Warhippy Posted January 5, 2016 Author Share Posted January 5, 2016 They're about to get their Libertarian Utopia as well, Government is going to cut off power, heat telephone and roads. The irony... Federal authorities are finally making their move against the heavily armed “militia” that has taken over the Malheur Wildlife Refuge in Burns, Oregon. Wary of provoking a deadly shootout with the anti-government extremists, the feds are taking the appropriate and logical step to freeze them out, cutting off power, telephone lines, and road access to the militia redoubt. An official in Washington remarked that “It’s in the middle of nowhere. And it’s flat-ass cold up there. After they shut off the power, they’ll kill the phone service. Then, they’ll block all the roads so that all those guys have a long, lonely winter to think about what they’ve done.” Temperatures are expected to plummet to 18 degrees Farenheit, with snowstorms expected over the next few days. While the rebels have declared that they are prepared to stay there for the “long haul,” the Guardian was “shown a food storage room that did not look like it could sustain a dozen men for more than a few weeks.” A social media call by the militiamen for supporters around the country to “send snacks” would also indicate that they are not prepared for a long siege. Ironically, those snacks would have to be sent by the mail, which the federal government also controls. It is unsurprisingly clear that these heavily armed fools with a very questionable understanding of what the Constitution actually says have not fully thought this out. Without more supplies or heat it is likely that they won’t last long. The local community has turned against them; the rancher who they came to defend has fully renounced them and have turned himself in to law enforcement. Their “cause” makes no sense; they are clearly provoking a standoff just for the sake of it. We commend the federal government for finding an ingenious solution that will not give these zealots what they want – at the most, a soapbox for their idiotic attempts to resist federal authority, and at worst a martyr’s death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Reminds me of that episode of Family Guy when Peter Griffin decided to form his own country in his house. Except that was executed better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks Prophet Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 16 hours ago, AlphaHoneyBadger said: That building is closed this time of year. Good for them standing up for their land. Expropriation rules are horse sh!t at best. What a surprise, you support the lunatics with guns holding up government property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electro Rock Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 I doubt you could swing a dead cat on this board without hitting a bunch ankle grabbing statists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 47 minutes ago, Electro Rock said: I doubt you could swing a dead cat on this board without hitting a bunch ankle grabbing statists. I doubt that you could swing a mouse on this board without hitting some redneck second amendment apologist... Don't look now boys, President Blackula is comin' fer yer guns! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortorella's Rant Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 So, don't these winners have jobs? Other obligations? "Sorry, I can't come in for the next two weeks as I'm off to illegally occupy a federal building cuz cow tipping and Obummer." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electro Rock Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 2 minutes ago, Tortorella's Rant said: So, don't these winners have jobs? Other obligations? "Sorry, I can't come in for the next two weeks as I'm off to illegally occupy a federal building cuz cow tipping and Obummer." That coming from a leftist is like hearing ISIS whining about Islamic extremism! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortorella's Rant Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 2 minutes ago, Electro Rock said: That coming from a leftist is like hearing ISIS whining about Islamic extremism! :D Good point! If it made sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 18 minutes ago, Electro Rock said: That coming from a leftist is like hearing ISIS whining about Islamic extremism! :D When you're that far right, everyone is a leftist.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted January 5, 2016 Author Share Posted January 5, 2016 1 hour ago, Tortorella's Rant said: So, don't these winners have jobs? Other obligations? "Sorry, I can't come in for the next two weeks as I'm off to illegally occupy a federal building cuz cow tipping and Obummer." As per my links, no...they run a business that was paid for by the government they are whining about. But to the best of my knowledge they do not have anything better to do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianLoonie Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 6 hours ago, Canucks Prophet said: What a surprise, you support the lunatics with guns holding up government property. As citizens and taxpayers, I think it technically belongs to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 8 hours ago, RUPERTKBD said: Do you hear yourself? Every law and regulation that the government enacts affects the people. This is what governments are elected to do: Govern. The minute these guys armed themselves and threatened violence, it went beyond "standing up for their rights" which as Warhippy so eloquently pointed out, is not within their "rights" at all. I forgot to add..... making laws/regulations without proper consultations. Just also want to mention.... lots of progressive movements constantly mentions violence to the police, the rich, certain ethnic groups, etc..... yet just chalked up as "oh well, they're victims too. they're just doing what's within their rights". