So it's a developing story, but word is coming through that Bundys sons as well as over 100 others have occupied a federal building in Oregon, saying they won't hesitate to fire on federal agents, urging others to join them and to bring weapons. Literal terrorists are invading right at this moment.
Occupation of property is not terrorism
I find their politics abhorrent, but the taking of property is not inherently terrorism. If they fire upon people first, yes. If forces fire upon them and they return fire, it's murkier.
Again: I loathe these people and their politics. But they haven't (from what I've read) taken hostages or hurt anybody. They're assholes, but not (yet) terrorists.
Yeah, but how damn quickly would they be called terrorists if they were doing the exact same thing but not white?
It would also be an incorrect classification in that case
What would you classify occupying a federal government building, while armed and threatening to shoot at lawful federal agents?
Genuinely asking, not meaning it as a rhetorical question. Especially since I know nothing at all about this so far beyond these few posts, like who these people even are.
I file it into the same category as rioting, or destruction of property.
Illegal, yes. But a means to try and overcome a perceived lack of communication with/trust in the powers that be.
Whether I think their views are JUSTIFIED is another matter. But it is not terrorism. It's an attempt to be heard in a system that you view as unwilling to hear you. Terrorism seeks to hurt - stuff like like this serves to make one's self heard.
Once again: I think these guys are over-entitled douches. But the mentality is wildly different from terrorists.
To state it plainly, armed occupation of land is a legitimate protesttactic that's been used by native communities against actual injustice.
In this case its mainly right wing assholes protesting other right wing assholes being charged with arson they committed to cover up an illegal deer hunt.
I'm just kind of baffled they decided to occupy a vacant building in the middle of absolute nowhere
it's one step above storming into an empty ranger station
I wonder if it is a cheap attempt at a militia hand out. When they say they'll be there indefinitely they mean that they'll be there as long as people are funding them.
I'm just kind of baffled they decided to occupy a vacant building in the middle of absolute nowhere
it's one step above storming into an empty ranger station
It was likely chosen specifically because it was unoccupied. If you want Federal attention without placing anybody in any danger, it's the best way to do it. One of the ways in which it differs greatly from terrorism.
So it's a developing story, but word is coming through that Bundys sons as well as over 100 others have occupied a federal building in Oregon, saying they won't hesitate to fire on federal agents, urging others to join them and to bring weapons. Literal terrorists are invading right at this moment.
Occupation of property is not terrorism
I find their politics abhorrent, but the taking of property is not inherently terrorism. If they fire upon people first, yes. If forces fire upon them and they return fire, it's murkier.
Again: I loathe these people and their politics. But they haven't (from what I've read) taken hostages or hurt anybody. They're assholes, but not (yet) terrorists.
Yeah, but how damn quickly would they be called terrorists if they were doing the exact same thing but not white?
It would also be an incorrect classification in that case
What would you classify occupying a federal government building, while armed and threatening to shoot at lawful federal agents?
Genuinely asking, not meaning it as a rhetorical question. Especially since I know nothing at all about this so far beyond these few posts, like who these people even are.
I file it into the same category as rioting, or destruction of property.
Illegal, yes. But a means to try and overcome a perceived lack of communication with/trust in the powers that be.
Whether I think their views are JUSTIFIED is another matter. But it is not terrorism. It's an attempt to be heard in a system that you view as unwilling to hear you. Terrorism seeks to hurt - stuff like like this serves to make one's self heard.
Once again: I think these guys are over-entitled douches. But the mentality is wildly different from terrorists.
To state it plainly, armed occupation of land is a legitimate protesttactic that's been used by native communities against actual injustice.
I'm just kind of baffled they decided to occupy a vacant building in the middle of absolute nowhere
it's one step above storming into an empty ranger station
It was likely chosen specifically because it was unoccupied. If you want Federal attention without placing anybody in any danger, it's the best way to do it. One of the ways in which it differs greatly from terrorism.
See that makes a huge difference in understanding peoples' views about this. I absolutely assumed it was some building that was currently/would be occupied the next morning.
Bring it down around them. They can rebuild the building.
Just pointing out here, I know how this thread usually leans. And if someone had said this about a building full of Muslim Americans, they'd be jumped on by about fifty yelling voices screaming, "that's not how we do things."
Let's just keep the standards the same when we're talking about sending in SWAT to wipe out a building of its population shall we? That's always an extreme measure of last resort.
I'm the outlier here.
Maybe some groups have legitimate complaints and reason to occupy an empty forest shithouse, but these militia dudes are just fucking barely one step above a neo-nazi camp out and I'm pretty sure in some circles would probably qualify.
Dead Legend on
diablo III - beardsnbeer#1508 Mechwarrior Online - Rusty Bock
Posts
it's one step above storming into an empty ranger station
To state it plainly, armed occupation of land is a legitimate protest tactic that's been used by native communities against actual injustice.
In this case its mainly right wing assholes protesting other right wing assholes being charged with arson they committed to cover up an illegal deer hunt.
It was likely chosen specifically because it was unoccupied. If you want Federal attention without placing anybody in any danger, it's the best way to do it. One of the ways in which it differs greatly from terrorism.
Can't forget the Alcatraz occupation.
I'm the outlier here.
Maybe some groups have legitimate complaints and reason to occupy an empty forest shithouse, but these militia dudes are just fucking barely one step above a neo-nazi camp out and I'm pretty sure in some circles would probably qualify.
Geth, close the thread