DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Why aren’t we calling the Oregon occupiers ‘terrorists?’

I was answering the title of this thread, which you can't seem to grasp.

My best friend has a flag with an AR15 on it with the words
"Come Take It" under the gun. It hangs on his house. He is cool. Not a terrorist either.

What you mean he isnt white

Just kidding man..I think you know that...When I was in Tel-Aviv...I went to where they Jews said was the birth place of Jesus...got a crucifix made out of olive wood..its hanging in the wall next to my front door...but Ive never thought Jesus was white...but have met many who think/thought he was.

Here nor there thanks for the laugh tonight..

No, you was answering directly to my post.

Don't try back tracking now.

Nope, my original response was to Lurker. You attacked me first.

Lol word. That must have been some adventure bro.

Yep, there's many that still do.

Eve hunks public opinion is what define terms.

Which mean you, Eve, probably think all middle eastern countries speak Arabic.

You probably wanna boom the made up city in the Aladdin cartoon, as well.

Don't make up stories just because you lost an argument, dude.

Really? So was I the first one to make the claim of supporting the BLM movement, or was that you?

Spin spin spin.

I didn't lose anything.

You just got caught lying about my support for the BLM movement, and now you're trying to dodge bullets like the matrix.

Not my problem you talking out the side of your neck. Gotta stay on your toes.

And because your definition of terrorism is wrong, you don't know what to do except go back to the standard "swish is black and racist" argument.

Except now that you already admitted that you do it to get on my nerves. It's not effective.

It's 2016. Find a new attack. You're out of date.

I highly recommend the trip regardless of faith or nonbeliever..it was pretty damn interesting.

I wasn't really lying, I was assuming because of the numerous times you play the race card on here. Like all the time, constantly.

I play it when's it's relevant.

Unfortunately on this board, it's constantly relevant.

Also, the definition of a racist is someone who feels their race is superior to another. I mention this because you stated my future racist comments about the BLM movement.

Can you point to a post where I state that I think blacks or Turkish people are better than Americans or white?

No?

You sure, no?

But continue talking out the side of your neck. You and your fanboy 40 are really good at it.

Anyway, now that I'm done addressing children, back to the topic.

One of the biggest problem were having in this country is how much the Feds are taking power, or in this case land.

The other problem are the people who feel they are wronged.

Are they really wrong, or are they just upset that they aren't allowed to do whatever they want, whenever they want?

Those two questions have a bunch of different perspectives attached to it.

jc...I'm glad someone else is the racist this time

I think this will end up like Ruby Ridge because the federal government has a way of forcing their hand.

Man from what Ive read..its definitely both..we are living in strange times...I used to think tin foilers was a joke..now I'm no longer laughing.

One problem is that no matter which party is involved, the Feds keep getting more and more power.

We get screwed over. Major corporation never lose out because they basically own our government. Which is why businesses benefit no matter who's in charge, it just matters which business as far as republican or democrat.

So we have a problem with the Feds gaining land. Is it for tax purposes, wildlife protection, what?

Then we have people who feel they have a right to the land. Ok....how?

And Ben then, I saw a Native American group saying the land belongs to them.

This is one of those things where I hope the supreme courts hears and rules on this case.

I would also like to see something along the lines of nobody being able to lay claim(right phrase?) to land that they don't actively take care of.

I'm not talking about something who bought 100 acres and doesn't use it. I'm talking about wide open land that should belong to the admrican people to use however they please, with limitations of course.

Meh, I'm becoming heavily despondent about the future of mankind within the next 30 years. I think overpopulation is really going to hit us hard. Especially with the problems towards our food production. I honestly think that preserving the land is what's best for us as a species.

Overpopulation is a myth.

ok my answer may be off..I'm sorry man in the morning I'll reread what I wrote and see if 1. I can back up what I'm saying and 2. I said the right thing..I'm in a bad fog in the brain tonight..so cut me just a tiny bit of slack here..



