Ha!  I'm not up to speed on this, but is it clear that the Paiutes had been in possession of the land in question until 1908?  If so, just hypothetically, I wonder what Bundy and Co. would do if the president used an executive order to appoint a board from the Paiute nation (?) to manage the lands.  I have a feeling that's not what they had in mind.

 

I'm a bit confused on one point.  The previous standoff with the Bundys about grazing on federal land was in Nevada.  So the land in question last time is not the same as the land in question this time.  Why did they pick the location where they are?  Or is it just federal lands in general.

 

John Green did a Vlogbrothers video on who owns Oregon.  (Note he realizes he is a grapefruit for mistakenly saying Portland is Oregon's capital and getting confused on his east and west.)

 

 

[MSNative]

Also not all that shocking coming from a Mormon redneck who refuses to recognize the authority of the Federal government.

What does his being Mormon have to do with his racist rant?

[chiguirre]

What does his being Mormon have to do with his racist rant?

Here's a link to a Mormon apologetics website that will explain in the nicest possible way the checkered history of Mormon racial views.

 

http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_racial_issues/Blacks_and_the_priesthood/The_%22curse_of_Cain%22_and_%22curse_of_Ham%22

[ChocolateReignRemix]

What does his being Mormon have to do with his racist rant?

Historically the Mormon Church has been extremely racist towards African Americans. It isn't a stretch to think someone as backwards as these folks disagrees with current LDS doctrine.

Edited January 8, 2016 by ChocolateReignRemix

[redsquirrel]

Maybe people would just take over the state house in Madison! And then occupy Wall Street! Maybe downtown Baltimore next. Just think of the implications! Or are you saying because those people weren't (visibly) armed that business wasn't disruputed?

 

And in these cases it was law enforcement who escalated the situation by showing up in full riot gear, putting snipers on roofs, driving around in huge armored vehicles with weapons on top and pointing them at peaceful demonstrators, using tear gas and pepper spray (sometimes on people who were already physically subdued and in cuffs).

 

 

The exception to that...zuccotti park, a predominately white group of protesters. 

 

Which brings me back to my original point. It doesn't seem to matter what side of the spectrum you are on, if you are white you get more consideration from law enforcement than if you are not.

 

That is white privilege at work

 

How many people have these heavily armed militants killed or shot?  The same number as Tamir Rice.

[Lady Florida.]

Based on what their tribal leadership has said, the Paiutes are fine with BLM management of the land. They have a good relationship with the BLM, which has helped preserve their archaeological sites, and ensured their access to and helped protect sacred sites. That doesn't always happen, but this is one of many cases where the Feds actually do a good job of balancing competing interests (well, in everyone's opinion,it would seem, except the ranchers who lost their grazing permits).

 

 

 

Yes, from everything I've read, the Paiutes are actually pleased with the relationship they have with the BLM and feel their sacred sites are treated with respect by the federal government. 

 

 

 

John Green did a Vlogbrothers video on who owns Oregon.  (Note he realizes he is a grapefruit for mistakenly saying Portland is Oregon's capital and getting confused on his east and west.)

 

 

 

I didn't realize they were still making new Vlogbrothers videos. I've never been able to finish any of Green's books (and I tried hard to read several at ds' request) but I respect his attempts to get young people interested in history, literature, and just a general love for learning. And because they like his books, they tend to listen to him.

[Ravin]

What does his being Mormon have to do with his racist rant?

 

Chiguirre and ChocolateReign covered it. Which is why I said "Mormon redneck" not "LDS redneck".

 

Oh, and I doubt these guys necessarily abstain from alcohol. There is quite a bit of Mormon cultural influence where these guys come from, but it's checkered and plenty of people may have internalized some things (like the story of Captain Moroni) while ignoring others (like any anything the LDS church has to say on being a civilized human being).

 

I pretty much assume the cultural roots these guys have are similar to those of this one ex-boyfriend of my sister's, who was from Nevada. He was a real piece of work, drank, smoked, smacked my sister around...but his behavior improved somewhat when the missionaries started coming around. He treated them with respect and listened to their authority. My sister actually joined the LDS church at one point, not long after he got shut of this guy, and the missionaries protecting her was part of why.

[redsquirrel]

These idiots are the gift that keeps giving.

Cliffs: the boneheads send one of their buddies to get food.  He instead spends it on beer.

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/1/7/1467083/-Trouble-in-Oregon-as-one-member-of-Y-all-Qaeda-went-AWOL-and-allegedly-drank-away-their-donations

 

It gets worse than just drinking up the profits

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3387117/Stolen-valor-Militiaman-bodyguard-ranchers-Cliven-Ammon-Bundy-posing-retired-Marine-served-Afghanistan-Iraq-boost-combat-credentials.html

 

Trust me, I know I am linking to the Daily Fail... but this story has picked up at other news sources and this seems to be the one that spurred on the questioning. So I am linking to what seems to be the original. 

 

These guys are delusional.  And Bundy has his own personal body guard.  What could go wrong?

[albeto.]

  And Bundy has his own personal body guard.  What could go wrong?

 

 

 

[swimmermom3]

This is hilarious!

 

A kid had a toy gun and was shot dead in less than five seconds.

 

A kid brought a clock to school and was picked up by the cops and processed as a criminal.

 

But a bunch of grown men in swat gear and guns take over a federal building and now we have to have sympathy for their plight?

 

This is crazy talk.

 

Well, when you put it that way! :D

 

Were they in SWAT gear? I saw the guy with the American flag on the back of his jacket and with an American flag flying from his horse.  You know, so we overlook the guns and see how patriotic these men are. 

 

I read a couple of good articles today.

