150 armed Militia occupy federal property in Oregon.

[Simon_Jester]

One reason these armed loonies get ignored is that their 'protests' are taking place in remote rural areas where they do not pose much of a problem for anyone else.

Unarmed people who happen to be taking up public parks in a city present an entirely different set of issues. On the one hand their actions are inherently less offensive to the majesty of the state. On the other, they're also a lot more of a problem on a day to day basis because they're occupying public spaces that people routinely use for other purposes.

Brutality towards unarmed demonstrators is stupid and wrong and evil. But I'm not sure this is so much a case of "sure, right wing nutjobs get to do as they please," as it is "different strategies for different situations." If the Bundy mob had chosen to occupy real estate inside a major city while brandishing weapons, they might get a very different reception for any number of reasons. Conversely, if a bunch of Occupy protestors decided to hole up on federal land dozens of miles from anywhere, they might well have been almost entirely ignored.

[Broomstick]

Fact is, there are a shit-ton of people who have been living on Federal land/national parks/nature reserves for decades, if not forever. Mostly, they're a bit whacky and inclined to being hermits and it's just not worth the trouble to clear them off provided they're leaving other people alone and not causing too much or overt damage.

[Civil War Man]

Looks like they are passing the time by rifling through personal data.

Militants May Have Accessed Government Computers At Refuge

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is looking into whether militants at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge have accessed government computers during their occupation.

OPB observed militants interacting with computers in the compound that can only be accessed with employee ID badges. The armed men also appear to have gone through materials in an office building used by federal employees.

This comes as militants rejected leaving the facility Friday, which they’ve occupied illegally since Jan. 2.

The computers are in a room of cubicles near the main compound. LaVoy Finicum, a member of the occupying group’s security team, accidentally led OPB into the area.

Finicum says the group plans to turn the office into a media center that would eventually house reporters.

There are four desks in the office, two on each side. Three of the computers were turned on, and in screen saver mode. Papers in the room were strewn about in a disorderly manner.

After Finicum realized he shouldn’t have allowed OPB to access the room, he quickly picked up lists of names and Social Security numbers by the computers, and hid government employee ID cards that were previously in plain sight.

Shortly after, one of the militant leaders, Ryan Bundy, walked into the room.

When asked about the computers, Bundy emphatically denied any of the work spaces had been touched since the occupation.

“No, we haven’t touched a single personal item. We haven’t touched any of the computers, we haven’t tried to log on — we haven’t done anything. We’re not here to hurt people,” Bundy said, “not even the people who work here.”

Along with possibly accessing the computers, militants at the compound are using government vehicles and equipment to operate and fortify defenses.

When reached Friday, FBI spokeswoman Beth Anne Steele declined to officially comment on any activity ongoing at the refuge.

However, law enforcement officials are concerned refuge employees could potentially be harmed by members of the group. Prior to the occupation, federal employees and family members of local law enforcement had received anonymous threats.

Harney County Sheriff David Ward said at a community meeting Wednesday that his deputies and own family members had been followed home, photographed, and had personal property damaged in recent months.

In an interview Friday, Ward said he was concerned about the welfare of the employees who work at the refuge. However, he said he hasn’t confirmed militants have indeed accessed any personnel data.

“With what information we do have, we’re doing everything we can to make sure we keep our citizens and those employees safe,” Ward said.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service spokesman Jason Holm also declined to confirm whether the computers had been used. But he did say the agency has taken a full inventory of what was left inside the refuge before the militants seized it.

“We are cognizant that the individuals in the refuge would have access to files, and things like refuge equipment,” Holm said. “We’re working with the FBI to mitigate any risk (to employees).”

There are 16 full-time and one part-time employee who work at the refuge, according to Holm.

“We are taking all appropriate security precautions,” Holm said when asked about employee safety.

Reporters Ryan Haas and Conrad Wilson contributed to this report.

[Simon_Jester]

And this is one of the strong arguments in favor of armed intervention. The biggest problem, I think, is that federal law enforcement is still shellshocked from Waco- a case where an attempt to enforce the law against a group of armed fanatics in an isolated area went badly, badly wrong.

