Reports of "Militia Takeover" in Oregon

Status
Not open for further replies.
The video hasn't stopped the conspiracy theory folks, they are still crying 'Murder' and 'Execution'. Edited video and planted 9mm, the usual 'truth', of course.

The left seems to be giddy at the sight of a white male gun-owning 'redneck'
being shot. Many of the comments on mainstream media stories are appalling. Some literally wanted the FBI to kill all of them at the roadblock, and more than one commenter wants to kill not only them but all of their families.

The thread a few days ago about testing the US population for depression? I'm starting to think maybe we should be reviewing the US population and their social media postings for signs of insanity and depravity. Some folks should not only be disallowed to have firearms, but knives, computers, and voting as well.
 
That's not at all true. He got out with his hands up, but when an officer approached Finicum ignored his commands and then reached into an inside jacket pocket twice, and was then shot (from behind) by a second officer. They found a loaded 9mm in the pocket he was reaching into.
Click to expand...


You wonder how long before the Bundy's and other supporters start screaming the gun was planted and it's all a conspiracy? This guy had a death wish. If you watched any of the interviews with him prior to this he almost always stated he would die for the cause.....which he did. He thought his death would make some kind of difference and he would go down in history, i.e. a martyr. That jury is still out.
 
The decision was made when he fled the traffic stop, at least the one of the final decisions, probably amongst the people that stayed in the truck. One guy got out.
Flash bangs were used on the remaining folks... Several bullets striking snow and the vehicle. I don't think that the officers were firing willy-nilly without a good reason.
 
The occupiers / protesters are idiots.. they had a perfect opportunity to stage their protest, get their message out, and leave peacefully with minimal or no repercussions.

Had they played their cards right, they could have gotten out of there and done the exact same thing again at a later date in another location.

Wash, rinse and repeat. A lot more effective than trying to pound your chest and see who will win against a vastly superior counterpart.

Seems like their leader had a very poor, or nonexistent strategic plan.. just a tactical one.

I'm actually surprised the feds let it go this long.
 
kilimanjaro said:
The left seems to be giddy at the sight of a white male gun-owning 'redneck'
being shot. Many of the comments on mainstream media stories are appalling. Some literally wanted the FBI to kill all of them at the roadblock, and more than one commenter wants to kill not only them but all of their families.
Click to expand...

It isn't just lefties and news media.

I too have noticed an undue and unseemly enthusiasm for harsh action toward these people, complete with accusations of treason and "white privilege".

I don't know why some of the reaction is so unhinged.
 
Don't read mainstream media comments. :) lol

There's was no need to act fast. They had all winter. If the media hadn't picked this up, probably would have been a local blip. Of course the protesters wanted to make a big deal of it. They also seemed to be the ones that mentioned that they were armed as well. Armed for protection is their own right. Should have kept it out of the public eye.
Maybe they thought it would help .... I dunno, doesn't help us out for sure.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kilimanjaro
The left seems to be giddy at the sight of a white male gun-owning 'redneck'
being shot. Many of the comments on mainstream media stories are appalling. Some literally wanted the FBI to kill all of them at the roadblock, and more than one commenter wants to kill not only them but all of their families.
It isn't just lefties and news media.

I too have noticed an undue and unseemly enthusiasm for harsh action toward these people, complete with accusations of treason and "white privilege".

I don't know why some of the reaction is so unhinged.
Click to expand...

Unhinged or in line with the usual comments about terrorists. Many of the people paying attention view them as terrorists and/or traitors. historically we tend to obliterate the rebellions that occurred in the US. (Shay's rebellion, ACW). I'd imagine the same comments were made about Black Panthers, the KKK etc. etc.
 
zinc said:
Unhinged or in line with the usual comments about terrorists. Many of the people paying attention view them as terrorists and/or traitors. historically we tend to obliterate the rebellions that occurred in the US. (Shay's rebellion, ACW). I'd imagine the same comments were made about Black Panthers, the KKK etc. etc.
Click to expand...

If the comments were in line with the usual comments about terrorists, we would expect to see excuses pertaining to poverty and hopelessness in their upbringing.

A couple dozen ranchers who announce that they do not want violence and produce a list of demands or grievances hardly meet any definition for terrorists or traitors. In terms of rebellion, it hardly compares to what happens in any city or college town after a big game.

I believe the comments pertain mostly to the social identity of the people involved. Some of the same commentary that seems to hope for these people to be liquidated comes from the very same writers who were outraged when Michael Brown was shot and made excuses when a mob burned down the business district in Ferguson Missouri.
 
Thats your view.

Others see them as terrorists, taking over public property, armed to the teeth and threatening the community around them, following people home and threatening them, making threats online (note some posted asking for others to come in and shoot up the feds), and stealing government vehicles.
 
Just to be clear, if you are facing an officer who tells you to put your hands up and you reach into any pocket, they can shoot you. They won't wait to see what you are reaching for, or until you point a firearm at them. At the point they can see a pistol it is too late for them to react before you have a chance to fire. Whether he had a pistol in that pocket or not is irrelevant.

He came REALLY close to running over that agent. I'll bet the agent had to change his/her pants afterwards. I'm not sure if the agent was trying to get out from behind his vehicle before it was rammed or thought he/she could stand in front of Finicums vehicle and stop it. Either way he/she almost got flattened. Definitely laid there in the snow for a second gathering their thoughts. I'm a little surprised that close call didn't cause a more forceful reaction.

