|
blowfish posted:And thus, the proportionate response would be to have a squadron of B52s level the area. Maybe they could send The B-52s. 
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 09:16 |
|
|
Lars Blitzer posted:I think it's because if they acknowledge it, then it gives them some sort of validation. You can be sure the SovCit shitheels are researching the poo poo out of what it is they're about, really, if only to get a handle on "That one weird trick that shuts the police down!" Year before last we here in Canada had some of the crazy trickle northward (along with ammosexuals/2nd Amendment assholes, so thanks for that) and the CBC had a couple segments aired talking about it, since not too many people knew about them. If you (general you, and not just Lars Blitzer) have the time, an Alberta judge published a lengthy decision on the case I think Lars is referencing that outlines a lot of what the legal system deals with with these SovCit types. quote:February 15, 2011: Mr. Meads filed a one page notarized document, printed in black and red ink, and marked with what may be a red thumb print. It also bears postage stamps in three corners on front and back, and includes various declarations including that “::dennis-larry:meads::” is a “living flesh and blood sentient-man”, a postmaster general, and that Barb Petryk, a clerk of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, is appointed his fiduciary and is liable for “all financial damages and bodily harm against myself ::dennis-larry:: of the meads-family::”. I liked how by the second filing he added more colons to his name. The first spelling with two sets of colons on either side didn't work? BETTER ADD ANOTHER SET!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2016 14:39
|
|
|
Aesop Poprock posted:I know I'm pages behind but since when does the mainstream or fringe right flock behind calm, rational sounding talkers. If the Bundys talked like Donald Trump they'd probably have his amount of supporters behind them A person who can argue their insane position in a calm and rational manner, as the sane person grows more and more frustrated and exhausted, is also considered to be a "smarter" and therefore "more correct" person. It's a tone argument, rather than a content argument. As much as the fringe-right loves fiery demagogues, they also recognize the value of winning debates. It's the reason certain media types always challenge dissidents to live debates, because they know they'll have a chance of discredit their opponents on a more formal stage. Basically this.  Generally, one does not debate an idea that has no merit, because it automatically elevates that idea to the same level as the idea that does have merit. It's like two people debating weight loss techniques: one says proper diet and exercise is the best way to lose weight, the other says cutting off your right leg is the best way, because you'll shed a bunch of weight in whole numbers really quickly. The second position is insane, but putting it up against the first position in a formal debate elevates it to the same level as the sane position.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
I don't know if I would go so far as to say most of these people are mentally ill in a medication-needing way. I think many of them are just desperate for some level of control in their lives, and were duped by hucksters selling them the illusion of the control they crave. People who are otherwise mentally healthy fall for scams all the time. It happens. I think a bit of Sunk Costs comes into play, too, where they've spent so much time filing these documents, and so much money on courses and seminars from the aforementioned hucksters that they just have to believe it'll work soon. It's like MLM, only they're bothering the court system instead of their friends and family. MLM schemes promise wealth and the comforts it creates, if they only believe in the product. The people who get rich off of MLM schemes are the ones selling the motivational books and DVDs and who hold the $500 a ticket seminars in stadiums on how to be successful by selling magic soap or some bullshit. The people selling the soap rarely break even.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
Your Gay Uncle posted:Ammon: Ok, we've had a lot of trouble with this occupation before, but I think we can do it this time . Pete, what are our odds? That's a loving 50 DKP minus! WHAT THE gently caress WAS THAT poo poo?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:That, or negoiate the surrender of the Feds/gov, and the Feds/gov will recieve a fair trial and execution for being traitors. "If we stay out here long enough, they're bound to see our determination and devotion to The Constitution and they'll learn the error of their ways and hand the entire government back to The People... Just a few more hours and it'll happen."