Ok from off the top of my head...it is simply a power grab of land to stop gas and oil companies from tapping into our reserves/resources.

I cant remember what company it was wanted permits to drill and not only did they get declined...the area was designated a habitat of some rare wild life that mysteriously showed up.

There is more Swish but I need to lay down...and will address this better tomorrow with sources and proof of what I'm saying with a more in depth answer for you to dissect...just give me a day man...I'm having a terrible time collecting my thoughts and putting it in writing.

Have a great night man..everyone else also.

Night bro

Not how we want to live. Humans are a massive drain on resources as is. I understand that it's a problem that can be avoided by careful planning, but it is real.

Yeah, I agree. Research what is going on w/the Colorado River.

i don't think it is.

i think the overpopulation rhetoric is nothing more than a way for the wealthy to own more of our resources by scaring people into thinking we have a overpopulation problem.

theres 7 billion people on this planet, yet everybody can fit into the state of texas in a house built for a family of 4.

have you ever taken a marketing class?

besides seeing and understanding marketing strategies and observations, you can see the affect marketing has on people and food resources.

here's a quick stat:

n the USA, 30-40% of the food supply is wasted, equaling more than 20 pounds of food per person per month

http://www.worldfooddayusa.org/food_waste_the_facts

and you see that everyday in the grocery store. want an example?

don't worry, i'mma give it anyway. Lets take peaches. the farmers harvest the peaches, or we import them right?

well, only a certain amount of peaches are actually sold in the stores, and even after that, only a percentage of those peaches in stores are actually sold to consumers.

why? because of of the cosmetic appeal to shoppers. Shoppers only buy the produce that LOOKS good to them. Farmers throw out a bunch of peaches that aren't shaped like the ones you typically see at the stores, because they aren't bought by us. we as shoppers only by the produce that visually appealing to us. so we want the somewhat rounded, butt looking ones, not peaches that look like anything else.

and that's just one example. also, what's SUPPOSE to happen is most of the food that isn't bought in stores or sold by the farmers are suppose to go to food banks. however, because of regulations, most companies only send a small amount of food, because it cost money to treat, pack and transport the food to the banks. it comes out of their pockets, not the governments. in most cases.

another example is how Russia destroyed all food that was imported from western countries. that isn't a resource problem, thats a "making a point" problem.

we have plenty of food to feed entire nations, never mind the homeless people on our street.

we have plenty of vacant homes, apartments, townhouses, or resources that doesn't involve cutting down trees to build new homes.

the problem is, the people and the governments they are represented by aren't willing to give to people who we feel don't deserve the extra that we enjoy everyday.

so we spin it to say we have an over population problem.

it's a joke, basically.

Also, we have this idea that overpopulation is because we are spreading.

instead of spreading out, just build higher.

Overpopulation isn't a myth created by the wealthy lol

Humans weren't meant to live so packed. You can build as high as you want, but have you ever been to Hong Kong? A city that builds so compact that they have to sleep upright? It's horrible. Look, a lot of what you're talking about can be greatly summarized in many of the ideas proposed in Metabolism architecture of the 60's in Japan. Actually, Marina City, in Chicago, is probably the most famous example of this. I dig what you're saying, but it's not just human like to operate in such a manner. Humans weren't meant to be cooped up in sky scrapers, they were meant to be in and around nature.

If you think of us as just animals, the sure.

But we aren't. A lot of European countries have high rises, or mini apartment towers. It might not mean much to you, but take a look at this:

http://www.happyplanetindex.org/data/

Now, there's other factors involved in this, but the index shows a bunch of European nations above us.

They have tons of apartment towers, if you have ever been.

I'm not talking about ridiculousness such as Kong Kong. But normal towers are just fine.

It's my opinion that overpopulation is for people who simply want more recourses to themselves.

We can debate whether that's true or not, but what's not true is that we have a resource problem. Not even remotely.

We are.

Swish, this argument will go no where on this forum. Besides this isn't the proper thread for it. But if you're ever in Columbus and have a few hours we can smoke some and discuss it.

thats cool.

