Evil Fluffy posted:

For someone who keeps bringing up the Hutaree militia do you actually know anything beyond the wikipedia page? Because the fact you keep comparing it to incidents caught on video and open confessions by Bundy Ranch/Oregon militia members implies you have no idea what you're talking about as you're comparing conspiracy and planning with actual things happening live and on video.

You also seem to ignore that Cliven Bundy has had issues going back decades so I'm guessing the answer is yes, given your posting history in this thread.

theflyingorc posted:

I'm sorry Gary, but I live in your house now, and we need to respect the current culture

also before i got here my dogs just ran freely all over your yard

Crain posted:

Also low interest loans...from somewhere...just like the government offers for businesses.

theflyingorc posted:

it's cool, he already thought of that. since he's the "current culture" then his land shouldn't be taken, but it was OK to take from the native americans, no big deal,

hahahaha getta load of this guy, he didn't think every action I take every day is justified and I deserve everything life has given me hahahahah

theflyingorc posted:

good news, he's going to get the loggers back on the mountain, and he's going to build a mill to create hundreds of jobs

i am JUST IMAGINING them trying to build a plant and supply chains without the support of the state and federal government

Main Paineframe posted:

Do you? The Hutaree case had people caught on video openly declaring their desire to go kill cops, which is way worse than the Bundy protesters' "self-defense" rhetoric. And yes, the fact that they're talking about "self-defense" against cops rather than openly going to war against them does matter in the courtroom. We all know what it means and what they want it to mean, but there is a difference and it does matter.

And Cliven Bundy's issues going back decades simply aren't relevant to this conversation; the FBI isn't going to arrest him over unpaid fines or anonymous angry phone calls. The FBI didn't get involved until the actual armed standoff itself (which they have started an investigation into, according to leaky witnesses who were interviewed during the course of the investigation), and they're going to keep the investigation going for a good long while, because I can't imagine they're confident in their ability to convince a judge that refusing to pay a permitting fee equates to conspiracy to overthrow the US government.


It worked for Texas, Israel, and the US itself, so I'm not really surprised he's trying a "gently caress you, your poo poo's mine now and I'm keeping it" tactic with such a long history of success.

SocketWrench posted:

It's tarp man


Jesus loving Christ. I hope they shoot Bundy "accidentally". Motherfucker that guy's retarded.

kartikeya posted:

http://www.kgw.com/news/4000-artifacts-stored-at-oregon-refuge-held-by-armed-group/15241509

Bonus idiocy from that link:

quote:

Bundy said people interested in archeology are welcome to explore the refuge, but that cattle ranchers and loggers should have priority when it comes to land use.

"Before white man came, so to speak, there was nothing to keep cattle from tromping on those things," Bundy said.

Though some countries had domesticated cattle 10,000 years ago, the animals came to the United States with European settlers.

"We also recognize that the Native Americans had the claim to the land, but they lost that claim," Bundy said. "There are things to learn from cultures of the past, but the current culture is the most important."

A Winner is Jew posted:

So I'm cool with the federal government giving a bunch of native americans guns, body armor, and armored vehicles if it means they get to "reclaim" the land from these assholes.

Lotka Volterra posted:

I'm not a bloodthirsty person in general, but yes, Bundy accidentally falling into a pit would make me happy.

Lotka Volterra posted:

I'm not a bloodthirsty person in general, but yes, Bundy accidentally falling into a pit would make me happy.

As a Millennial I posted:

So where are these APCs Pete claimed he saw?

theflyingorc posted:

It's pretty terrifying how earnest and charismatic Ammon's goddamn nonsense is.

Not a word of it is true, but you can see how it would appeal to a person who was both desperate and stupid

edit: Ammon mentioned armored vehicles being seen around Burns and the reporters just took it at face value. Something's up.

DrNutt posted:

Sounds like the judge in the Hutaree case was a real loving dipshit then, creating precedence like this. These people are dangerous.

quote:

“The government’s case is built largely of circumstantial evidence,” U.S. District Judge Victoria Roberts said in a 28-page order dismissing the charges before the case was sent to a jury.