The four in the reserve who think they will be able to leave with no charges are absolutely delusional. I would be very surprised if most of the people who stayed there for more than a day aren't tracked down over the next few weeks and arrested. At least those who stayed the last week or so. Just because they were allowed to leave does not mean they won't be arrested later.
 
The only thing that I can't reconcile is calling them terrorists for acts of civil disobedience. I'm not talking about the stalking and such. Mainly about sitting in the refuge. They should have kept their weapons out of the public view i.e. News.
Stalking and threats can be called terroristic.

But simply staging a protest while armed, I don't think makes a terrorist. Public property is the place for this. You don't want this happening on private property, right?
Now using the vehicles, digging up the land is probably a crime. Charging a road block is a deadly force event. So is reaching in your pocket directly after ramming aroad block, another reason to use deadly force.

Now all the other crimes aside, so I can make my point, I find it disturbing that many citizens feel that staging a protest on public property and owning a gun makes a person eligible for death without due process.

I'm not really defending this whole weeks long event, I feel the protestors skirted well beyond what they could have done.
I'm only upset about the basic premise that being on public land while armed requires a swat response; according to some.
 
Drunk driving, menacing and reaching for a firearm during a stop are all distinguishable from the shack occupation.

That's your view.
Click to expand...

Yes, but it isn't just my view.

Treason is the betrayal of one's own country by waging war against it or by consciously or purposely acting to aid its enemies. Terrorism involves the use of violence intended to produce terror in service of a political end.

If the worst the IRA, Baader-Meinhof and AQ had done was occupy a shack, proclaim a non-violent intent and give their view of the legitimacy of the authority involved in some aspects of federal action, we'd not know their names because that isn't terrorism any more than the Occupy Movement were terrorists.

They haven't acted to support a national enemy so no treason is involved.

The group have broken some laws and acted with appropriate foresight, consideration and wisdom. However the casual accusations of treason and terrorism are inaccurate and appear emotional.


In my city, a boy named Tamir Rice was shot by a PO; it's a sad story all the way around, but the details aren't pertinent here.

A few weeks ago, protestors without a parade permit decided to march specifically to bring rush hour to a halt. My normal 40 minute commute was doubled because these people thought that 40 fewer minutes with my family would produce greater sympathy for a woman who will not see her boy again.

They were stupid and inconsiderate. They were not terrorists and weren't engaging in treason.
 
Last edited:
I can't say what exactly happened in the video. Hopefully there's more video than just what was shot from from the helicopter, dash cam maybe, that shows the event from a different angle.. Sure was a lot of activity taking place from 5:50 mark to 6:07
 
Last edited:
My issue with the video:
As it stands, he tried to get around a roadblock meant for his crew, therefore endangering lives.
He exited the truck hands in the air.
He appears to stumble in the snow.
He makes movements that appear to me he was reaching into his jacket.

What we cannot tell from the video is exactly when he was shot and how many times.
All that can be determined is when he became incapacitated; that can happen at various times after being hit, sometimes a while, sometimes instantly if the CNS is disrupted. There is just a moment before incapacitation where it appears that the officer behind shot him.
So who knows, looks like he went for a gun and he got shot. But there are openings for speculation.
 
The only way "normal" people will have the least bit of empathy for this guy is if an autopsy shows he was having a heart attack and that will make it probable he was reaching there because of severe chest pains. I believe that would be medically possible/consistent. Even then, the empathy will be limited.
 
I find myself amiable to their cause, but appalled by their tactics.

The problem is, we dont know how to be the underdog with our freedom being abused.

The cause needs to get better organized with thought out strategy and tactics.
The left has allot more experience fighting the power than us.

But the worm has surely turned.
I cant think of many times a upstanding land owner would be shot along the side of the road because he disagrees with the Government.
Granted his personality led to this end, but still.
How far do they have to push you before they are shooting you on the side of the road?

Needs to be a plan, because force wont win. No matter how many guns we have.
 
Last edited:
COZ--exactly what is the reasoning behind Bundy's occupation of a fed facility? I Google-fooed but did not find any detailed description of exactly what the grievances are. I know the re-sentencing of the Hammonds was part of it, but the Hammonds didn't even want them there. Before making any more comments about these guys I would like some credible facts about what these people want.

Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
COZ--exactly what is the reasoning behind Bundy's occupation of a fed facility? I Google-fooed but did not find any detailed description of exactly what the grievances are.
Click to expand...

Bundy claims he got a "Divine Message" from God to take the facility. God honest truth.
 
I know---but that is rhetoric IMO. :)

The flap about the government owning land is the part I don't understand. Seems there is some backstory about abuse by the Feds taking lands from ranchers. The Cliven Bundy incident was discussed at length here in TFL, and is likely a contributor to Ammon Bundy's thoughts about the occupation. But is the facility that Ammon Bundy occupied the object of some kind of alleged abuse by the government? Or was this deal a willy-nilly decision and in the same locale as the Hammond ranch and just handy?
 
CR said:
The flap about the government owning land is the part I don't understand.
Click to expand...

Dissatisfaction with federal land management isn't exclusive to the Bundys or even to western ranchers.

CR said:
Seems there is some backstory about abuse by the Feds taking lands from ranchers.
Click to expand...

That is part of the story, however as I understand it Mormons, or at least Mormons of Bundys stripe, are like Boers and Israelis in that they believe in a manifest destiny attached to the land they came to hold after a period of persecution.

It isn't what I would characterize as an anti-federal position rooted in widely accepted premises.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top