This is gonna get interesting! Militia takes over Ore. federal building after protest.
- Thread starter Uncle Ben
- Start date
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
how about finally getting back to the topic of the OP?
The occupation at Malheur is over! Let the aftermath begin.
Fry complained about drying out from lack of MJ, poor boy. One of the mistakes that the occupiers made was to occupy in Harney County where they banned the sale of weed. If they had occupied some place near Eugene, Fry could have stocked up his stash and held out longer.
BURNS, Ore. — The armed occupation of a rural Oregon wildlife refuge ended peacefully here Thursday after 41 days as the last four anti-government activists surrendered to FBI agents, following an dramatic and emotional hour-long negotiation with the final holdout broadcast live on YouTube.
After repeatedly threatening to shoot himself, complaining that he couldn’t get marijuana, and ranting about UFOs, drone strikes in Pakistan, leaking nuclear plants and the government “chemically mutating people,” the last occupier, David Fry, 27, lit a cigarette, shouted “Hallelujah” and walked out of his barricaded encampment into FBI custody.
“I don’t want to be put behind bars,” he said at one point. “I don’t want to take that risk….I didn’t kill anybody.”
The FBI said they arrested David Fry at about 11 a.m. without incident. Before he was taken into custody, agents arrested Sandy Anderson, 48, of Idaho; her husband, Sean Anderson, 47; and Jeff Banta, 46, of Elko, Nev. They were taken to Portland to face federal charges.
The occupation at Malheur is over! Let the aftermath begin.
Fry complained about drying out from lack of MJ, poor boy. One of the mistakes that the occupiers made was to occupy in Harney County where they banned the sale of weed. If they had occupied some place near Eugene, Fry could have stocked up his stash and held out longer.
BURNS, Ore. — The armed occupation of a rural Oregon wildlife refuge ended peacefully here Thursday after 41 days as the last four anti-government activists surrendered to FBI agents, following an dramatic and emotional hour-long negotiation with the final holdout broadcast live on YouTube.
After repeatedly threatening to shoot himself, complaining that he couldn’t get marijuana, and ranting about UFOs, drone strikes in Pakistan, leaking nuclear plants and the government “chemically mutating people,” the last occupier, David Fry, 27, lit a cigarette, shouted “Hallelujah” and walked out of his barricaded encampment into FBI custody.
“I don’t want to be put behind bars,” he said at one point. “I don’t want to take that risk….I didn’t kill anybody.”
The FBI said they arrested David Fry at about 11 a.m. without incident. Before he was taken into custody, agents arrested Sandy Anderson, 48, of Idaho; her husband, Sean Anderson, 47; and Jeff Banta, 46, of Elko, Nev. They were taken to Portland to face federal charges.
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
sounded familiar. couldn't place it though.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
From what I can tell, your description is apt. They are losers. As are most members of "freedom" militias. My opinion for what its worth, they are unwilling to look to themselves as the main cause of their being a loser, they blame the gubmint and selectively read the bible, the book of Mormon or constertooshun or whatever to justify their acts.
I mean, Fry was a nobody. Ammon Bundy had a pretty bleak existence and also a nobody except for his fathers strange behavior. I mean, have you ever driven through that shit hole his father is squatting on? His father, also a loser, has squandered any inheritance the Bundy brothers could have received. One or both of them are represented by legal attorneys paid for by the state because they can't afford one.
undercovergrow
Well-Known Member
sorry to OP for straying off thread topic but thanks to @Corso312 for responding and @Fogdog your post regarding consent was excellent. i'm glad you aren't too terribly scarred @Corso312 unless you mean that as you get older your women are getting older too...that might get kinda gross...
it is unfortunate that the ranchers didn't have a more cohesive argument regarding their cause and what they were hoping to accomplish and, obviously, that they took over (with guns) an unimportant and unoccupied government building. while the government is buying up a lot of land and i always question big government motives, the family seems to have been fighting this for a long time and it seems they've completely failed at public relations regarding this subject.
it is unfortunate that the ranchers didn't have a more cohesive argument regarding their cause and what they were hoping to accomplish and, obviously, that they took over (with guns) an unimportant and unoccupied government building. while the government is buying up a lot of land and i always question big government motives, the family seems to have been fighting this for a long time and it seems they've completely failed at public relations regarding this subject.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
How much time do you spend fixated on this stuff?
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
If you are talking about the Bundy family, they failed legally, they failed logically, they failed financially once the gov enforces the debt that Cliven has accrued and they failed just about any other way one can. As far a starting a sagebrush revolt is concerned, look at who came to the occupation. There was one rancher in the whole affair and he didn't even live on his ranch land any more. His family won't own that ranch either once his unpaid grazing fees and penalties are collected.
I'm with you in suspecting the Feds. Its almost a reflex of mine. War on Drugs, don't get me going on that. But I prefer the constitution and laws that we have to ones written by ranchers who don't ranch and other gun toting losers.
Last edited:
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
Think I'm making too big of a deal.
Maybe we all shouldn't be so hard on those who think racism and pedophilia are ok?
OddBall1st
Well-Known Member
You turn that radar on at their birth and don`t turn it off. It`s a parent thing.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
I think bringing it up daily for months on end is making too big a deal of it, yes...
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Thanks for tipping us off regarding Cliven Bundy. Arrested at Portland Airport before he could drive out to the occupation.
The aftermath of all this can still get messy. There are still armed militia in the Burns area. Hope that they feel unwelcome and pack up before they do anything that will cause them to be locked up too.
Oregon's jails are pretty full. Maybe we can look at this as a prisoner exchange. For every so called militia member locked up, one nonviolent drug offender will be released.
londonfog
Well-Known Member
hmmmm. They will fit right in with their sorts. The skin heads and aryan will welcome them
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
A more severe form of slavery than presently exists was once legal too wasn't it, Prohibitionist?
...and you really should do something about that halitosis.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Good one.
Sorry to derail your vivid imagination, but I am in a monogamous relationship with a kind, beautiful and intelligent middle aged woman.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
No. I don't ascribe consent to a given age. Therefore I don't say a person of a given age can or cannot consent. It varies with the individual, so your statement was erroneous. I do believe the younger a person is the less likely that individual has developed the wherewithal to consent.
You don't interact with me now, because you fail miserably to present your arguments in any kind of a consistent way and to engage me is to be reminded of your hypocrisy....plus you're mad that you can't defend Bernie Sanders hypocrisy as well. I believe after I flayed you over Bernie, your crying became louder, until you stomped off sucking your thumb.
Also, you're wrong about which of us is more empathetic. You think controlling others is a standard that is worthy of replicating systemically. I do not. I think people own themselves, but not others. You do not.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Nice misrepresentation Prohibitionist.
I said IF A PERSON IS CAPABLE OF CONSENTING TO SOMETHING, and what they are consenting to doesn't involve the third party, the third party intervening becomes the transgressor.
You never refuted why that premise above in a generic sense is in error. You were too busy foaming at the mouth and interjecting things and dreaming up kiddie diddling scenarios to sate your appetite for that kind of discussion.
I think in addition to potential halitosis, you may have been dropped on your head as a young Prohibitionist.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
It's almost like he has dreams about it. Maybe his handlers should adjust his meds.