“While this evidence could certainly lead a rational fact finder to conclude that ‘something fishy’ was going on, it does not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendants reached a concrete agreement to forcibly oppose the United States Government,” the judge wrote.

...

In her written opinion, the judge said the elements of a conspiracy may be proven entirely by circumstantial evidence, but that each element of the offense must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

“This is one of those times,” the judge said, adding that the court “is limited by what inferences reason will allow it to draw.”

“It stands to reason that most, if not all, of these Defendants had a strong dislike – perhaps hatred – of the Federal Government and law enforcement at every level,” the judge wrote. One could also reason that certain defendants wanted to harm or kill law enforcement agents. The evidence certainly suggests that (David) Stone Sr. strongly believed in the idea of a need to go to war with certain enemies.”

But, the judge concluded, the court “would need to engage in conjecture and surmise to find sufficient evidence that defendants shared a unity of purpose, the intent to achieve a common goal and an agreement to work together toward the goal,” as case law requires.

...

“Vague antigovernment hate speech simply does not amount to an agreement as a matter of law,” the judge said. “The court would need to infer and speculate not only that the other defendants were aware of Stone’s desire to spark a war with the federal government, but that an agreement to do so in the manner alleged in the indictment was reached. Reason will not allow such an incredible inference on this record.”

Main Paineframe posted:

Oh, absolutely. The judge in the Hutaree case was a tremendous rear end in a top hat, who threw out a perfectly good militia prosecution on idiotic grounds like "you can't assume the individual militia members share the militia leader's openly stated desire to kill cops and overthrow the government" and "if they don't have a specific concrete plan that all of them have openly agreed with then it's just political speech". Just look at these loving quotes:


Problem is, the FBI doesn't get to say "well, that judge was an rear end in a top hat", ignore it, and soldier on. Letting a militia prosecution end in failure, not even through acquittal but through the judge openly calling bullshit on the case and kicking it right out of the courtroom, emboldens anti-government types way more than being slow in the investigation. That means they have to live with those precedents, and try their best to adapt to them so that they won't get screwed by them again. I think it was a horrible ruling, but if you want to know why the FBI is being so utterly passive here and letting the protesters get away with so much (to the point where they only arrested the one guy for the vehicle theft), it's because last time they tried to prosecute a militia group a federal judge told them it was ridiculous to infer things from what the militia members were saying and doing. The FBI absolutely wants to prosecute here, but they're going to be meticulous to the point of near-absurdity first, and that means it's going to be slow and quiet. There's no way they haven't infiltrated the poo poo out of this occupation, and agents are going to be poring over every second of video for months after this thing ends, but the decentralized and semi-spontaneous nature of this thing means that the scale of this thing is going to be way beyond the usual militia investigation - and I won't be surprised if it takes much longer. And there's no way the FBI is going to break it up before summer, as the chances of organized violence just get lower every day. If this was going to erupt, it was going to erupt in the first few days when law enforcement was caught by surprise and the only people there were diehards expecting immediate confrontation. Now that a bunch of hangers-on have showed up, law enforcement has settled in for the long haul, and Ammon is savoring his fifteen minutes of fame, there's no way they're going to escalate if left to their own devices.

Main Paineframe posted:

Do you? The Hutaree case had people caught on video openly declaring their desire to go kill cops, which is way worse than the Bundy protesters' "self-defense" rhetoric. And yes, the fact that they're talking about "self-defense" against cops rather than openly going to war against them does matter in the courtroom. We all know what it means and what they want it to mean, but there is a difference and it does matter.

Evil Fluffy posted:

You know what else matters? Video and photographs taken by the militia assholes themselves actively violating the law. "I really want to kill x" isn't remotely the same thing as "look I just uploaded a video to Facebook showing me and others destroying Federal property." So no, you don't know the difference. Thank you for confirming it. That the Hutaree case's judge was a loving dipshit doesn't make the arguments against acting on these people any less idiotic. The people involved in the occupation don't have ignorance as an excuse. They are actively taking part in criminal activity. Even the ones who haven't been dumb enough to post videos and pictures of themselves breaking the law.

