quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

we will kill you and if you try to kill us we will kill you.

Oh yea good law abiding peaceful protest there...sometimes i just cannot believe what you say...lol

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
As for the complaint against his mother, I can't see these guys admitting she threatened them even if she said she was going to shoot them, that complaint is just silly.

I thought that too...no way in hell would I ever expect someone in this type of situation to admit to being threatened by a 74 year old grandmother. But there is nothing that has happened that would indicate the sheriff has lied about anything.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Am I correct in thinking there is no known link between thr protesters and the threats? Not that this makes the threats acceptable in any way.

Nothing I have seen yet identifies who made the threat other than 'angry protesters'.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
The Sheriff on the other hand went off the deep end and said these guys were trying to not only overthrow the county government, but the Federal government as well.

I wouldn't call it the deep end. There is a lot of backstory and little details that get lost in reporting the big picture, but that can be found elsewhere. Apparently Bundy has been posting about this for two months, talking about the peaceful protest but also telling followers to 'come prepared to take a stand'. Even the Oathkeepers, who I would think would be the last to denounce this, have a long statement posted right on their official site, and they suggest that uprising against the Federal Government may very well be part of his plan. And they are calling Bundy out for misleading people about his intentions regarding just how far he will take this.

From the Oathkeepers site:
He then describes plans for a rally, march, and protest on Saturday, January 2, that will march though town and end by placing flowers in front of the Hammond family residence in town. That description sounds like it will be only a protest, and that is the apparent intent of the Three Percenter groups involved, but Ammon’s rhetoric goes way beyond just a protest. For example, on December 11th, he posted:

Please understand that we must exhaust all prudent measures before taking a physical stand against the horrific actions that the People of Harney County are enduring (including the Hammond’s). If this Notice is ignored, then one more Notice of Demand will be sent, it will list the many petitions that have been ignored and demand that the Hammond’s rights be restored. If that final Notice is rejected then People across the Union will have justification to assemble and once again restore individual rights. (emphasis added.)

So, at the least, Ammon is sending out confusing and contradictory messages of what he is asking people to do, and at the worst, he is planning on going far beyond a mere protest, and intends some form of armed direct action (and all despite the Hammonds making it known that Ammon does not speak for them and they intend to voluntarily report to federal custody.)

At the very least Ammon needs to make it very clear what he is asking people to do, and he needs to make it clear that he is going against the clearly stated intent of the Hammonds. His rhetoric is all about taking a stand and defending the Hammonds from being taking into custody and then going further and defending the entire county against the Feds, despite serious opposition by the local community against any form of armed confrontation.

https://www.oathkeepers.org/the-hammond-family-does/

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

The Gitmo was suggested tongue and cheek...although I see no difference between Muslim terrorist and these assholes....It would serve them right to be incarcerated without a right to trial just as many of the prisoners in Gitmo have endured for years.

The second they decided to arm themselves they stepped away from their Constitutional right to peaceful protest and became criminals...and they deserve to be treated that way.

I am certainly not against a protest over the re-sentencing which I find difficult to understand but taking up arms against your government is treason.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Really? You think looting a store is peaceful protest?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Really? You think looting a store is peaceful protest?

Phydeaux, you must not have been following where I stand very often to form that conclusion.

I am against BLM. Was posting what was Ironic.

On top of this, I believe this oregon issue can be solved peacefully.

It's land dispute. Although currently, I again, have been reading mix stories about exactly what is going on.

Why do these ranchers think the land is theirs when it's public land?

On CNN itself, it was described as two ranchers put in jail for refusing to sell their land. But if it's public land, why is the federal government having to buy it from them?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
I posted a pretty good coppy and paste from (hat tip: LucyLastic) that explained just how egregiously the federal government had violated the Hammonds civil rights. Its a must read if you want to understand the situation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I see no difference... If a law officer is threatened when upholding the law of the land... it is either criminal or terror behavior... If I were to peacefully protest, even civil disobedience, that is one thing... but if i destroy property...loot...block free access... take up arms... I would be a criminal or a terrorist...And... deserve apprehension... trial...and if found guilty appropriate punishment.

It makes no difference how righteous a protest is... armed criminal behavior is not acceptable.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

FR


http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/30/as-college-sophomore-eric-holder-participated-in-armed-takeover-of-former-columbia-university-rotc-office/

Butch since Holder was armed while occupying a federal building do you think they should have gunned him down or at least sent him to Gitmo.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I think anyone who participates and or supports armed insurrection is a criminal or terrorist in my book... is that plain enough for you? Anyone who disobeys the law... as in Ruby Ridge. Many of the officers on the scene had no idea what was behind the charges and that asshole got someone killed by resisting... If he had given up it could have been straightened out in the courts... Bama there is NEVER a reason to take up weapons against the law of the land where there is judicial recourse.

Butch