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2016 18:13
|
|
|
Armani posted:RIGHT SIDE MANY FEDS HANDLE IT You are going to protest very, very slowly. And by slowly, I mean loving slow. If you get arrested, it means you're going to lose 50 Patriot Points, 'cause you didn't know what the gently caress to do. When it gets into Phase 2 you want to take the government down as fast as poss-i-ble. Nuke it as hard as poss-i-ble. You'll have plenty of time to rest in Phase 3 while I'm becoming the President.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
Internet Webguy posted:You realize who we are talking about, right? Stupid farm people. The conversation that's being had over Finicum's death is the correct conversation to have about police use of deadly force. The fact that people want to know exactly what happened, what was said, who shot when, etc., that they want sound on the aerial video, and bodycam video as well, is all a necessary part of ensuring transparency among law enforcement agents who have used their guns to kill a suspect. It's what Black Lives Matter has been asking for since the movement started. It's a conversation they want the nation to have. That it took the killing of an openly hostile white guy to prompt that conversation among certain conservative elements is pretty much white privilege.txt I'm sure there are reasons why this particular use of deadly force against an armed white man was totally unjustified, while all the rest used against unarmed black men/boys are 100% justifiable, but ensuring honesty and transparency in law enforcement can at least be a noble end goal.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:Wait, what? "This guy died being arrested so Obama should carpet bomb civilians in Iraq and Syria." Did I interpret that right? No, you've got it backwards. She's implying Obama cares more about the lives of foreign Muslims than the lives of REAL AMERICAN PATRIOTS because Lavoy went and got himself shot, and the policy on dealing with daesh has been primarily to target infrastructure and known militant positions while limiting civilian casualties, because civilian casualties are what daesh wants. It's just a continuation of the secret Muslim thing. Electing a black guy really broke a lot of brains, didn't it?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:They really, really need to turn Finicum into a martyr so they can find some way to salvage this month-long stupidity into a "victory". Also, racism. It's been really interesting to watch the narrative around him constantly shift to fit the immediate need. At first, he was shot while on his knees, with his hands in the air - that was based on "eyewitness accounts" as told through Cliven Bundy, right? Then, details emerge that he had run the roadblock and almost hit an officer (this was still before the video), so then it was that the feds shot first and it spooked him and he tried to escape. Then the video comes out, and now we've got the "he was reaching for a wound" and "his gun was at the refuge". If we ever get bodycam and/or sound of the encounter, and it turns out that the wounding theory is a lie, I'm interested to know how their interpretation of events will immediately change and be broadcast to all like-minded patriots to parrot on social media comments. By the way, on the wounding thing - I've read enough news articles about deadly force to know that one of the first things many people ask is "why didn't they just shoot him in the leg?" to which the reply is usually along the lines of "in a tense situation, you can't guarantee that kind of accuracy" or "police are trained to shoot to kill once a situation escalates to the point where a discharge is considered justified." In other words, the entire idea that they had this plan to expertly hit Finicum in the side, in order to make him reflexively reach toward his side, which could then be interpreted as "he's got a gun", justifying the use of deadly force, is all just more imaginary movie gun bullshit - at least in my opinion. Like, what a ridiculous plan! What if he didn't exit the vehicle, or the shot intending to wound missed its mark and hit him in the arm or foot, or even killed him? What if it missed entirely? Why would they need to invent some kind of bizarre plot that required precise, expert aim and timing?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
ChlamydiaJones posted:Jesus loving christ this stuff is painful to read; Maybe the FBI also figures that the militia types will never believe anything they say anyway, so why even bother trying to refute their invented conspiracies when they'll just turn on a dime to invent a new one in the face of new evidence? Like, let's say they show pictures of the vehicle and it isn't riddled with bullet holes? Someone will just point out some minor, almost imperceptible detail that "proves" it's not the real car.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:The video isn't to convince the true believers, it's to stop anyone else from buying their story. Yes, I gathered as much, but when the story changes, at what point do the police stop trying to outdo the true believers? Like I said, if they had bodycam footage with sound, and it turns out Finicum was only shot the once, then the story about the wound is no longer valid, so they'd have to change that and come up with something else. Or do the police figure the wounding theory is unbelievable enough that it'll never stand up to any real scrutiny, so at this point why bother? I get that the aerial footage was important to outdo the "hands in the air, on his knees" story that first started bleeding through, but as soon as this was out, it was almost an instantaneous turn to invent a new reason why this happened. Hasn't this guy been doing whatever the gently caress he wants on the land with zero effective consequences whatsoever? Wasn't that what the whole thing a couple of years ago was all about?