 

This one featured a couple of Oregon ranchers with slightly different takes that I can really respect.  I think there are many ranchers out there who do the right thing and have been hurt by policies, but the Bundys and the Hammonds aren't those kinds of ranchers.  They run a rather crooked line and ironically while complaining about someone supposedly taking their property or denying them their rights, they have no problem doing it in return. They aren't patriots, but greedy, self-interested buggers. It's a shame that they are in the spotlight and not those that genuinely need help.

 

This one talks about how the federal grazing policy works.

[swimmermom3]

And don't forget some of these involved here actually POINTED firearms at federal agents during the standoff at the Bundy ranch.  For an oppressive dictatorship that allegedly has its boots on the throat of these folks, our government sure is showing a tremendous amount of restraint.

 

Generous too in giving the Bundy brother a $500,000 small business loan.  :D

[swimmermom3]

Can you connect the dots for me? What LDS theology do you suspect is motivating them?

 

One of the Bundys said something along the line that the Constitution is like scripture, like the Book of Mormon.  I thought I put that quote upstream, but I'll find the article and link it.  God directed them to do this.

 

Remember, in the United States, if you are a white male, you can wave a gun, wave a U.S. flag, and thump on the Bible (or apparently, the Book of Mormon) while committing arson, poaching, refusing to pay taxes you legally owe, and taking over federal property at gun point. It's all cool. God made you do it.

[swimmermom3]

Can it be like, a Symbionese Liberation Army redux? Because I feel like America needs that. We need to watch the left disintegrate somehow. 

 

 

There is this dude, and he is super popular on reddit, named Chris Hitchins. I cannot stand him. Can. Not. He wants so badly to be a thinker but he's a hack. Basically, this is the guy who makes atheists look like hysterical, unthinking acolytes. What, you say, you haven't seen atheists act like that en masse? Well go to a Hitchins speech or read a thread on him on reddit or 4chan and you're in for a real treat. By "real treat" I mean that no matter what your personal belief system, if you love truth and care about human beings, he will make you want to gouge your own eyes out.

 

ETA: He thinks Mother Theresa is a narcissist. 

 

 

I am confused. What does a need to watch the left disintegrate and atheists that look like hysterical, unthinking acolytes have to do with federal land issues? 

[swimmermom3]

Bundy did a phone interview with The Oregonian a couple of days ago where he stated that they want the Hammonds released from prison and the refuge under local control.  I can't find a direct quote of what he said but it seems pretty clear that they told that to The Oregonian.  He said again today that they want the refuge to be under local control.  

 

 

My understanding is that while state or local control sounds good, financially it is fairly difficult to do.  

 

Something that we haven't talked a lot about too is that some lands that are refuges or that have conservation limitations on them are in that position because whoever was previously using the land recklessly depleted resources.  What would happen if the refuge was under local control? So you kill the birds, strip the resources, and then what?  Irresponsible logging in the Northeast helped shaped some of the West's restrictions regarding forests.

[Mom2Es]

I was feeling oh so sorry for the Hammonds until I found out that one of the fires they set was actually to cover their poaching activities. Not really sure they are exactly law-abiding patriotic Americans either. 

 

 

 

 

A couple of things:

• The "covering up poaching" was a theory that the prosecutor put forth during the trial.  However, the jury finding the Hammonds guilty of arson does not necessarily mean that the jury believed that aspect of the prosecutor's case.  It just means that they believed the Hammonds let the BLM land catch fire on purpose
• The poaching theory of the prosecution's case relied on testimony from Dusty Hammond, an estranged relative who had been thirteen years old at the time of the fire.  Dusty's testimony also contradicted public hunting records.  As a result, the judge believed his testimony was biased
• The Hammonds were not charged with illegal hunting
• Evidence at the trial included the phone call the Hammonds placed in which they got permission to set the fire
• A range conservationist testified that the fire improved the conditions on the BLM land (juniper is invasive and drinks up a lot of water)

 

A transcript of the original sentencing can be found here

The Hammond's Supreme Court brief is here

[redsquirrel]

So, the militants have escalated things.  They have more people there and have set up an armed perimeter

 

http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2016/01/oregon_standoff_idaho_militia.html#incart_big-photo

 

The one thing that local reporters, and when I say local I mean people who live in the community and know what is really going on, have been clear about is that the FBI etc has been invisible. They have had no physical presence, and the same for ATF etc. It has all been the local sheriff. No one has even seen outside LE in town.

 

Now, I assume the sheriff has been been in contact with the FBI, but they have been staying away.

 

The new group that has shown up is called "III % of Idaho".  I guess they use roman numerals because Arabic numerals are..well..Arabic? That is a joke, I have no idea why they use Roman numerals.  In the press they are called 3%, but they call themselves III percent.

 

 

So, this escalation is their next show of force, putting heavily armed people around to 'secure a perimeter' is not in response to any outside threat.  This is all on the terrorists and their desire for confrontation. I am guessing they weren't getting enough media attention and though they needed to look more threatening and macho.  The not bringing enough groceries and asking for food does sort of undermine that.

 

The community remains worried about who exactly is walking around with guns in their community.  Bundy has called for anyone with guns to come and join them, so who knows who is showing up.

 

You know, for a bunch of people who are so hepped up on STATES RIGHTS they sure are a lot of out of town boys.  The Bundys and their minions are from Utah, these new guys are from Idaho...and they all seem to be invading Oregon. Oregon, the actual community where they are, have asked them to leave..the sheriff, the locally elected sheriff, the authority that is supposed to be the only legeitimate one in their eyes, has asked them to leave.  When does Oregon get any say in the matter? It's clear to me that these guys don't believe a word of what they profess.  If they did, they would have left when they were asked to leave.