|
Inferior Third Season posted:If they had prevented them from coming and going as they pleased when this started, and prevented literal FedEx trucks from delivering supplies, this would all be over by now from cold and hunger, and they would have looked far more absurd, petty, and incoherent than they do now. "The federal government is stopping us from getting supplies" makes the story more interesting. As does giving the proud patriots a line to cross, because they will, of course, cross it. Who What Now posted:So are you deliberately ignoring the fact people are joining up with them when you say this, or what? I'm not even accidentally ignoring it. The fact that a handful of lunatics have turned up doesn't mean that they're not being "...treated with a combination of fear and derision by pretty much everyone". Did you have a counterargument that you wanted to advance?
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 15:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 15:34 |
|
|
Perfectly Safe posted:"The federal government is stopping us from getting supplies" makes the story more interesting. As does giving the proud patriots a line to cross, because they will, of course, cross it. and? why should we care how much of a pity party militia criminals throw for themselves?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
Condiv posted:and? why should we care how much of a pity party militia criminals throw for themselves? New narratives generate more media attention.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 15:16
|
|
|
i dunno, why don't we ask three separate terrorism experts about it? http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2016/01/why_dont_feds_try_to_oust_oreg.html#incart_river_index This article was linked by JJ Mcnab on Twitter, who is one of the main experts on SovCits watching the situation and has been cited multiple times in this thread. She gave no negative criticism of the article's conclusions despite being a huge advocate for understanding the movement and notifying people of its dangers Who What Now posted:So are you deliberately ignoring the fact people are joining up with them when you say this, or what? the town isn't filling up with hundreds of supporters. they sent out a call for people to come, and it appears that almost nobody has shown up. theflyingorc fucked around with this message at 15:20 on Jan 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 15:17
|
|
|
Perfectly Safe posted:I'm not even accidentally ignoring it. The fact that a handful of lunatics have turned up doesn't mean that they're not being "...treated with a combination of fear and derision by pretty much everyone". "If you ignore all the people that support them then nobody supports them!" Yeah, no poo poo. Regular Sherlock Holmes, you are.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 15:20
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:"If you ignore all the people that support them then nobody supports them!" Yeah, no poo poo. Regular Sherlock Holmes, you are. no, seriously, from watching the stream yesterday there's at MOST 30 cars at the compound. the idea that this situation is spiraling out of control is not justified by the facts
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:"If you ignore all the people that support them then nobody supports them!" Yeah, no poo poo. Regular Sherlock Holmes, you are. No, I said that they were being "...treated with a combination of fear and derision by pretty much everyone". That doesn't mean absolutely everyone. Did you have a counterargument that you wanted to advance?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 15:30
|
|
|
Perfectly Safe posted:New narratives generate more media attention. and? so we throw rule of law out because of the possibility of media attention? and what's the lack of media attention supposed to prevent, more of these guys showing up/more support for these guys? cause i got bad news for you, they're getting more supporters/support because of the limp-dicked police response
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 15:30
|
|
|
Condiv posted:and? so we throw rule of law out because of the possibility of media attention? and what's the lack of media attention supposed to prevent, more of these guys showing up/more support for these guys? cause i got bad news for you, they're getting more supporters/support because of the limp-dicked police response if sovcits are riled up they'll start randomly murdering police officers, judges, and politicians all over the country hth
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 15:34
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:if sovcits are riled up they'll start randomly murdering police officers, judges, and politicians all over the country hth Like a breaking fever - individuals with radicalization potential must be culled. Warriors, come out and playyyyyyy
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
Condiv posted:and? so we throw rule of law out because of the possibility of media attention? The law against receiving Fedex packages? Condiv posted:and what's the lack of media attention supposed to prevent, more of these guys showing up/more support for these guys? There's not much point in their being there if they're not getting media attention. Condiv posted:cause i got bad news for you, they're getting more supporters/support because of the limp-dicked police response I quite understand the desire for a throbbing, quivering, dare I say gulping action movie response, but I don't agree that it's the best route to take and believe that the desire for it comes from a need for emotional satisfaction. I also don't agree that the movement is receiving more support based on dick hardness of any kind.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:if sovcits are riled up they'll start randomly murdering police officers, judges, and politicians all over the country hth The irony to this would be that instead of being a martyr for their own cause, removal of government, the people they murder would be martyr for the removal of the 2nd amendment.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:no, seriously, from watching the stream yesterday there's at MOST 30 cars at the compound. the idea that this situation is spiraling out of control is not justified by the facts Are you purposefully ignoring the militia patrols that are in the town harassing people, or are you ignoring them by accident?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
