Jump to content
IGNORED

Armed Protesters take over Oregon Federal Wildlife Refuge


violynn

Recommended Posts

 

1 hour ago, FloraKitty35 said:

Fox News (if they mention this at all) will build them up as "patriots". These kind of people scare me way more than ISIS.

Yessirree, Fox News is reporting on this. And passing along quotes that government force will risk lives, and passing along a call for others to join them. I bet many others are on the road right now, ready to stand up to this "bully" of a government.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/01/03/armed-protesters-at-national-wildlife-refuge-say-government-force-would-risk-lives.html?intcmp=hpbt3

I agree, FloraKitty35. These people are terrifying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 490
  • Created
  • Last Reply
15 minutes ago, livinginthelight said:

 

Yessirree, Fox News is reporting on this. And passing along quotes that government force will risk lives, and passing along a call for others to join them. I bet many others are on the road right now, ready to stand up to this "bully" of a government.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/01/03/armed-protesters-at-national-wildlife-refuge-say-government-force-would-risk-lives.html?intcmp=hpbt3

I agree, FloraKitty35. These people are terrifying.

Of course Fox news is doing this.  :angry-banghead:  :shakehead2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly.  If Fox News vanished off the earth never to be heard from again, the world would be a better place for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, bashfulpixie said:

If they're heavily armed and threatening violence, how is this not terrorism of some sort?  These nut jobs and their followers terrify me.

People want to peacefully protest the government? I'm all for it. Once you add guns and violence, it's not longer peaceful IMO, even if they aren't fired.

White guys can't be terrorists.  Duh.  They're lone-wolves, mentally ill, and protesters.

A couple friends of mine live in Burns, and spent the day getting to the boyfriend's parents' house in Beaverton, more toward Portland, to get away from this.  They plan to stay there until this is all over.  They don't feel safe at home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, really? Beaverton is a long, looooong way from Burns. Is it that bad down there? Are they afraid of violence spreading? Or of sympathizers on the outside? 

http://audubonportland.org/news/audubon-society-of-portland-statement-on-the-occupation-of-malheur-national-wildlife-refuge

Here is the Audubon Society's statement and a description of the land involved. I am generally sympathetic to farmers. I do think "Big Pharma" often uses arms of the government to push smaller guys out of business. And I haven't read everything in this case, or been to the land reserve. But it does seem like this family had the idea that just because they raise cattle they should have the right to let their animals go where ever they bloody well please. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly.  If Fox News vanished off the earth never to be heard from again, the world would be a better place for it.

Faux News is verboten in this house. I even blocked it on the TVs in my home. My take is I pay for the service so I decide what is or is not allowed. I don't generally care what people watch otherwise. They can watch hardcore porn for all I care but Faux News is the one thing I put my foot down on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I think the entire concept of 24-hour cable news is flawed and leads to unethical "journalism." Faux News is the worst, of course. But news shouldn't be for-profit entertainment. Journalism shouldn't have a marketing team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, sawasdee said:

I can't believe that anyone gives eejits like this a second thought - who are the other eejits supporting them? They are breaking the law, and claiming they have a right to do so under the Constitution - can you hear the Founding Fathers rotating in their graves?

These eejits are the anti-gubmint, prepper, Obama-is-going-to-suspend-the-constitution-and-declare-Marshall-law-and-herd-everyone-up-in-FEMA-concentration-camps wingnuts.

But they're white, so it's totes OK. :roll:

(Note: 'martial' purposefully mispelled b/c that's how these wingnuts usually spell it in their frothing-at-the-mouth tirades on such fine websites as Wingnut Daily).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've read that the father and son set fires on federal land to conceal that they were poaching. Their conviction and sentence is for arson. They are separating themselves from the terrorists who are occupying federal property.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, EyeQueue said:

These eejits are the anti-gubmint, prepper, Obama-is-going-to-suspend-the-constitution-and-declare-Marshall-law-and-herd-everyone-up-in-FEMA-concentration-camps wingnuts.