Evil Fluffy posted:

You know what else matters? Video and photographs taken by the militia assholes themselves actively violating the law. "I really want to kill x" isn't remotely the same thing as "look I just uploaded a video to Facebook showing me and others destroying Federal property." So no, you don't know the difference. Thank you for confirming it. That the Hutaree case's judge was a loving dipshit doesn't make the arguments against acting on these people any less idiotic. The people involved in the occupation don't have ignorance as an excuse. They are actively taking part in criminal activity. Even the ones who haven't been dumb enough to post videos and pictures of themselves breaking the law.

Evil Fluffy posted:

You know what else matters? Video and photographs taken by the militia assholes themselves actively violating the law. "I really want to kill x" isn't remotely the same thing as "look I just uploaded a video to Facebook showing me and others destroying Federal property." So no, you don't know the difference. Thank you for confirming it. That the Hutaree case's judge was a loving dipshit doesn't make the arguments against acting on these people any less idiotic. The people involved in the occupation don't have ignorance as an excuse. They are actively taking part in criminal activity. Even the ones who haven't been dumb enough to post videos and pictures of themselves breaking the law.

quote:

"We also recognize that the Native Americans had the claim to the land, but they lost that claim," Bundy said. "There are things to learn from cultures of the past, but the current culture is the most important."

many johnnys posted:

Why did the hammonds go to jail again? Can they prove who exactly was holding matches when starting the arsons? I mean they don't have video footage or anything of the fires.

I mean yeah he instructed his nephew to drop lit matches along the countryside until he ran out, and said "We are going to light up the whole country on fire", but that's just speech so why are they in prison? In light of Huratee, sounds like the Bundys have a case!!!!!!!

many johnnys posted:

Why did the hammonds go to jail again? Can they prove who exactly was holding matches when starting the arsons? I mean they don't have video footage or anything of the fires.

I mean yeah he instructed his nephew to drop lit matches along the countryside until he ran out, and said "We are going to light up the whole country on fire", but that's just speech so why are they in prison? In light of Huratee, sounds like the Bundys have a case!!!!!!!

Main Paineframe posted:

Yeah, it's a good thing the FBI waited a week or two for them to start openly stealing and breaking poo poo, instead of rolling in guns blazing on the first day to arrest them for misdemeanor trespassing. The longer they're left there, the more crimes they commit and the more things the FBI will be able to charge them with. It's important for them to pile up the little things, since (thanks to Hutaree) the FBI won't be able to hit them with a big-ticket charge anytime soon. Most of the individual things they've done are each only worth a year or two in prison, and only for the specific individuals who have been proven beyond any doubt to have done those specific things; the longer they run rampant doing poo poo like logging into government computers and taking down cameras, the worse it gets for the most prolific offenders as they end up stacking up lots of little crimes into a heavy sentence. For example, "destroying federal property" has a monetary threshold where anyone who does less than that amount of damage can be punished with up to one year of prison, and anyone who does more than that amount can be punished with up to ten years. On top of that, some of them have racked up something like a year for trespassing, six months for intimidating or impeding government officials, something like up to five years for unauthorized access to government computers, whatever the punishment is for stealing government property since some of that's probably happened by now, and probably a few other things too. But those charges can only be levied against the people who actually committed those specific actions, so I'm quite sure there's a few undercover agents keeping a close eye on exactly who takes down each camera and exactly who logs into each computer.

theflyingorc posted:

kartikeya posted:

So it turns out there's a guy who has worked and lived on the refuge for decades.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vb-nxVkxXFM

Discendo Vox posted:

Happier times at the refuge.

As a Millennial I posted:

Here's the "armored personnel carrier"

I'm gettin hype

theflyingorc posted:

where'd you get this from?

Zanzibar Ham posted:

Yeah, and if the FBI waits until they murder some folks, then they'll be able to really throw the book at'em!

Perfectly Safe posted:

Anaesthetists are specialised medical professionals who still very occasionally kill people even though they have pretty perfect real-time control over dosage.

There isn't such thing as knock out gas - you can easily kill people by trying to put them under using a generalised distribution system, kids or not.

benzoapyrene posted:

They could still use BZ. Just lob a shell in, and round them up while they're all having a shared delusion. Aside from the SovCit one, I mean.

LeoMarr posted:

BZ might cure collectively cure their delusions.