Seeing as most of it reads like history, I thought you just might. The feds diverted water to double the size of a lake to chase out residents, from a wildlife preserve that doesn't have wildlife. That's long before the current residents had a problem. This is a 100+ year land grab.

I don't hold these guys blameless for some of their actions, but the past history makes me question the arson charges. I read the liberal sites too, but they didn't have the level of detail the site I posted had.

I had a friend send me this just a little bit ago...if you have 25min to kill..it shed some light for me on this subject.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx4ocLdWE90

jc

Mission from God: check
Armed to the teeth: Check
Willing to die for this: Check
opposing governments: Checks
been training to fight the government, which is why they are a militia? Check

Can we start calling them terrorist now? Cause that sounds a lot like ISIS.

Man behind armed Oregon band says he's on mission from God


PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — The man behind the armed occupation of a federal wildlife refuge comes from a Mormon family that has been challenging government authority for at least two decades.

Related Stories

The Bundys, the family behind the Oregon militia standoff, explained Vox.com
Wildlife refuge occupation part of long-running lands fight Associated Press
Oregon ranching case sparks anti-government sentiment Associated Press
Patriots or domestic terrorists? Armed protesters seize Oregon wildlife refuge Christian Science Monitor
The Latest: Sheriff says ranchers have turned themselves in Associated Press
Dumped At The Altar Obese Bride Does The Amazing RYOT Sponsored 
Ammon Bundy, like his father in previous confrontations, says he is following directions from God and invokes his family's faith when explaining the anti-government movement he is attempting to lead.

In March 2014, Cliven Bundy was at the center of an armed standoff with federal officials over grazing rights on government land. Federal officials backed away from seizing the Nevada rancher's cattle, but the dispute remains unresolved, and the Bureau of Land Management says the family has not made payments toward a $1.1 million grazing fee and penalty bill.

Now Cliven Bundy's son has put himself in the spotlight, this time in Oregon in a dispute over someone else's ranching operation. His armed group is pressing federal authorities to turn over government land to local control.

Ammon Bundy came to Oregon hoping to rally support behind his cause, but his tactics have been broadly rejected by many locals, by the state's main ranching group and by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, which the Bundy family has belonged to for generations.

In a statement issued Monday, Mormon leaders said the Oregon land dispute "is not a church matter," but they condemned the seizure and said they were "deeply troubled" by reports that suggest the armed group is acting "based on Scriptural principles."

View galleryFILE - This is a combo of file photos showing the Bundy …
FILE - This is a combo of file photos showing the Bundy family from left to right, Ryan Bundy, Clive …
The ranchers that Ammon Bundy came to defend rejected his assistance and on Monday voluntarily surrendered to serve a federal prison term on a 2012 conviction on charges of committing arson on federal land.

A leader of the group Oath Keepers_past and present members of the military, first-responders and police officers who pledge to uphold the Constitution— issued a statement saying Ammon Bundy has gone too far. Many Oath Keepers were at the 2014 Bundy ranch standoff in Nevada.

But in Oregon, Oath Keeper founder Stewart Rhodes said, Ammon Bundy had picked the wrong battle.

"We cannot force ourselves or our protection on people who do not want it," Rhodes said last week on the group's website.

Speaking through their attorney, Dwight Hammond Jr. and son Steven said they preferred to turn themselves in and serve out their sentence.

View galleryAn American flag is shown at the front entrance to …
An American flag is shown at the front entrance to the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge headquarters …
"And that clear statement of their intent should be the end of the discussion on this," Rhodes said.

Ammon Bundy has said he had never heard of the Hammond case until his father mentioned it to him. The Hammonds were convicted three years ago of setting fires on federal land in 2001 and 2006. One of the blazes was set to cover up deer poaching, according to prosecutors.

The men served no more than a year until an appeals court judge ruled that the terms fell short of minimum sentences requiring them to serve about four more years.

