Private Militia Takes Over Federal Wildlife Sanctuary in Oregon

[Rolyo85]

They staged an armed occupation of a government building. It was an attack on the government. How exactly is that not terrorism? And is THIS really where you're going to take your stand, since you can't outright support them?

 

[T-Rexx]

Now the terrorists claim to have rigged the wildlife refuge with booby traps.

It's not known whether this is a hoax, these are explosive devices, or simply designed to hurt people.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-oregon-militia-traps-idUSKCN0VL057

 

[T-Rexx]

Only the utterly irrational would call them terrorists. They fail that status by the definition given here by someone who called them terrorists -- which demonstrates the irrationality of calling them that.

I said:

He means those religious crazy people who talk to God and get rewarded in the afterlife for killing people. The ones who like to attract attention to themselves by destroying property. The ones who nobly sacrifice themselves in a blaze of violence (while yet taking out enough surrounding innocent victims) in the misguided belief that that will force you to adopt their ideas. The ones who post videos to the internet to attract believers to their cause.

Those terrorists.

To date, these terrorists:

1) Claim to be carrying out the will of God.

2) Have destroyed property.

3) Have sacrificed themselves in a blaze of violence while attempting to take out those around them.

4) Have posted videos to the internet to attract followers to their cause.

The terrorists have, in short, met every one of my bullet points. You seem to think that because they have failed (so far) in their attempts to kill someone (other than themselveselves), that this absolves them of the definition of terrorism.

I suppose you regard the London bombings of 21 July 2005 as patriotic attacks on a tyrannical government, since nobody died (despite the best efforts of the terrorists).

 

[Rolyo85]

But but but they're white and Christian!

 

[Kulindahr]

Now the terrorists claim to have rigged the wildlife refuge with booby traps.

It's not known whether this is a hoax, these are explosive devices, or simply designed to hurt people.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-oregon-militia-traps-idUSKCN0VL057

That would be the first terrorist action in this affair. So we have four terrorists, total.

 

[Kulindahr]

I said:



To date, these terrorists:

1) Claim to be carrying out the will of God.

2) Have destroyed property.

3) Have sacrificed themselves in a blaze of violence while attempting to take out those around them.

4) Have posted videos to the internet to attract followers to their cause.

The terrorists have, in short, met every one of my bullet points. You seem to think that because they have failed (so far) in their attempts to kill someone (other than themselveselves), that this absolves them of the definition of terrorism.

I suppose you regard the London bombings of 21 July 2005 as patriotic attacks on a tyrannical government, since nobody died (despite the best efforts of the terrorists).

No, they haven't. They claimed to be carrying out support for the Constitution. They used property that wasn't theirs; they didn't destroy any. None of them sacrificed themselves in "a blaze of violence".

In other words, you're making shit up to force this to fit your definition.

 

[T-Rexx]

No, they haven't. They claimed to be carrying out support for the Constitution.

They also claim to be carrying out the will of God.

Ammon Bundy Says He's Following Directions from God.

They used property that wasn't theirs; they didn't destroy any.

They ripped out fences on the property with backhoes. They tore out the security cameras and created new roads through the wildlife area. They vandalized property in Burns.

Armed Oregon Occupiers Unashamedly Steal, Destroy Federal Property.

None of them sacrificed themselves in "a blaze of violence".

Perhaps you didn't hear. LaVoy Finicum tried to run from a traffic stop, tried unsucessfully to get around a police roadblock, and then ran from his truck. He was shot as he tried to draw his gun on police.

Why Police Shot the Oregon Occupier LaVoy Finicum.

In other words, you're making shit up to force this to fit your definition.

What, exactly, did I "make up?"

 

[TX-Beau]

Yeah, gonna go with "terrorist."

 

[Rolyo85]

Have some sympathy. Kuli really wants to support them because GUNS!!!!!, but they are just too awful, so he can't do it openly. All he has is their label to fight for...

Kulindahr, what term do you use for them if not terrorist? I am genuinely curious.

 

[Kulindahr]

They also claim to be carrying out the will of God.

Ammon Bundy Says He's Following Directions from God.


They ripped out fences on the property with backhoes. They tore out the security cameras and created new roads through the wildlife area. They vandalized property in Burns.

Armed Oregon Occupiers Unashamedly Steal, Destroy Federal Property.




Perhaps you didn't hear. LaVoy Finicum tried to run from a traffic stop, tried unsucessfully to get around a police roadblock, and then ran from his truck. He was shot as he tried to draw his gun on police.

Why Police Shot the Oregon Occupier LaVoy Finicum.


What, exactly, did I "make up?"

You're grabbing at a few details that justify your label. One guy talking about God when the rest are talking about the Constitution is a useless statistical sample. Tearing things up with a backhoe is vandalism, not terrorism. And there was no "blaze of violence", just a suicide by cop.

If they were terrorists, so are many sports fans at big events -- they think God favors their team, they destroy property in stadiums, and they get violent against security.

Terrorists would all have been on the same page, and would have used violence. The only evidence in favor of calling them terrorists is the booby traps -- other than that, they were a poorly organized, unfocused and unimaginative bunch of activists not unlike the Occupy movement. They just happened to be armed, and occupied federal property rather than city property.

 

[Kulindahr]

Have some sympathy. Kuli really wants to support them because GUNS!!!!!, but they are just too awful, so he can't do it openly. All he has is their label to fight for...

Kulindahr, what term do you use for them if not terrorist? I am genuinely curious.

Typical irrationality -- all you can see is guns and that immediately makes everything evil in your eyes. Since only one of them ever made any effort to actually do anything with those guns, they're irrelevant.

What do I call them? Inept and ignorant interlopers. That was evident from the moment they didn't disagree when called a "militia", which they weren't by any proper definition. And my support for them is only in your imagination; they should have been isolated and ridiculed, the way the actual natives of the area tried to do. If they'd been natives trying to get their land back, I might have supported them, but it never was their land, they had no claim to it, they had no rational reason to be there that long -- a one-week assembly with a peaceful exit after an assembly where they made their point would have been far more effective.
They don't even qualify as hoodlums, really; they were too unfocused for that. My estimation is that most of them were sort of lost as to how to deal with a situation where the federal government has a lot more authority than the Constitution ever envisioned and most people just don't care, and insufficient imagination to try to think of a way to get a message across to anyone who might.