• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Armed Militia Members take over Federal Building in Oregon

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
zinfamous said:
"whenever possible, deflect the discussion to some woman in some unrelated event."
Click to expand...

That's LK's style; drop in on a thread and drag in everything plus the kitchen sink to deflect from the topic and divert it on to someone/something they view as the real enemy.
 
LegendKiller said:
Yes, pointing out ridiculous "sovereign citizen" types and remembering one recent instance is sexist. Go go SJW victimization.
Click to expand...

so you respond directly to a mention of these criminals bringing in women and children as human shields--under testimony from one of these criminals regarding these specific tactics--by mentioning some obnoxious woman doing something stupid somewhere else, for reasons.

You are just one precious piece of freedom aren't you?

How about a direct answer from you:

Do you support their actions?
 
Someone on twitter called these morons "YeeHawdists"...lol!

ETA: Someone else said that the Bundys are nothing but moochers; they want free land in Nevada and free housing in Oregon.
 
Last edited:
zinfamous said:
so you respond directly to a mention of these criminals bringing in women and children as human shields--under testimony from one of these criminals regarding these specific tactics--by mentioning some obnoxious woman doing something stupid somewhere else, for reasons.

You are just one precious piece of freedom aren't you?

How about a direct answer from you:

Do you support their actions?
Click to expand...

No, I responded to the "sovereign citizen" foolishness with a like-anecdote. It is as simple as that.

From what I see, no. It appears that Bundy's kid is trying to grasp at something that isn't his.
 
DrDoug said:
Because nothing says that you're a real man more than hiding behind women and children with your guns.

I read over at LGF that Ammon Bundy has a LiveStream up and that he was on it spouting sovereign citizen bullshit. The feds ought to get some jamming gear over there and shut them down.
Click to expand...

If he was in Yemen he'd have a Hellfire missile fired up his ass. In US, though, apparently white, christian, right extremist can do WTF they want as long as they bring guns. At a bare minimum if another standoff occurs they should all be charged with child endangerment.

And why hasn't power been/water been cut to this facility?
 
Indus said:
I have another question.. why doesn't this qualify as terrorism?

ter·ror·ism
ˈterəˌrizəm/Submit
noun
the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.
Click to expand...

After looking at the definition, shouldn't it be terrorism?
Click to expand...

I see we're playing the dictionary game! 😀 A favorite past-time of mine!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism
In its broadest sense, terrorism is any act designed to cause terror.

"Terrorism" comes from the French word terrorisme, and originally referred specifically to state terrorism as practiced by the French government during the 1793–1794 Reign of Terror. The French word terrorisme in turn derives from the Latin verb terrere (e, terreo) meaning "to frighten".

In November 2004, a Secretary-General of the United Nations report described terrorism as any act "intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act"

the United Nations General Assembly has repeatedly condemned terrorist acts using the following political description of terrorism: Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them.

U.S. Code Title 22 Chapter 38, Section 2656f(d) defines terrorism as: “Premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.”

By distinguishing terrorists from other types of criminals and terrorism from other forms of crime, we come to appreciate that terrorism is :
- ineluctably political in aims and motives;
- violent—or, equally important, threatens violence;
- designed to have far-reaching psychological repercussions beyond the immediate victim or target;
- conducted either by an organization with an identifiable chain of command or conspiratorial cell structure (whose members wear no uniform or identifying insignia) or by individuals or a small collection of individuals directly influenced, motivated, or inspired by the ideological aims or example of some existent terrorist movement and/or its leaders; and
- perpetrated by a subnational group or nonstate entity.


A definition proposed by Carsten Bockstette at the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies, underlines the psychological and tactical aspects of terrorism:

Terrorism is defined as political violence in an asymmetrical conflict that is designed to induce terror and psychic fear (sometimes indiscriminate) through the violent victimization and destruction of noncombatant targets (sometimes iconic symbols). Such acts are meant to send a message from an illicit clandestine organization. The purpose of terrorism is to exploit the media in order to achieve maximum attainable publicity as an amplifying force multiplier in order to influence the targeted audience(s) in order to reach short- and midterm political goals and/or desired long-term end states.
Click to expand...


So now I'm left a little confused... you indicated you understood what the word "terrorism" means but you actually don't. It's as if your primary interest is in insulting others rather than having an intellectual discussion. I'm quite sure you enjoy the company of yourself 😛
 
Last edited:
Zorba said:
If he was in Yemen he'd have a Hellfire missile fired up his ass. In US, though, apparently white, christian, right extremist can do WTF they want as long as they bring guns. At a bare minimum if another standoff occurs they should all be charged with child endangerment.

And why hasn't power been/water been cut to this facility?
Click to expand...

