Militia takes over Malheur National Wildlife Refuge headquarters in Oregon

Do you have some type of mental handicap?

They where never even charged with poaching......

Which is why I never said they were. In fact I don't think I've ever used the word poaching in the past...well, ever on this board.

Do you have anything to say about the facts on the case?
 
For those of you here who find kindred or brotherly spirit with those brave, dedicated (white male) gun toting thu...errr...patriots who took back their land from the gubbamint with nary a scratch from the po-po, they've realized the limits of their newfound Randian paradise and desperately need your assistance to continue the revolution.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CX04Me6UEAAq0mu.jpg

Whip out your patriotic wallets and send them poor honorable boys a nutritional Care package of all the unused Spaghetti-O's, Twinkies and Cheetos from your pantries before they starve to death. Do it for their children and their freedom. Do it for your children and their freedom. Do it for J.Ritz and B.Coop.

http://media.tumblr.com/7f49af67374e45355d02de2fe0c44bac/tumblr_inline_mus7bztC1J1rpbzy6.gif
 
Then it should be easy to bulldoze and either send these fools scurrying or ...

Are you sure that the Hammonds aren't poachers? Many people think that they were. Your "nobody was hurt" lines fall a little hollow.

There are some things that you bring up that are unrelated, and then some things you wrote that are flat out wrong.

The Hammonds have said they have no connection with the terrorists who have seized the federal building. The Hammonds were convicted by a jury of their peers and have exhausted the legal process which mandates they serve a minimum of five years.

This was not one judge deciding anything. They appealed their case to the Supreme Court who agreed that the lower court was correct in giving them the five year minimum.

I also don't understand your use of a child's logic, the idea that, "yes I've done something wrong, but other people have done worse". That doesn't change what the Hammonds did.

Hopefully, the Feds will seize all that property now for damages.

do you people even have any idea what you are talking about. You obviously don't eeven know what the original charges were, you have no idea when the offenses occurred and you could care less with what they were charged with and when they were charged and by whom. You could not give a damn about what the original judge thought and did. What a pack of fools you are.

prod brings up poaching like a typical smoke in your eyes,

5 inch talks of bulldozing something she has never seen

spider is so full of shit the supreme court. it was an administrative move by the Obama administration to try them as terrorists.

140 acres of public grass land was burned which at the time of the first trial was deemed to have improved the fed. lands. the second fire which burned 1 acre was in response to a large wildfire on fed. lands. The hammonds set a back fire on their own land to stop the wild fire. This is common practice in fighting fires. The original trial found they endangered no one and they were not at fault but beings as they said they set the fires they had to do some time. they agreed and did the time. Obamas justice department decided later to try them as terrorists. 11 years after the fact.

I will guarantee tat not a one of you even care about the truth
 
do you people even have any idea what you are talking about. You obviously don't eeven know what the original charges were, you have no idea when the offenses occurred and you could care less with what they were charged with and when they were charged and by whom. You could not give a damn about what the original judge thought and did. What a pack of fools you are.

prod brings up poaching like a typical smoke in your eyes,

5 inch talks of bulldozing something she has never seen

spider is so full of shit the supreme court. it was an administrative move by the Obama administration to try them as terrorists.

140 acres of public grass land was burned which at the time of the first trial was deemed to have improved the fed. lands. the second fire which burned 1 acre was in response to a large wildfire on fed. lands. The hammonds set a back fire on their own land to stop the wild fire. This is common practice in fighting fires. The original trial found they endangered no one and they were not at fault but beings as they said they set the fires they had to do some time. they agreed and did the time. Obamas justice department decided later to try them as terrorists. 11 years after the fact.

I will guarantee tat not a one of you even care about the truth

I'll call, please cite where Obama had them tried as terrorists.
 