[Flagg]

I refer you to Napoleon the Clown's post.

This, exactly.

When you can be white and armed to the teeth using women and children as human shields while pointing assault weapons at law enforcement with impunity, but black in a big-box store looking at an air rifle you may want to purchase and be gunned down by the police without repercussion there's a problem. And anyone who thinks differently should be committed.

On the upside, none of the press covering the event have had rubber bullets and tear gas fired at them.

So that's... progress?

Some have, but that's because they're not "real" journalists with laminated badges saying so.

[Flagg]

And this is one of the strong arguments in favor of armed intervention. The biggest problem, I think, is that federal law enforcement is still shellshocked from Waco- a case where an attempt to enforce the law against a group of armed fanatics in an isolated area went badly, badly wrong.

Yeah, I love how rightwing teeny-peeny gun toting shitpiles always fail to mention that the Waco suicide cultists who were led by a pedophile stockpiling massive amounts of outright illegal weapons immediately fired upon the ATF agents there to serve a search warrant who went in the same way the DEA would go into a compound of drug dealers known to be armed to the teeth and killed 4 (IIRC) of said ATF agents within the first seconds of the raid.

Oh, but it was the eeeeevil guvmint who burned all those kids to death even though the suicide cultists led by a pedophile had 57 days to send out the children to keep them out of harms way but like all cowards with micro-wangs wanted them there as human shields so the government wouldn't perform another raid for fear of killing a bunch of child hostages.

[Simon_Jester]

Eh. I'm not saying the ATF was in the wrong, but any situation where that many innocent people die is enough to give law enforcement pause.

Law enforcement that doesn't care about that is how you get things like "baby horribly burned when cop tosses flashbang into their crib."

[Flagg]

Eh. I'm not saying the ATF was in the wrong, but any situation where that many innocent people die is enough to give law enforcement pause.

Law enforcement that doesn't care about that is how you get things like "baby horribly burned when cop tosses flashbang into their crib."

Sorry if you got the impression I was insinuating that you were claiming the ATF was in the wrong as it wasn't my intent, but I can see why you may think so. No, I'm just sick of the 23 years of bullshit I've had to wade through in arguments where people seem to think the entire thing was the governments responsibility.

I actually do think it was handled badly after the initial raid. But lets face it, at that point it was more of a hostage crisis than anything else. It's just that when it comes to situations like Waco, all of the sudden the "Branch Davidians" suicide cults defenders seem to regard the children as the parents property rather than the human shields/hostages that they were.

[Joun_Lord]

It's just that when it comes to situations like Waco, all of the sudden the "Branch Davidians" suicide cults defenders seem to regard the children as the parents property rather than the human shields/hostages that they were.

I've heard it argued that the kids being put in danger was the point, that the Waco Wackos tried to use the kids as human shields because it gets better press if children are hurt and the jackbooted government thugs would be less likely to bum rush the nutters with kids involved. People are irrational when it comes to the death of children. Nobody wants to kill a kid, even if its so damn easy, and nobody really wants to see shocking images or read stories of children being murderified. Because children were killed people tend to ignore everything, practically treating the BDs themselves as innocent victims too.

Sure the Branch Davidans were criminals that makes the Bundy Bunch (so far) look like freaking Carebears but kids be killed man, KIDS!!!! Thus the crimes get ignored, the fact the BDs killed their kids as much as the ATF did if not more nobody cars aboot, and the fact the whole groups was violent and heavily armed is conviently forgotten. People sure remember the kids burned alive by the ATF though.

I remember something similar coming up about the Bundy ranch fiasco, they had women and children near all the armed cowfuckers because it would be more marketable to the media to have unarmed women and children gunned down by evil gubmint agents.

So I can see why the government goons practice restraint. Dead kids are objectively bad anyway you cut it and they are dealing with irrational people who will most certainly use kids as human shields.