Mormon Star Wars posted:Are you purposefully ignoring the militia patrols that are in the town harassing people, or are you ignoring them by accident? yes, the hundreds of thousands of cars that have descended on this small town all of the harassing behavior being described could be accomplished with a handful of vehicles. this isn't a dystopian future where the militias have successfully replaced the police
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
Perfectly Safe posted:The law against receiving Fedex packages? the law against breaking and entering, hacking, grand theft auto, and the other numerous laws they've broken. are you stupid or do you not realize they've broken a number of serious laws including death threats against judges and law enforcement officials. quote:There's not much point in their being there if they're not getting media attention. they seem to be getting attention, money, and support even without media attention. so yes there's a point quote:I quite understand the desire for a throbbing, quivering, dare I say gulping action movie response, but I don't agree that it's the best route to take and believe that the desire for it comes from a need for emotional satisfaction. I also don't agree that the movement is receiving more support based on dick hardness of any kind. blockading the building and starving them out isn't action movie at all and still serves the purpose of enforcing the law. and that's the important thing, these people and their friends think the law literally does not apply to them, and they are only emboldened by the lack of response.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:if sovcits are riled up they'll start randomly murdering police officers, judges, and politicians all over the country hth so we can't ever arrest them or their friends will murder us? might as well give them the land they want then
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
Condiv posted:so we can't ever arrest them or their friends will murder us? might as well give them the land they want then Worked for Cliven
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 15:59
|
|
|
Ha, I called it:quote:He said he came to the refuge from his home outside Cincinnati while his parents were on vacation in Costa Rica. He said they will return home in about a week. He thought he could sneak off and play anti-government militant for a week without his parents noticing, and now his face is in the news as an Isis sympathizer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
quote:“I’m an ironic kind of guy,” he said. “My humor is a little off compared to most people.” Sounds like he's got a case of the prodromal schizophrenia
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
Perfectly Safe posted:No, I said that they were being "...treated with a combination of fear and derision by pretty much everyone". That doesn't mean absolutely everyone. Counterargument argument to what? Your baseless assertion that they have no support? Why should I?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:09
|
|
|
Condiv posted:so we can't ever arrest them or their friends will murder us? might as well give them the land they want then they're not going to "get the land" even if they somehow found a way to start using the land for...something (i still don't understand what we think they're going to do on it), they won't be able to sell whatever they're producing, unless they sell to someone who is ALSO willing to have a standoff. literally what the government is doing right now is trying to prevent murdering people they don't have to murder. this is, in fact, a good thing
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:12
|
|
|
As a Millennial I posted:Sounds like he's got a case of the prodromal schizophrenia has anyone asked him if he has stairs in his house yet
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:13
|
|
Alucardd posted:Max Temkin from CAG is thinking a bit larger Dude couldn't find a charity that needed a grand?
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:14
|
|
|
As a Millennial I posted:Sounds like he's got a case of the prodromal schizophrenia the optimal thing is, since there's no way this guy isn't a gamergater, is to ask him his opinion on Zoe Quinn
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:14
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:yes, the hundreds of thousands of cars that have descended on this small town In the the town they have literally done this, yes. It's not nation-wide, but don't ignore what's happening there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:14
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:In the the town they have literally done this, yes. It's not nation-wide, but don't ignore what's happening there. No, they goddamn haven't. Cite your evidence, there's been: A single photo posted that says "we're going on patrol" Suspicious vehicles seen at some government employee homes Reports of people being approached at the grocery store. This could easily be accomplished by 2-3 cars. People in town have a right to be nervous but if there were literally dozens of individuals doing this we'd be hearing about it. edit: of note, OregonLive.com is running information on Powerball as their top story instead of the standoff now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
If the police refuse to act how is that meaningfully different than not being there at all? At some point to get the attention they crave they are going to injure or more likely kill someone and people are going to just loving throw up their hands and spew "What could have been done to prevent this?" while I tear my goddamn hair out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:they're not going to "get the land" It feels like there's this big gap in this thread where some people feel like there's two choices. A) Arrest them NOW or B) Let them get away with everything forever and ever. Obviously the United States of America isn't going to turn over federal land because of a dozen or two loonies with guns. Ideally these guys will eventually be arrested for their crimes, although obviously a certain amount of cynicism is understandable given the Bundy Ranch standoff not leading to arrests. Some people just think that there's time and room for the authorities to play this whole thing carefully since there are no hostages or direct threat to innocents or even really major inconvenience since they took a closed up rural building that wasn't being used anyway. Obviously some people feel this has already gone too far and that letting it last longer just emboldens not only these guys but other like minded individuals and increases the short and long term danger. The big fight in here seems to be in those two groups not being able to see each other's arguments or just dismissing them out of hand.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