But they're white, so it's totes OK:roll:

(Note: 'martial' purposefully mispelled b/c that's how these wingnuts usually spell it in their frothing-at-the-mouth tirades on such fine websites as Wingnut Daily).

As has been pointed out numerous times elsewhere, if you're armed and black, you are (collectively) thugs.  If you are armed and white, you are a "militia".   The significance to me, when you allow this term "militia", is that it legitimizes these wing nuts in their own eyes in terms of the 2nd amendment:

Quote

 A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

oregonlive.com has settled on the term "militants", because everybody is too scared to use the term "terrorists". 

This article is especially useful for context:
I Studied Oregon’s Militia Movement. Here’s 5 Things You Need to Know.  To whet your appetites if you are following this closely, these are the 5 things 

1. It’s actually a land grab — with guns

2. The paramilitaries are powered by conspiracy theories

3. The Patriot movement is a child of the White Power movement

4. The Federal government policies have allowed this to happen

5. There is widespread opposition to the Malheur takeover

The link to the full article is usuncut.com/news/5-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-oregon-militia-takeover/   I like this guy's writing.  It's informative and concise. There is a paragraph of two for each point.  You can check out the author's website here; he studies right wing groups: spencersunshine.com

The latest?  These guys are bringing in children and (presumably) wives, because they can't take care of the kids themselves, now can they?  I hope the feds turn off the water, electricity and heat ASAP and find a way to jam cell phone reception, with jamming cell phones at the #1 item; without a social media platform, they are just a bunch of yahoos sitting out in the cold. 

I'm sure these yahoos have brought generators, but they will run out of gasoline to power the generators at some point. 

ETA: I love my fellow citizen wordsmiths and punsters.

So, if you don't want to use the word terrorists or militia, call them what they are: Vanilla ISIS

If they are ranchers trying to set up their own state, is that a cow-iphate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, onlyme said:

http://www.wweek.com/2016/01/03/the-bundys-claims-about-their-federal-building-seizure-are-very-dubious/

They claim they have children, but unless there is something newer out there it looks like they are lying. They've also lied about how many people they have, and their supplies don't look that deep. 

 

The comments are worth reading. Someone says that "Since facts matter" and posts a link to an Infowars article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Howl said:

So, if you don't want to use the word terrorists or militia, call them what they are: Vanilla ISIS

I prefer YallQaeda. 

Prepared to stay for years my lily white ass, so long as they blockade to place. These fuck faces don't want government involvement? Shut down the power and heat, since those are provided to that building from government funds.

As far as I know, they are there under the guise of standing up for two men who burned 139 acres of public land to cover up their poaching of deer. Just like the last Bundy shit show, they weren't taking land back from the government. They were damaging land owned by everyone. Public land is managed by the government to preserve it's use by everyone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, they've asked for snacks. I don't think they're staying for years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe they claimed that they burned controlled fires to save their property. My personal opinion is that they probably were poachers, because (and this really shows my biases) people who talk and act like that tend to be terrible people who think the rules don't apply to them. I also saw a picture of them riding on ATVs and that makes me instantly dislike these people. 

I really hate that they (the militia) are doing this. It takes people's legitimate complaints government overreach and associates anyone who might think that the needs some criticism on land use policy (and other things) into a cray wing nut.

Personally, I don't know enough about ranching or land use outside of my own area. So I can only speak to what I know. I'm not a fan of the regulations they put on sport fishing and subsistence fishing, while allowing commercial fisherman to overfish. And, in the lower 48, I hate how parks are monetized and the NFS has allowed private property to block access to public lands. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Maggie Mae said:

I believe they claimed that they burned controlled fires to save their property. My personal opinion is that they probably were poachers, because (and this really shows my biases) people who talk and act like that tend to be terrible people who think the rules don't apply to them. I also saw a picture of them riding on ATVs and that makes me instantly dislike these people. 

I really hate that they (the militia) are doing this. It takes people's legitimate complaints government overreach and associates anyone who might think that the needs some criticism on land use policy (and other things) into a cray wing nut.