[Patroklos]

I remember something similar coming up about the Bundy ranch fiasco, they had women and children near all the armed cowfuckers because it would be more marketable to the media to have unarmed women and children gunned down by evil gubmint agents.

That's not what happened, unless you have proof that the women there were not there of their own accord. Noting that the media unfairly gives increased headlines to the death of women even if they are standing voluntarily in solidarity with men is not using them as human shields (and I don't think they were unarmed), that's just using the realities of bias in your favor and very smart. The same happened at OWS rallies (any event actually) if the media wanted an eye catching visual, show the women bloodied by a baton instead of the guy right next to her just as bloodied. There was no talk of kids in that event, all of which was covered in our own thread on the topic.

You should ask yourself why you assume women at these events are without agency.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Sure the Branch Davidans were criminals that makes the Bundy Bunch (so far) look like freaking Carebears but kids be killed man, KIDS!!!! Thus the crimes get ignored, the fact the BDs killed their kids as much as the ATF did if not more nobody cars aboot, and the fact the whole groups was violent and heavily armed is conviently forgotten. People sure remember the kids burned alive by the ATF though.

Which is funny, given that the Branch Davidians immolated themselves and their children.

So I can see why the government goons practice restraint. Dead kids are objectively bad anyway you cut it and they are dealing with irrational people who will most certainly use kids as human shields.

Which would be fine if the feds went in and arrested everyone after they dispersed. A month after everyone leaves, FBI and ATF agents slip inside their homes in the middle of the night while they sleep, and they wake up with cuffs on. Done.

But they didnt. Cilven Bundy himself is sitting pretty on his ranch and a shitload of federal trust land, including park land, that he has expropriated. The BLM has de facto given up large chunks of Nevada because of that shit and his friends.

So of COURSE they are going to try the same shit in Oregon. And if the feds keep pussyfooting around, they are going to do it in Utah and Arizona as well. Then they are going to try it on reservation land, which will be absolutely hilarious.

[Joun_Lord]

I remember something similar coming up about the Bundy ranch fiasco, they had women and children near all the armed cowfuckers because it would be more marketable to the media to have unarmed women and children gunned down by evil gubmint agents.

That's not what happened, unless you have proof that the women there were not there of their own accord. Noting that the media unfairly gives increased headlines to the death of women even if they are standing voluntarily in solidarity with men is not using them as human shields (and I don't think they were unarmed), that's just using the realities of bias in your favor and very smart. The same happened at OWS rallies (any event actually) if the media wanted an eye catching visual, show the women bloodied by a baton instead of the guy right next to her just as bloodied. There was no talk of kids in that event, all of which was covered in our own thread on the topic.

You should ask yourself why you assume women at these events are without agency.

I never said the women were there not on their own accord. They were lassoed into coming or bullied into standing in the line of fire. They did that on their own but at the behest of the leaders. Thats why I said similar. They were human shields like the kids at Waco but unlike the kids the women at Bundy atleast consented to be used as pin cushions for federal bullets.

Which is funny, given that the Branch Davidians immolated themselves and their children.

Well clearly that can't be true as the internet and the media says the ATF set the fire and the internet or media would never lie!

Seriously though, I'm fairly aware of that but that was part of my point. People seem to only really remember the kids and the ATF and kinda combined the two into a crispy kiddie and incompetent government agency hybrid of misinformation and lies. Nobody seems to blame the Branch Davidans despite the fact they kept the kids there, used them as human shields, and evidence shows they are the ones that committed the fires.

Which would be fine if the feds went in and arrested everyone after they dispersed. A month after everyone leaves, FBI and ATF agents slip inside their homes in the middle of the night while they sleep, and they wake up with cuffs on. Done.

But they didnt. Cilven Bundy himself is sitting pretty on his ranch and a shitload of federal trust land, including park land, that he has expropriated. The BLM has de facto given up large chunks of Nevada because of that shit and his friends.

So of COURSE they are going to try the same shit in Oregon. And if the feds keep pussyfooting around, they are going to do it in Utah and Arizona as well. Then they are going to try it on reservation land, which will be absolutely hilarious.

