Militia Takes Over Wildlife Refuge In Oregon

[Kutnupe14]

The only movement will be this guys giant bowel movement from eating everyones MRE's

Remaining Militiamen Are Hungry for Blood: "If they stop you from getting here, KILL THEM!"

I actually wondered about this... Are other militia guys going to start heading to Oregon? I think LE dropped the ball. I understand them taking down the guys at a traffic stop, but they actually killed somebody. Obviously that's wasn't their intention (hopefully), but since they did, there should have been a contingency in place to take down the compound if there were protester casualties. Failure to do so leaves the door open for this to spin out of control.

 

[KG1]

I wonder what happened to the Delta force spec-op that the Oathkeepers forewarned about?

 

[halfmileharry]

No. A good man (and I think Finicum was a good man), is not necessarily right in the issues he is willing to die for.

...and this doesn't automatically make LEO necessarily right in shooting him either. We have NO facts here. just hearsay.

 

[Hop]

I had found a video made by one of the drivers (#1) who was stopped. I posted it on Facebook but can't get to it from my current location. HST had set up a multi-car ambush. Driver #1 indicates Finicum drove away from that initial stop after driver #1 was removed from his vehicle. Police gave chase. That's about all you can believe from his point of view.

There was a girl in Finicum's vehicle that has been spouting some serious accusations that I won't go into here. We need some dash/body cam video to corroborate her story.

Word from another source says FBI/LEO in the area have ordered all media broadcasters away. That cannot be good. News @ 11!

 

[IndyDave1776]

Word from another source says FBI/LEO in the area have ordered all media broadcasters away. That cannot be good. News @ 11!

Seeing to it that there is only one side of the story which will presumably be filtered six ways to Sunday is never a good thing and does not do anything to foster trust regarding those responsible for doing so.

 

[voidsherpa]

Word from another source says FBI/LEO in the area have ordered all media broadcasters away. That cannot be good. News @ 11!

Saw reporter state they have a roadblock set up 5 miles out preventing media access.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Saw reporter state they have a roadblock set up 5 miles out preventing media access.

We hear plenty about 'if you have nothing to hide'. Now, they can own it and wear it when they are treated as untrustworthy.

 

[Kutnupe14]

We hear plenty about 'if you have nothing to hide'. Now, they can own it and wear it when they are treated as untrustworthy.

You don't think a restriction on media access during a potential tactical situation is appropriate? Surely you realize the media doesn't take tactical considerations to mind when they have a big juicy story.
Needless to say, I think you're comparing apples to oranges.

 

[IndyDave1776]

You don't think a restriction on media access during a potential tactical situation is appropriate? Surely you realize the media doesn't take tactical considerations to mind when they have a big juicy story.
Needless to say, I think you're comparing apples to oranges.

I would say to let them exercise their First Amendment rights. If they are imprudent, it works the same way that if you take a soldier's chance...

You are right about the apples and oranges. As citizens we have a constitutional right to privacy from the government. The government does NOT have a right to privacy from us. Thank you for bringing that error to my attention.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I would say to let them exercise their First Amendment rights. If they are imprudent, it works the same way that if you take a soldier's chance...

You are right about the apples and oranges. As citizens we have a constitutional right to privacy from the government. The government does NOT have a right to privacy from us. Thank you for bringing that error to my attention.

In this I would say you are wrong. What leads you to believe this? In practice the govt may keep certain things private, if it's due to welfare and safety concerns; even more so if there's an immediacy of addressing a threat.

 

[IndyDave1776]

In this I would say you are wrong. What leads you to believe this? In practice the govt may keep certain things private, if it's due to welfare and safety concerns; even more so if there's an immediacy of addressing a threat.

Seeing to it that there is only one side to the story is a little different. I would also remind you that in the last two generally similar situations, there was a certain sniper involved in both situations who should have been tried, convicted, and executed, and would have received at least two out of the three had federal law not allowed him, at his sole discretion, to have state charges moved to federal court, where they were promptly dismissed. That makes one hell of an argument for seeing to it that there is independently-derived evidence available.

 

[dirtybird]

You don't think a restriction on media access during a potential tactical situation is appropriate? Surely you realize the media doesn't take tactical considerations to mind when they have a big juicy story.
Needless to say, I think you're comparing apples to oranges.

Am I the only one who thought of the San Bernardino media incident when reading this?

 

[BogWalker]

I would rather a civil war not start over this m'kay?

 

[IndyDave1776]

I would rather a civil war not start over this m'kay?

You think it is going to grow those kind of legs?

 

[BogWalker]

You think it is going to grow those kind of legs?

No, but seems the guys holed up in that building want it to.

 

[actaeon277]

In this I would say you are wrong. What leads you to believe this? In practice the govt may keep certain things private, if it's due to welfare and safety concerns; even more so if there's an immediacy of addressing a threat.

They were able to embed reporters in Iraq, but unable to do so here?
Rules were set down. Reporters were limited, but had to share info. Etc.

 

[voidsherpa]

They were able to embed reporters in Iraq, but unable to do so here?
Rules were set down. Reporters were limited, but had to share info. Etc.

Woah our police force isn't militarized enough for that yet.. give it another 6 months.

 

[MohawkSlim]

They were able to embed reporters in Iraq, but unable to do so here?
Rules were set down. Reporters were limited, but had to share info. Etc.

One of the initial reports I read said there was a CBS crew filming the incident.

Haven't heard much about it since and I'm sure the video will be part of the "ongoing investigation" but it's possible it's out there. Then again, we heard about 3 male shooters in full tactical clothing at the outset of San Bernadino and look how false (flag) that's turned out to be.

 

[Kutnupe14]

They were able to embed reporters in Iraq, but unable to do so here?
Rules were set down. Reporters were limited, but had to share info. Etc.

How long do you think those requests took to approve? If the media abided by those rules, the heck I'd have no problem with them doing the same with domestic law enforcement. But honestly, who are we kidding? You think the media would agree to hold a story until an OP is completed, when local and independent press would break such a story much earlier? ....the public wants the gist (even if completely wrong), well before the details.

 

[Spear Dane]

I would rather a civil war not start over this m'kay?

Neither the right issue nor the right time. The only people that care about this is them. Keep yer ammo dry. When/if 'they' come for our guns, then it's time.