Personally, I don't know enough about ranching or land use outside of my own area. So I can only speak to what I know. I'm not a fan of the regulations they put on sport fishing and subsistence fishing, while allowing commercial fisherman to overfish. And, in the lower 48, I hate how parks are monetized and the NFS has allowed private property to block access to public lands. 

I've heard that the areas that were burned were in a drought zone, meaning that it would have been very easy for these fires to get out of control and damage not just public land, but private property as well. Rural brush fires are hard to fight, not just because of the potential magnitude of damage, but because the land is already sparsely populated to begin with, making it difficult to mobilize properly trained firefighters to contain the fires in a timely manner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YallQaeda doesn't care what these guy's did or why they did it. Just like the Bundy ranch fiasco, it's any excuse possible. 

The guys who started the fires are irresponsible af no matter what the reason. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/3/2016 at 11:45 AM, gustava said:

WHITE DOMESTIC TERRORISM.

Vanilla Isis.

 

What I wanna know is: Is Trump going to demand a registry for Mormons? Since they're obvi all terrorists and whatnot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, onlyme said:

Wow, really? Beaverton is a long, looooong way from Burns. Is it that bad down there? Are they afraid of violence spreading? Or of sympathizers on the outside? 

http://audubonportland.org/news/audubon-society-of-portland-statement-on-the-occupation-of-malheur-national-wildlife-refuge

Here is the Audubon Society's statement and a description of the land involved. I am generally sympathetic to farmers. I do think "Big Pharma" often uses arms of the government to push smaller guys out of business. And I haven't read everything in this case, or been to the land reserve. But it does seem like this family had the idea that just because they raise cattle they should have the right to let their animals go where ever they bloody well please. 

Quick point, "big pharma" is typically used to refer to pharmaceutical companies, they call the farmers "big ag", but as someone who is a 5th generation family farmer, who has worked in the industry all over the country, farmers are generally doing fine. There are a lot of little Podunk operations that close up every year mostly because either they lose interest or because they don't want to change with the times. My hometown is a large economy that is roughly 50% agriculture and if you want to know who lives in the big houses you see, chances are it's the farmers. I get frustrated with people who have never stepped foot on a farm blogging about how you need to buy from the farmers market because "the poor family farmers", as if we're some dusty hillbillies incapable of running a business. And this rant is not meant to be rude or snarky directed specifically at onlyme, I'm sure you're trying to be supportive, but it frustrates me. End rant.

back to these dusty hillbillies that ARE causing a problem. The two individuals who these redneck messes are claiming to "support" have denied being in a league with them at all and have said on record they don't condone what yallqueda is doing. It really won't be hard to smoke these buffoons out, they have limited supplies, but my worry is they were somewhat disappointed at the lack of fireworks in Nevada and are going to try to force a Waco situation here. If they are prepared to die for some straw-man argument so be it, but it's too bad that they're going to use up so many resources to commit suicide by cop. Bunch of idiots. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainly I'm referring to situations where a smaller set-up is ordered to (for example) destroy a years worth of cheese making, or a whole herd of animals are ordered to be destroyed for dubious reasons. While large companies get away with substandard cleanliness, etc. Just because someone is sympathetic to small operations doesn't mean they are being condescending. I do like to support local farmers. I buy much of my produce and meat from local farms (and visit them.) They work hard. If a farmer is getting rich, good for them if they are doing it honestly.  I'd rather it be a local one for our own economy, also I think it's more environmentally responsible. I'm sorry, I just don't see why anyone should get their hackles up over it? 