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 2 minutes ago, Lancaster said: I forgot to add..... making laws/regulations without proper consultations. Just also want to mention.... lots of progressive movements constantly mentions violence to the police, the rich, certain ethnic groups, etc..... yet just chalked up as "oh well, they're victims too. they're just doing what's within their rights". Sorry Lancaster, I know this is going to sound facetious, but I honestly cannot understand your last paragraph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Just now, RUPERTKBD said: Sorry Lancaster, I know this is going to sound facetious, but I honestly cannot understand your last paragraph. Equally dangerous, if not more so, rhetorics thrown out by those in BlackLivesMatters, Occupy, BDS, etc... They seem to get less criticism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 4 minutes ago, Lancaster said: Equally dangerous, if not more so, rhetorics thrown out by those in BlackLivesMatters, Occupy, BDS, etc... They seem to get less criticism. Hard to quantify "dangerous", but I'll certainly concede that there has been some violence associated with those protests. However, I would be remiss if I did not point out that many of those came about as a result of someone being wrongfully killed (some would say murdered). Also, to my knowledge, those protesters did not make a point of occupying a public facility and they did not make a point of declaring that they were armed and would use their weapons if provoked. Finally it seems to me that if a "Black Lives Matter" protest were to declare a willingness to use weapons, along with an assertion that they were in possession of such, the response by law enforcement would be swift and sure. They certainly wouldn't be afforded the indulgence that this group has, IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks Prophet Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 20 minutes ago, CanadianLoonie said: As citizens and taxpayers, I think it technically belongs to them. That's one way of looking at it. But the way they're going about it is not right. As others have mentioned, it could be labelled as domestic terrorism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 Just now, RUPERTKBD said: Hard to quantify "dangerous", but I'll certainly concede that there has been some violence associated with those protests. However, I would be remiss if I did not point out that many of those came about as a result of someone being wrongfully killed (some would say murdered). Also, to my knowledge, those protesters did not make a point of occupying a public facility and they did not make a point of declaring that they were armed and would use their weapons if provoked. Finally it seems to me that if a "Black Lives Matter" protest were to declare a willingness to use weapons, along with an assertion that they were in possession of such, the response by law enforcement would be swift and sure. They certainly wouldn't be afforded the indulgence that this group has, IMHO. Just to be clear, we're on the same page in regards to violence. I don't believe that the threat of violence should be put on the forefront. So those militias shouldn't really be behaving the way they are now. As I said before, should all parties meet at the negotation table and everything de-escalates, then in theory the 2nd amendment worked. But then again, I view the 2nd amendment like countries with nuclear weapons.... should never be used, but noticed in the background to promote dialogue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 2 minutes ago, Lancaster said: Just to be clear, we're on the same page in regards to violence. I don't believe that the threat of violence should be put on the forefront. So those militias shouldn't really be behaving the way they are now. As I said before, should all parties meet at the negotation table and everything de-escalates, then in theory the 2nd amendment worked. But then again, I view the 2nd amendment like countries with nuclear weapons.... should never be used, but noticed in the background to promote dialogue. I disagree. If such a thing occurs, it sends a message that armed takeovers of public buildings is the way to make yourself heard. A very dangerous precedent, IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackberries Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 38 minutes ago, CanadianLoonie said: As citizens and taxpayers, I think it technically belongs to them. O RLY http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2016/01/03/bundy-militia-musters-again-over-paiute-land-162939 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianLoonie Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 Just now, Blackberries said: O RLY http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2016/01/03/bundy-militia-musters-again-over-paiute-land-162939 I was referring to "public" buildings... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.ed4ffd81393717a7b4296e6fdaac89fa.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.