24 more people were shot by

KNEE GRRRRZ in Chicago this weekend then by the Oregon terrorists
 
yes we get that you love being a racist.


carry on slave


For those of you here who find kindred or brotherly spirit with those brave, dedicated (white male) gun toting thu...errr...patriots who took back their land from the gubbamint with nary a scratch from the po-po, they've realized the limits of their newfound Randian paradise and desperately need your assistance to continue the revolution.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CX04Me6UEAAq0mu.jpg

Whip out your patriotic wallets and send them poor honorable boys a nutritional Care package of all the unused Spaghetti-O's, Twinkies and Cheetos from your pantries before they starve to death. Do it for their children and their freedom. Do it for your children and their freedom. Do it for J.Ritz and B.Coop.

http://media.tumblr.com/7f49af67374e45355d02de2fe0c44bac/tumblr_inline_mus7bztC1J1rpbzy6.gif
 
Shoulda shot him

FLASHBACK: As college student, Eric Holder participated in ‘armed’ takeover of former Columbia University ROTC office. “As a freshman at Columbia University in 1970, future Attorney General Eric Holder participated in a five-day occupation of an abandoned Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) headquarters with a group of black students later described by the university’s Black Students’ Organization as “armed,” The Daily Caller has learned. Department of Justice spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler has not responded to questions from The Daily Caller about whether Holder himself was armed — and if so, with what sort of weapon.”
 
do you people even have any idea what you are talking about. You obviously don't eeven know what the original charges were, you have no idea when the offenses occurred and you could care less with what they were charged with and when they were charged and by whom. You could not give a damn about what the original judge thought and did. What a pack of fools you are.

prod brings up poaching like a typical smoke in your eyes,

5 inch talks of bulldozing something she has never seen

spider is so full of shit the supreme court. it was an administrative move by the Obama administration to try them as terrorists.

140 acres of public grass land was burned which at the time of the first trial was deemed to have improved the fed. lands. the second fire which burned 1 acre was in response to a large wildfire on fed. lands. The hammonds set a back fire on their own land to stop the wild fire. This is common practice in fighting fires. The original trial found they endangered no one and they were not at fault but beings as they said they set the fires they had to do some time. they agreed and did the time. Obamas justice department decided later to try them as terrorists. 11 years after the fact.

I will guarantee tat not a one of you even care about the truth

I care about the rule of law.

Just because any group doesn't like a verdict doesn't give them the right to take over a government building.
 
I care about the rule of law.

Just because any group doesn't like a verdict doesn't give them the right to take over a government building.

says the degenerate that said NOTHING about the RIOTS and LOOTING from BLM and the Gov building takeover in Wisconsin
 
Fucksakes. Look:

1. The Hammonds were sentenced for arson, not poaching, but it's made very obvious from the witness statements related to the trial that the arson was meant to destroy evidence of poaching. The sentences reflect this, and trying to split hairs about it is idiotic.

At any rate...

2. The Bundy militia circus is clearly imposing itself on the Hammonds and the local community. The Hammonds have clearly distanced themselves from it. More than a few locals put up signs protesting the "protesters" when they arrived. The Bundys' behaviour is ultimately about their self-aggrandizement, not about anything the local community wants.

As for the Bundys' so-called cause...

3. The Bundys' ongoing fight with the BLM has nothing to do with the BLM have "stolen" land from them. The BLM designated land around the Bundy ranch as protected in the late Eighties to help save a species of endangered tortoise. That sort of thing is the BLM's function. The Bundys' entire position boils down to "screw the tortoises, this is our land;" they're a Sovereign Citizen adjunct to the wingnut Republican battle against the EPA and the Endangered Species Act, not a bunch of plucky "patriots" defending themselves from rapacious mining concerns.

I suspect some of the locals in Oregon may know some of that, and have some idea how fake the Bundys' "fighting for the people" posturing really is. Others' opinions of the Bundys may be coloured, so to speak, by that fact that...

4. While savouring his stand against the BLM in 2014, Cilven Bundy opened his mouth and proved -- in a development not entirely shocking to observers of the far right of the American political spectrum -- to be a huge fucking racist. Which contributed heavily to the impression of their being generally-speaking such a bunch of ignorant, lying hypocritical assholes that even the likes of Glenn Beck want nothing to do with them.