I've heard "Big Pharma" used for both. But arguing over terminology, especially street terms, isn't all that important to me. I think it's still easy for anyone to know what I meant. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somehow during the original Cliven Bundy standoff, it escaped me that Cliven Bundy is a Mormon patriarch.  Several online articles have mentioned that he has 50(!) grandchildren, meaning he has a ton of kids, who have all produced like bunnies and many of those grandkids have likely reached adulthood.  Two things struck me.  The first is the Under the Banner of Heaven vibe, (not related to multiple wives because I think Cliven only has one), but the whole setting up your own private state, because Mormon patriarch.  The second is that, with all those kids having kids, there isn't enough ranch to support everybody.  The original standoff seems, in retrospect, somewhat of a resource war.  To support a family that large, if a bunch of them want to support themselves through ranching, there's no more land.  Of course they want the government to turn it over to them.  They've got a dynasty going on and need to expand.  So don't pay taxes and rip off the government by not paying $100,000s of thousands of dollars in grazing allotment fees. Problem solved.  Lots of $$ for all the Bundys. 

And BINGO! Just googled and Think Progress has laid it all out for me in an article today:  The Bundy Family's Odd Mormon Connection, Explained.

thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/01/04/3735830/bundy-mormonism/

If you want to see the Burns, OR protest march timeline,  with a history of the Hammond Ranch vs federal Fish and Wildlife/Malheur from the Bundy perspective, check out  bundyranch.blogspot.com/

I'm a gonna need to lay in a serious supply of popcorn.  This is gettin' interesting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Part of the reason I get frustrated is because the smaller operations, the farmers market types, I find are more often disengenuous about their claims. The larger companies have to put in tons of time and effort to comply with regulations around food and environmental safety, they are audited constantly, they keep massive databases of all their records, have highly trained personnel, etc, and the people with the back yard garden come up to these farmers markets and claim they're doing it better when in fact they aren't following any regulations, are making dubious if not outright false claims about their products, take very few food safety measures, and all manner of other things and then claim that they are the ones who are being more responsible. I have no problem with people wanting to support niche growers, buy locally, buy organic, natural, free range, whatever you want, there are responsible producers in all of those areas and if that is a product your want, by all means seek it out. My issue is misinformation spread mostly by bloggers and such tend to make consumers think those small operations are inherently better when it's actually the large operations who are more concerned for the land and their consumers, after all, they have millions of dollars, years of experience, their family business, and the livelihood of all their employees tied up in ensuring you have the best, safest product availble, Celeste at the farmers market has a few Pinterest pages and some raised beds invested, and no way to trace your e. Coli back to her. And if telling people the crops are all watered with collected rain water (except the 90% of the time they aren't)  and no pesticides are used (except the ones that she bought at the local tractor supply and used incorrectly because she doesn't have a certified pest control analyst advising on what exactly those bugs are that are eating her plants, but the cashier pointed out diazinon kills anything, so she put a bunch of that on yesterday) sells more product, that's what she'll do, and people will buy it because there is no oversight other than her word. 

The only time I have ever even heard of the government legitimately destroying product that did not have a valid reason to be destroyed was once and it was related to a smuggling situation where they identified the incorrect grower, there was no sabotage by larger companies, it was entirely a government flub. 

And I assure you, large companies going after smaller ones is not a widespread problem, I'm not saying it doesn't happen,  but I've never heard of it. 

Again, if you like local, responsibly raised and fact checked products, wonderful, support those people, get them a solid market base to expand and thrive. If you are getting your information from mommy bloggers or taking the word of the guy at the fruit stand in the local park, ask some questions because often a little digging will turn up a lot of dirt. And don't write off commercial farmers in order to support "family farms" because the majority of the time those commercial farmers are family farms, we're just the families that are good at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, daisyd681 said:

YallQaeda doesn't care what these guy's did or why they did it. Just like the Bundy ranch fiasco, it's any excuse possible. 

The guys who started the fires are irresponsible af no matter what the reason. 

The guys who started the fire are crazy irresponsible, but at least they are owning up to it and planning on reporting to prison. They're fighting it, but I would fight being sent to federal prison, too. You can't really hold that against them. I really wish the news media would be more clear with "these terrorists have occupied a federal building in order to disrupt the government and waste taxpayer resources, because they don't like paying their bills for services rendered. In this case that is grazing rights to government land on which they have run their cattle. They outwardly claim it is in solidarity with local ranchers who have no actual affiliation with the terrorists and would like to not be named because they do not condone or support this terrorist group"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Boogalou locked this topic

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.