I can report that the authorities are probably closing the roads:

ODOT TripCheck site:

ORE78
MP 91.6
ORE78, Burns Junction
Closure
Crash/Hazard
Lanes Affected: (Northbound) 1 Lane
Comments: The highway is closed northbound. Use alternate routes.
Public Contact: ODOT/CTOC Bend
Incident #: 233983
Last Updated: 01/03/2016 8:36 pm


and:

ORE78
MP 30
ORE78, 2 miles South of Crane
Closure
Crash/Hazard
Lanes Affected: (Southbound) 1 Lane
Comments: The highway is closed southbound. Use alternate routes.
Public Contact: ODOT/CTOC Bend
Incident #: 233984
Last Updated: 01/03/2016 8:35 pm

The two closures block access to the wildlife refuge from the southeast and east. It's interesting that the reason is listed as "crash/hazard". I guess that's accurate since the guys are crashing there and they are a hazard...lol!
 
The summary of this thread is as such:

"Some privileged white people are not being shot at by law enforcement, nor being called terrorists by society at large, and that makes me angry!"


Understanding that now, I can go back to ignoring you all again 😉 See, that's the true privilege of being white, I can ignore without repercussion people who want to irrationally rage 😀
 
Last edited:
cubby1223 said:
The summary of this thread is as such:

"Some privileged white people are not being shot at by law enforcement, nor being called terrorists by society at large, and that makes me angry!"


Understanding that now, I can go back to ignoring you all again 😉 See, that's the true privilege of being white, I can ignore without repercussion people who want to irrationally rage 😀
Click to expand...

Whooosh!
 
cubby1223 said:
The summary of this thread is as such:

"Some privileged white people are not being shot at by law enforcement, nor being called terrorists by society at large, and that makes me angry!"


Understanding that now, I can go back to ignoring you all again 😉
Click to expand...

Those people who it looks like you think are not terrorists have now occupied the fire lookout towers in the area and have installed "marksmen" for "safety" and Bundy is "absolutely" ready to use force if he thinks he needs to. The sheriff even says:

“These men came to Harney County claiming to be part of militia groups supporting local ranchers when in reality these men had alternative motives, to attempt to overthrow the county and federal government in hopes to spark a movement across the United States”.
Click to expand...
Do you think that it's a peaceful protest? The sheriff sure doesn't think so and neither do I.

Go ahead, keep ignoring... do what you do best!
 
LegendKiller said:
I didn't see guns but I have to admit I didn't look closely. Also, what makes that non-violent. Was there violence caused? Do you have to have guns in order to be violent?
Click to expand...

Ah, I see you didn't actually read of the original links/research a thing before posting, just jumped in and started blithering like an idiot per usual.

feralkid said:
Now you know how you make all of us feel.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
MongGrel said:
Ah, I see you didn't actually read of the original links/research a thing before posting, just jumped in and started blithering like an idiot per usual.
Click to expand...

For a guy who thinks B-52 Arc Light type of employment is an appropriate solution to ME issues, you throwing around the idiot title is humorous.
 
DrDoug said:
Those people who it looks like you think are not terrorists have now occupied the fire lookout towers in the area and have installed "marksmen" for "safety" and Bundy is "absolutely" ready to use force if he thinks he needs to. The sheriff even says:

Do you think that it's a peaceful protest? The sheriff sure doesn't think so and neither do I.

Go ahead, keep ignoring... do what you do best!
Click to expand...

Please read the wikipedia page again. You're asking a question who's answer is irrelevant. Stop being a dumbass. We have too many dumbasses on this forum as it is.

You absolutely deserve to be ignored for what you just wrote.
 
Knowing said:
While I agree that the wholesale slaughter of wildlife is wrong, I don't think that it quite qualifies as ecoterrorism the way that say, the arson of Hummers does. Presumably they were at least using the meat. I have also read that a study was done and found that no harm was done to the habitats from at least one of the fires.

The rest of this post is what I was hoping to find in this thread. I agree wholeheartedly, I hope that the Bundys are successful in bringing the topic to a head but I have a suspicion that merely associating the Bundys with the Hammonds is going to make the Hammonds worse off.
Click to expand...

Poaching in general is illegal. Especially so on a scale they did it.

Recruiting people to show up armed to take possession of Federal property isn't too bright an idea, I'm surprised myself many of the people here were not taken into custody after the Bundy ranch thing myself.

You another one that came into the thread spouting off BS per usual looking like a fool.

Nothing like throwing opinions around all over the place when you obviously had not taken the time to even find out what was go on to begin with.
 
Last edited:
cubby1223 said:
Please read the wikipedia page again. You're asking a question who's answer is irrelevant. Stop being a dumbass. We have too many dumbasses on this forum as it is.

You absolutely deserve to be ignored for what you just wrote.
Click to expand...

Ooooh, do you want to spank me too...lol! Speaking of being a dumbass, you rock at it!
 
evu6rqw.jpg


Yallqaeda. Lmao.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top