They never actually dispersed all the way. Even now there are still armed douches camped out on Bundy's land (his actual land, not the shit he stole).

Now that isn't a defense of the governments handling of Bundy. They should have arrested him........20 years ago back in what I still think of as the 80s but was actually the 90s. Back before he had armed idiots, okay more armed idiots protecting his ill gotten gains.

Now trying to move in would most likely only result in bloodshed lovingly recorded for all the world to see.

There honestly isn't a good solution to Bundy or the current shit. Moving in gets people killed, the idiots starting the shit, innocents including possibly children and of course the cops who have to stop the morons, while sitting idly by gives them strength and lets them further dig in. There is little chance of this being solved peacefully save by giving into their insane ass demands. The Bundy bitches are armed (probably with guns bought with money from government checks), itching for a fight, and think they will get massive support when the shit goes down.

[Patroklos]

I never said the women were there not on their own accord.

You say except your next line is...

They were lassoed into coming or bullied into standing in the line of fire.

...which is saying exactly that. Do you have any proof that this was the case?

They did that on their own but at the behest of the leaders.

Who were their leaders? Were none of them women? Did no women present get a word in about what was going on there? This is something you can prove?

Thats why I said similar. They were human shields like the kids at Waco but unlike the kids the women at Bundy atleast consented to be used as pin cushions for federal bullets.

I'd say consent is a pretty damn big difference between the two, enough to make them wildly different and not at all similar. And did it ever occur to you that the reason they consented (or even came up with the damn idea as far as you know) was because they could play that bias to keep EVERYONE from being pin cushions for federal bullets? That seems pretty brave to me.

Human shields generally have the connotation that you are an otherwise uninvolved party being used. Civilians in war. Hostages in a bank robbery. At the Bundy ranch the women present, unless you can prove otherwise, were parties just as at fault from Federal law enforcement eyes as the men, were themselves armed, and until you can present any inkling of proof otherwise were fully involved in everything they were a part of. Its not their fault the mysogony of PR types and the country in general is so ingrained in this regard that they can play it like a fiddle.

The assumptions you are making about these women are very dubious JL.

[Joun_Lord]

You say except your next line is...

I actually meant to say "weren't". My English not so good. Though while that was my fuck-up it should have been obvious what I meant from the context. Why can't you understand what I meant through impersonal words and computer screens? WHY!!??!!!

Seriously though, my bad.

Who were their leaders? Were none of them women? Did no women present get a word in about what was going on there? This is something you can prove?

Cliven Bundy, the militia idiots like Richard Mack, those were those who were in charge. Bundy in particular.

I'd say consent is a pretty damn big difference between the two, enough to make them wildly different and not at all similar. And did it ever occur to you that the reason they consented (or even came up with the damn idea as far as you know) was because they could play that bias to keep EVERYONE from being pin cushions for federal bullets? That seems pretty brave to me.

From what I know from statements made by people who were there it was not their idea. Though to be fair the same asshole later changed his statement to say they were volunteers but that was well after the fact.

I'd say consent is a pretty damn big difference between the two, enough to make them wildly different and not at all similar. And did it ever occur to you that the reason they consented (or even came up with the damn idea as far as you know) was because they could play that bias to keep EVERYONE from being pin cushions for federal bullets? That seems pretty brave to me.

There is no evidence they were doing it either on their own or at the behest of the idiots in charge for noble reasons. Any news story I can find seems to say the women (and children) were either there to help stop the agents from firing or to be essentially martyrs for the cowardly cow cause created by cunts.

Human shields generally have the connotation that you are an otherwise uninvolved party being used. Civilians in war. Hostages in a bank robbery. At the Bundy ranch the women present, unless you can prove otherwise, were parties just as at fault from Federal law enforcement eyes as the men, were themselves armed, and until you can present any inkling of proof otherwise were fully involved in everything they were a part of. Its not their fault the mysogony of PR types and the country in general is so ingrained in this regard that they can play it like a fiddle.