Ammon Bundy said he prayed about the matter and "clearly understood that the Lord was not pleased with what was happening to the Hammonds."

The Hammonds said they lit the fires to reduce the growth of invasive plants and protect their property from wildfires.

View galleryAmmon Bundy, one of the sons of Nevada rancher Cliven …
Ammon Bundy, one of the sons of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, speaks during an interview at Malheur N …
"I did exactly what the Lord asked me to do," Bundy said in a YouTube video posted last week in which he appeals to people to join him in Oregon to protest the treatment of the Hammonds.

In the 2014 showdown with federal authorities in Nevada, Cliven Bundy also justified his actions in religious terms, saying that he decided to challenge federal agents after praying for guidance.

Their ideology aligns with a strain of anti-government thinking that was espoused by some church thought leaders during the Cold War. But it is rejected by mainstream Mormons today, according to Matthew Bowman, a professor of American religion at Henderson State University in Arkansas.

Still, whether to submit to church leaders or follow a personal conviction remains "a deep and central tension within Mormon doctrine and culture," Bowman said.

The Bundy family's dispute with federal authorities dates to 1993, when land managers in Nevada cited concern for the federally protected desert tortoise and capped Cliven Bundy's herd at 150 animals on a 250-square-mile allotment of land. Officials later revoked Bundy's grazing rights completely. Federal officials' attempts to round up the cattle from the arid habitat 80 miles northwest of Las Vegas were called off in an effort to avoid bloodshed.

View galleryAmmon Bundy, one of the sons of Nevada rancher Cliven …
Ammon Bundy, one of the sons of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, speaks during an interview at Malheur N …
The 2014 standoff — and the current one in Oregon — are continuations of a decades-long fight over public lands in the West. Many people living in rural areas say their efforts to make a living have been hurt by federal policies regulating the use of government lands.

Conservation groups counter that federal agencies are a better choice than states to manage public lands. That's because the agencies can authorize the land for multiple uses, such as mining, grazing or recreation, while many Western states are constitutionally obligated to use lands they manage for the most lucrative purpose — often mining.

"Certainly the folks that live close to these places have a very legitimate voice in this debate. But what is unique about this national land system is that everyone gets to participate," said Jessica Goad, advocacy director for the Denver-based Center for Western Priorities.

Many locals agree with Ammon Bundy that the second Hammond sentence was too harsh, considering the crime. But they disapprove of Bundy's occupation and fear it could lead to violence.

Those concerns were shared by John O'Keeffe, president of the Oregon Cattleman's Association, who said Monday that his group "does not support illegal activity taken against the government."

Ammon Bundy himself has benefited from federal programs. Records show that in 2010 he borrowed $530,000 through the Small Business Administration for his company, Valet Fleet Service LLC. On Tuesday, he justified the loan by saying he is not anti-government but is opposed to federal policies that go against the people's will.

What laws have the Oath Keepers broken?? I'm not saying they are or arent terrorists..but what laws have they broken?? any?

Honest question Idk.

i'm pretty sure theres a few laws they broke when they stormed a federal building armed.

so you dont know for sure...I'll see if I can find out for myself. Thanks.

come on dude, you know they broke laws.

A federal building
Armed.

come on bro, you KNOW they broke some laws.

I was just asking Swish...I know people in that group "Oath Keepers" on a personal level and they try to follow the law...but who knows they may have went off the reservation so to speak...

I think if they stormed the building with guns a blazing they might have broken a law or two. Don't know if they did that or not.
What I do know is they showed up, assembled as is their constitutional right, then posted a request on Facebook for someone to go to the gas station for chips and drinks.

You've got to be kidding, Ted.

http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/163.190

163.190¹
Menacing
(1) A person commits the crime of menacing if by word or conduct the person intentionally attempts to place another person in fear of imminent serious physical injury.

Would that be Dennis the Menacing? These days just getting out of bed probably breaks some stinking law.
OOOooo, Menacing Terrorists...