Made-up grievances, greedy assholes, contempt for genuine law and order masquerading as brave defense of the Constitution... yep, that a "Patriot"-movement circus for you. #YallQaeda's only real "cause" is the million and change in grazing fees that Cliven Bundy very much would like to not pay and wants to make into everyone else's problem. Defending people like this is a low moment even for the GB's population of dim-bulb wingnuts.
 
Last edited:
The nearby Bundy land is coveted by the Chinese for a wind farm

The consultant working for the Chinese on this is

Harry Reids son

Now you know
 
Fucksakes. Look:

1. The Hammonds were sentenced for arson, not poaching, but it's made very obvious from the witness statements related to the trial that the arson was meant to destroy evidence of poaching. The sentences reflect this, and trying to split hairs about it is idiotic.

At any rate...

2. The Bundy militia circus is clearly imposing itself on the Hammonds and the local community. The Hammonds have clearly distanced themselves from it. More than a few locals put up signs protesting the "protesters" when they arrived. The Bundys' behaviour is ultimately about their self-aggrandizement, not about anything the local community wants.

As for the Bundys' so-called cause...

3. The Bundys' ongoing fight with the BLM has nothing to do with the BLM have "stolen" land from them. The BLM designated land around the Bundy ranch as protected in the late Eighties to help save a species of endangered tortoise. That sort of thing is the BLM's function. The Bundys' entire position boils down to "screw the tortoises, this is our land;" they're a Sovereign Citizen adjunct to the wingnut Republican battle against the EPA and the Endangered Species Act, not a bunch of plucky "patriots" defending themselves from rapacious mining concerns.

I suspect some of the locals in Oregon may know some of that, and have some idea how fake the Bundys' "fighting for the people" posturing really is. Others' opinions of the Bundys may be coloured, so to speak, by that fact that...

4. While savouring his stand against the BLM in 2014, Cilven Bundy opened his mouth and proved -- in a development not entirely shocking to observers of the far right of the American political spectrum -- to be a huge fucking racist. Which contributed heavily to the impression of their being generally-speaking such a bunch of ignorant, lying hypocritical assholes that even the likes of Glenn Beck want nothing to do with them.

Made-up grievances, greedy assholes, contempt for genuine law and order masquerading as brave defense of the Constitution... yep, that a "Patriot"-movement circus for you. #YallQaeda's only real "cause" is the million and change in grazing fees that Cliven Bundy very much would like to not pay and wants to make into everyone else's problem. Defending people like this is a low moment even for the GB's population of dim-bulb wingnuts.

Damn, the Shogun of Harlem just laid it down.
 
This is the deal, wannabes:

There is no such thing as "reason" left now - that horse left the barn when human life is not regarded as human life anymore, just as a man can be a woman if he only wants to. Without reason, "right" or "wrong" truly enter the realm of unicornland; ie, neither no longer exist in reality.

So, without reverence of reason for prevailing in disputes of any degree, there's only power and, more importantly, will.

Wannabes will yap endlessly, but that's really all this - and so much more to come - is about.

Poor progressives don't understand that if they don't even possess the will to overcome third world challenges, all their usual irrelevant yapping is the only ammo they have to addresses real world challenges that end'll up rocking their unicorn boat big-time.

I cannot wait til the offensive progressive wannabe crackdown begins...
 
I don't think this is turning out the way those rednecks thought it would. You take a building by force, chances are you're gonna leave by force and not like it.
I bet they wuss out before it turns into Waco though. Nobody really wants to die over some land. They say they do but comes down to it they'll cave.
 
sure you do :) and yet you can offer no proof. hum.

how many family members do you have sucking down on that welfare?

I'll make you the same deal I offered that coward veteman...

We can both put $1000 in escrow with a neutral 3rd party on here, and then show them proof of ownership of all of my properties, and show them current bank account statements, and proof of other assets.

You do the same, and if you have more than me, the money is yours... if not, the money is mine.

I already know how you'll handle this, but I'm calling you out anyways.
 
Back
Top