Humans shields are not always uninvolved people or innocent bystanders or whatevs. The definition is "the deliberate placement of non-combatants in or around combat targets to deter the enemy from attacking these combat targets" and I think the wimmenfolk and the chilluns purposely placed in and around a bunch of hostile redneck yokels (those are our words, don't repeat them) armed with evil black extended clip assault weapons to prevent the opposing force from blasting them with the gats fits the defintion of human shield pretty darn well. Nothing I can find shows the women who were there around the big strong armed menly men were armed and the children certainly weren't.

And whether or not the gubmint considered the women "combatants" alongside the dudes matters little considering their roles were different, the women were not there to fight the power but to be shot on camera to get sympathy and rage boners rising.

The assumptions you are making about these women are very dubious JL.

Possibly. I mostly repeating what the asshole who were there said about the situation. Now of course you can very easily make the argument that those statements were dubious considering the sources, the fact the sources are dubious idiots who one might suspect are sticking the feces of the bulls they are protecting in their mouths. However they are some of the only sources from within the Bundy fiasco.

[Alyrium Denryle]

There honestly isn't a good solution to Bundy or the current shit. Moving in gets people killed, the idiots starting the shit, innocents including possibly children and of course the cops who have to stop the morons, while sitting idly by gives them strength and lets them further dig in. There is little chance of this being solved peacefully save by giving into their insane ass demands. The Bundy bitches are armed (probably with guns bought with money from government checks), itching for a fight, and think they will get massive support when the shit goes down.

We have these things called snipers.

But a siege--an actual fucking siege--would work. Cut off water, cut off power, freeze all their assets (dont forget to shoot the cattle), interdict their mail. They get nothing in and if they try to come out, arrest them. They are in Clark County Nevada. In the summer it gets...warm. Warm and unpleasant (100 degrees or more, not uncommon). Play Dominique on loudspeakers all day and all night every day until they go insane.

[Batman]

Does the 'cruel and unusual punishment' thing in US law apply before people are arrested?

Nevermind. If it did half of Pop Music would be illegal because of that.

[Joun_Lord]

We have these things called snipers.

But a siege--an actual fucking siege--would work. Cut off water, cut off power, freeze all their assets (dont forget to shoot the cattle), interdict their mail. They get nothing in and if they try to come out, arrest them. They are in Clark County Nevada. In the summer it gets...warm. Warm and unpleasant (100 degrees or more, not uncommon). Play Dominique on loudspeakers all day and all night every day until they go insane.

Dude, you really want to snipe people who might be armed and definitely are stupid but haven't actually harmed anyone? Is you super cereal about that?

You use snipers against definite threats, against enemy combatants, not a bunch of civilian morons that I wouldn't call harmless but didn't actually hurt anyone yet. Its the same as drone strikes against people. Its something that should only be used for actual factual really bad people, not a bunch of cow fuckers or some propaganda spewing dumbshit.

The goal is to preserve lives, even the worthless lives of total pieces of human excrement who is killed the human race's collective IQ might go up a point or three.

Now doing a siege is different but for whatever reason the powers that be must have not that it was a good idea.

I assuming they thought it would further inflame tensions. The fact they didn't do it, didn't do anything to give cause to the Bundy babies meant not violence took place and currently the Bundy ranch only has a few guys rather then dozens or hundreds.

Its probably the same reason they haven't swept in yet even with the reduced number at El Rancho Bundy, finish waiting the idiots out rather then going in like some cowboy and either making things worse or getting the fucknozzles, innocent bystanders, or the bacon boys deaded. They aren't a threat to anyone except themselves so long as they are contained. Sending in cops or trying to stir up the situation means they stop being generally harmless losers.

[Rogue 9]

I wouldn't say no violence took place.

[Joun_Lord]

To split hairs the violence didn't take place at Bundy ranch and they did kick the people out fairly quickly for being even kookier kooks then the kooks there. Also being felons possessing firearms though the Bundy brats didn't apparently see a need to report that fact to the police which would have been easy considering there was bunch of cops in shouting distance literally.