Condiv posted:the law against breaking and entering, hacking, grand theft auto, and the other numerous laws they've broken. are you stupid or do you not realize they've broken a number of serious laws including death threats against judges and law enforcement officials. And one would hope that arrests will be made in due course. Right at the moment, nobody is attempting arrest at any level of law enforcement. The FBI's position at the moment is that they are engaging in a demonstration. As a result, there's no reason to set up a roadblock. It's also logistically very difficult and very expensive to do so, as has been pointed out multiple times. The sole desire for this [e: immediate action] seems to be to see justice done swiftly. I can appreciate that. I just think that it's unwise and impatient. I will be right there with you if there are no repercussions for Bundy et al. Condiv posted:they seem to be getting attention, money, and support even without media attention. so yes there's a point I don't know what you mean. They aren't "without media attention" at the moment. In any case, my previous statement was based on the assumption that they wanted to accomplish more than "not starve". If their sole goal is to make it through the winter in a bird sanctuary then I guess they can do it, media attention or not. Condiv posted:blockading the building and starving them out isn't action movie at all and still serves the purpose of enforcing the law. and that's the important thing, these people and their friends think the law literally does not apply to them, and they are only emboldened by the lack of response. So your feeling is that turning it into a siege would dissuade other people from coming to Bundy's aid? It seems to me that the lack of a big face off with the government is something that other similar-minded groups might find rather uninspiring. Who What Now posted:Counterargument argument to what? Your baseless assertion that they have no support? Why should I? No, I said that they were being "...treated with a combination of fear and derision by pretty much everyone". That doesn't mean that they have no support. You don't have to do anything, obviously. Up to you. Wouldn't want you to feel forced into anything that you're not comfortable with. Perfectly Safe fucked around with this message at 16:26 on Jan 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:24
|
|
|
Inferior Third Season posted:Slate comes out with a South Park style "both sides are good/bad" article. The US doesn't negotiate with terrorists, unless they're white, christian, and conservative.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:25
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:i dunno, why don't we ask three separate terrorism experts about it? For gently caress's sake, dude, literally her very next tweet: https://twitter.com/jjmacnab/status/687066259704385536
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:27
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:If the police refuse to act how is that meaningfully different than not being there at all? At some point to get the attention they crave they are going to injure or more likely kill someone and people are going to just loving throw up their hands and spew "What could have been done to prevent this?" while I tear my goddamn hair out. They cannot shoot someone on the compound, because there is no one on the compound to shoot - they have no hostages. If you read that article I linked, three separate terrorism experts said that the FBI should not raid the compound, but rather wait for this to disperse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:30
|
|
|
kartikeya posted:For gently caress's sake, dude, literally her very next tweet: Yes, I saw that tweet criticizing Zandt's characterization of them as protestors. Can you show me where she says that the FBI is taking the wrong tack?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:31
|
|
|
I appreciate whatever strategies are being used to avoid violence. It wouldn't be as frustrating if Cliven didn't "win" his previous standoff and had to at least pay his goddamned fines. Also, I find it personally infuriating when sovereign citizens are in the news without anyone standing on their necks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:43
|
|
|
It's bizarre to me that they have broken a stack of laws and are still not arrested when they leave the compound. I guess the rules don't apply if you call yourself a 'patriot' enough times.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:46
|
|
|
Perfectly Safe posted:And one would hope that arrests will be made in due course. Right at the moment, nobody is attempting arrest at any level of law enforcement. The FBI's position at the moment is that they are engaging in a demonstration. As a result, there's no reason to set up a roadblock. It's also logistically very difficult and very expensive to do so, as has been pointed out multiple times. Oh no, the government might spend money!! Truly there can be no greater outcome than this. It's much more reasonable to let them stay where they are indefinitely to the tune of around 70k per day for god knows how long. That's a much more fiscally responsible decision. Glad you were here to remind us Fiscal Conservatives here in The Problem Attic of this fact. quote:No, I said that they were being "...treated with a combination of fear and derision by pretty much everyone". That doesn't mean that they have no support. No, they aren't. There is no shortage of support for them online. Just look up at the top of the page/last page to see an article about how Obama should cave into their demands and release the two child abusing arsonists from prison. Meanwhile your evidence that they are "...treated with a combination of fear and derision by pretty much everyone" is... what, exactly? That you feel this way obviously the
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:46
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:The US doesn't negotiate with terrorists, unless they're white, christian, and conservative. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:48
|
|
|
Internet Webguy posted:What happens when the Feds trump their Super Sheriff by appointing an Uber Sheriff Times Infinity Plus One No Takebacks? What then? NOW it was serious. A double-dog-dare. What else was there but a "triple dare you"? And then, the coup de grace of all dares, the sinister triple-dog-dare. "I TRIPLE-dog-dare ya!" Schwartz created a slight breach of etiquette by skipping the triple dare and going right for the throat!