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:If only Hitler said that, that he was just camping OUTSIDE of France and not actually occupying it. Hilter was not occupying France anymore than it should be. Like, what does that last line mean? We aren't occupying it anymore than it should be. It should be occupied, but they aren't occupying it more than necessary?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
There's gotta be someone there on Periscope right now.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
I really hope the people who actually live in Burns and want these nuts to go away get some kind of recourse soon, because this looks scary as all hell. It's really unfair that a lot of perfectly innocent people have to be poo poo on by these nutters simply because their town happens to be the place they've decided to turn into their hill to quite possibly literally die on. That having been said, quote:
 I kind of like that only 3% of the III% actually wants to get off their Rascals and make the trip.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Cliven did actually lead a charge of the occupiers during the standoff at his ranch. He's been willing to risk that sort of thing in the past. Was he actually calling the shots there, in the sens of actually organizing militias and such? I thought a bunch of different groups just showed up and started acting like they were his bodyguards or something.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
Have they actually thought out an end goal in all of this? What happens if they get what they want? I mean, I know they won't, but for argument's sake, let's say the federal government throws its hands up, downloads all federal land to the State, or even to the County, and all the public servants they want gone up and leave. Then what? Does Cliven Bundy move there and become Rancher and Cowboy (capitalized proper nouns, apparently) Supreme? Do they say, "you're welcome" all sarcastically to the people who never asked for this and move on to the next county or state and do this again? Are they going to "liberate" every national park and wildlife reserve in the country?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2016 05:05
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:
There is not an ironicat big enough for these out-of-Staters thinking that the counter protests are filled up with peopled who were "bused in" to make the opposition look bigger. The citizens of Burns have been telling the militias to go home back when this was about a couple of guys peacefully agreeing to serve the rest of a jail sentence that a judge had previously, illegally, not given them. The dudes who prompted this entire loving debacle wanted nothing to do with these fucks, and no one else in the town does either, but they're so convinced that what they're doing is what The People want. Are the residents of Burns not The People? Are they They The People and not We The People? Didn't Harney County elect its leaders lawfully before this happened? Wouldn't that mean this is who The People want? 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2016 15:45
|
|
|
Kro-Bar posted:Being a veteran is like being a real-life superhero to many Americans. And just like superheroes, when it comes to homelessness they don't need any of our drat help to get off the streets. Get a job, Superman! Hey Bob, Supe had a straight job.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
Pixelboy posted:I may have been the only person to catch this. Boy, he had the strength, but he would not.  "I Tarpman, you Jane."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
Two shares, both of which are making fun of the post. "Fuckers need more gummy dicks."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
Knight posted:That's why the post was "varified"  Ammosexuality is a perfectly legitimate orientation and The Constitution doesn't expressly forbid a man from marrying his guns.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2016 23:04
|
|
|
Ratoslov posted:Making it completely impossible to do literally anything in Burns and securing the undying hatred of the entire community? No, you see, they will be greeted as liberators!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2016 00:24
|
|
|
The cardboard RIP sign really did it for me. You couldn't get some paint to write RIP LaVoy on the cross you built? Hell, even one of those big Sharpies would probably suffice. I wonder how many of the people involved in this actually care beyond the mild showing of effort here to put up this memorial. This looks more like bandwagon jumping than any real dedication.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2016 15:14
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Spoony bards FTFY
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 04:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 09:16 |
|
|
OB_Juan posted:Out of the way, Pecks! "Get outta here, or we'll cook ya!"
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 02:33
|
|