Much as I hate to admit it, because I hate to admit anything even slightly positive about the fuckstain on the pimple on the ass of Ron Paul that is Cliven Bundy, you cannot really blame that racist piece of thieving shit or his deluded supporters for the actions of the Millers. They were violent retards well before Bundy decided he was going the government from oppressing his right to steal land and not pay taxes with guns and would have more then likely done the exact same thing they did without Bundy.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Dude, you really want to snipe people who might be armed and definitely are stupid but haven't actually harmed anyone? Is you super cereal about that?

You use snipers against definite threats, against enemy combatants, not a bunch of civilian morons that I wouldn't call harmless but didn't actually hurt anyone yet. Its the same as drone strikes against people. Its something that should only be used for actual factual really bad people, not a bunch of cow fuckers or some propaganda spewing dumbshit.

The goal is to preserve lives, even the worthless lives of total pieces of human excrement who is killed the human race's collective IQ might go up a point or three.

I ought to have been more clear.

If for example, the feds were to make an active move on the Bundy Ranch, if when agents approach the idiots drop into prone positions, you dont risk your agents. You dont risk children being caught in a crossfire. You utilize snipers.

They aren't a threat to anyone except themselves so long as they are contained.

Except they are not contained. They have managed to spread the infection to Oregon, and the BLM has largely given up management of a swath of southern Nevada.

[Joun_Lord]

I ought to have been more clear.

If for example, the feds were to make an active move on the Bundy Ranch, if when agents approach the idiots drop into prone positions, you dont risk your agents. You dont risk children being caught in a crossfire. You utilize snipers.

Well yeah, if they have to go and deal with the dickweeds snipers should be employed. I think thats pretty standard police procedure in situations like hostage or siege to have police snipers on station to at the very least spot threats and possibly to take them out.

But by no means should snipers be employed just the end the Bundy bungholes in some sort of assassination type deal especially when so far they aren't really violent....... so far.

Except they are not contained. They have managed to spread the infection to Oregon, and the BLM has largely given up management of a swath of southern Nevada.

I was meaning more contained as in they are contained and unable to continue their goals of government overthrow and violence but even like the military tactic of containment the fact they were denied their glorious revolution means their message itself is heavily curtailed. They are physically contained on two sites with very limited support, the locals practically ready to run them out of town.

A far cry from what might have happened should have Bundy ranch turned violent. Any sort of containment of their toxic ideology would have been nearly unpossible.

Which is fine by me. While I hope the government stormtroopers with the jack boots and fingerless gloves are more proactive should the camouflaged gun toting morons act a fool but for now letting them sit and be the butt of jokes, to not accomplish anything beyond getting people pissed off at them, to let them continue to open their mouths so racist and stupid shit fall out, and all the while nobody dies (from this shit, plenty of people are dying in like Chicago and Iraq and other places but totally unrelated to the Bundy's.....probably).

[Raw Shark]

Considering that they all have guns, apparently lack respect for the idea of a wildlife refuge, and are begging for supplies on Facebook, I'd wager that they've probably at least attempted to bag a deer by now. Whether any of them is competent at actually doing that...

[Broomstick]

Part of me thinks there's a bureaucrat tallying up all violations great and small they are committing to throw at them when they are finally arrested.

[Thanas]

Part of me thinks that nothing will ever happen to them.

[Flagg]

Part of me thinks that nothing will ever happen to them.

Bingo. We have a spineless asshole who refuses to let his DoJ go after cops who outright murder people as POTUS. This is the guy who would rather use billions to fund troops in Afghanistan he repeatedly promised wouldn't be there after 2014 while not giving even one red cent of a raise in cost of living adjustments for people on Social Security, Disability, and Retired Military Disability/ Pensions who desperately need it and has already allowed armed fanatics to use women and children as hostage-human shields once. Why on Earth would anyone expect him to endanger the prospects of the next Democratic Party Presidential Nominee by risking the massacre of dozens of shit-kicking, vacuum-headed, "real Americans" blatantly violating the law now when he wouldn't do it a year or 2 ago?