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
Here's the thing about what's happening. When this first started, everyone laughed and their potential allies immediately distanced themselves because everyone, even the militants, thought the Feds were going to descend on them like the fist of God. People expected things to happen as they generally do in these situations: the area would be blocked off, the power would be cut, and they'd be trapped out in the middle of bumfuck nowhere with no appropriate supplies or gear because all they seem to have done is brought a shitload of guns and ammo and maybe a week's worth of food. Their potential allies, most of them anyway, did not instantly disavow or disparage their movement because they disagreed with them, even the locals were making sympathetic noises to their actual cause. Further, it's not like what they did was something militias and random internet tough g--err, PATRIOTS don't fantasize about all the live long day. It's just these guys are loving cowards, by and large. They don't actually want to get shot and killed by law enforcement, they just want to be big patriotic gun heroes standing up against the evil tyrannical FedGov like big patriotic gun heroes do. Except...nothing has happened to these guys. They haven't even been remotely inconvenienced, let alone faced any actual threat of jail time or getting caught in a shootout. We're turning into our second week of this nonsense and as far as anyone can see - and in this regard it doesn't matter what the Feds are actually planning on site because this is entirely based on perception - the militants are free and clear to do seemingly anything they want. Furthermore, to the watching SovCits and sympathizers, they're seeing things like Ammon Bundy saying a bunch of nonsense magic SovCit words and it seemingly working. Remember, the SovCit thing is that if you just use the write combo of legalese the government can't touch you. This is such a powerful idea to them that their leaders have made bank off of it, and hundreds of people have either been charged or outright gone to prison because of their efforts trying to find these magical loopholes. Here's Ammon Bundy demonstrating that they were right all along. So what we're seeing going on now, with other militias seemingly going back on what they initially said and supporters coming out of the woodwork isn't really a shocking twist; they're seeing that these guys have done exactly what they've fantasized over and have faced literally no meaningful opposition, just a bunch of angry liberals making internet posts about it and the townsfolk holding meetings (if they're even paying attention to that last). Basically Ammon Bundy and Friends are doing exactly what they've always wanted to do and getting away with it to all appearances. Suddenly it's not so risky to start voicing support. For some of them, the risk seems low enough that they're driving out to Oregon. It's starting to seem so low risk that some politicians at the state level, the people most notorious in the world for being solely concerned with how they look, are starting to think it's alright to show public support for the militants. This is a turn, not in opinions on the actual issue, but in people's perception of what kind of trouble might be had for showing they actually do like what the militants are doing. Because there are a lot of people in this country at all levels who DO like that. And the more you show them they can do it without any actual consequences (remember, perception. It doesn't matter what's happening where people can't see it if there are no visible consequences going on) the more people are going to feel emboldened to say what they really think, and maybe join in. You're seeing it happen, and I guarantee it's going to get worse until if and when law enforcement actually does do something (or the militants step over another line and everyone steps back to wait and see if this, maybe, is the line they can't cross without getting some of those unfortunate consequences). Again, these guys are by and large cowards of the Freeper variety. If you show a coward he can do what he wants without repercussion, the coward's going to do it, or at least feel it's perfectly okay to voice that he wants to/thinks other people should (because  ).This is the problem. And meanwhile, people are being literally terrorized in the US of A, white people even, and no one's standing in the terrorists' way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 15:34 |
|
|
InterFaced posted:I appreciate whatever strategies are being used to avoid violence. It wouldn't be as frustrating if Cliven didn't "win" his previous standoff and had to at least pay his goddamned fines. Also, I find it personally infuriating when sovereign citizens are in the news without anyone standing on their necks. Again, the federal government is going to be able to swoop in and arrest Bundy et al for years over that episode- preferably sometime after he stops being surrounded by men with ARs. The main difference now is they may be able to charge everyone involved under RICO. Who What Now posted:Oh no, the government might spend money!! Truly there can be no greater outcome than this. It's much more reasonable to let them stay where they are indefinitely to the tune of around 70k per day for god knows how long. That's a much more fiscally responsible decision. Glad you were here to remind us Fiscal Conservatives here in The Problem Attic of this fact. Blockading the compound is 1) physically difficult independent of cost, 2) is likely to lead to the militants gaining more support (including support from sympathetic locals) and 3) is almost certainly going to get people killed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2016 16:52
|
|
