Not ALL neanderthals! 
16 Likes
when u realize bae was never really against the police state, they just want it imposed equally.
2 Likes
I think it’s fair to say that their skin color most definitely provided them a level of privilege they would not have been afforded otherwise in the state and area that their trial took place, yes.
I also think that the charges against them were intentionally weak sauce. They could have been charged with destruction of government property, with conspiracy against the government, or other things that would have applied very well to their situation. Instead, they received charges that were relatively easy to disprove. “Conspiracy to prevent employees from doing their jobs”? Seriously?
26 Likes
Do you honestly think that people like the Bundys are about true freedom or that they care if black kids get shot by the cops? Honestly and truly?
What I would really like is a criminal justice system that serves us all equally in a way that mitigates historical inequalities. I’d very much like to see people who do commit crimes not get slaps on the wrist because of their white maleness.
22 Likes
Which I think nicely illustrates the crux of the problem, which again, goes back to that privilege that accrues to because of their race (and in most cases here, gender). A stronger case could have been made with better chargers, it seems. They occupied a federal building, left a mess, and were clearly looking to make a statement about ending government control of western lands, consequences be damned. And it’s not like they were quiet about their intentions, as they tweeted and facebooked the whole fucking ordeal.
But maybe the government thought that charging them with anything else would be alienating and the last thing anyone wants to do is alienate what’s seen as the center of the country…
13 Likes
Of course not.
I don’t think the way to end white male supremacy is to put white men in jail any more than I think the way to close Guantanamo Bay is to waterboard the guards.
How can we moralize about the horror and brutality of our justice system and the criminalization of dissent, and then demand that it be inflicted on our political adversaries? These people are jackasses and they’re white, but they do not deserve to be repressed or jailed by the security state. And they certainly don’t deserve to be “droned”. It’s weird to me that people can even think that’s funny, given how close it is to reality.
2 Likes
Isn’t this a victory for civil liberties and the first amendment?
You might not agree with their cause or how they went about it, but the precedent is a win for all occupy protest movements.
Do you not think they did anything wrong in this case? Do you think they did not break laws or that they deserve no punishment for what laws they did break?
I don’t want retribution or for them to be droned. I do want white guys to actually get convicted of crimes and sentenced to something that makes sense. If these were black lives matter activists, do you think they would have gotten off? Likely not. Wanting them to not get off because of their skin tone doesn’t mean wanting a police state. And don’t forget that many minorities in this country already live in that police state.
I think this decision (and several others that have popped up on BB recently, mainly with white men convicted of rape getting insultingly light sentences) is yet another example of how white supremacy actually operates and how that creates a bifurcated system of justice. Men who are white, with money, christian, and straight, just get a better deal.
I don’t agree with some of the more aggressive comments, but it’s from a deep well of frustration that we are STILL dealing with this stuff.
But I’m only speaking for myself here, not for anyone else. You’ll have to see what they say about your criticism, which I don’t think are wholly unfair, TBH.
21 Likes
That would be true if the outcome of this trial was due to sympathy toward occupy protest movements of any kind. I kinda doubt that. I think probably this was sympathetic toward the white, angry, gun-toting kind exclusively.
13 Likes
And I think these were Oregon state charges… They still have home SERIOUS FEDERAL CHARGES coming up in February. While this was a kind of bogus case they are not out yet.
from the Seattle Times article
So this may have been what can we throw at them locally thing and not too worried as they still are going to another court.
17 Likes
The federal stuff is going back to the original cattle ranching thing, isn’t it?
3 Likes
I think you have the wrong amendment. It’s not the 1st Amendment when you forcibly take property while armed.
11 Likes
Ah, good info to know.
1 Like
I imagine so and whatever else they can pin on them. Federal prosecutors play for keeps.
2 Likes
The precedent this sets is “if you’re a group of white yahoos, you can trash any federal building you want and have a party, as long as you make it clear that employees can still come to work”.
11 Likes
That depends on whether one thinks that armed people threatening violence actually are a police issue; as opposed to protestors not actually making credible threats of violence.
Which Vanilla Isis was doing.
9 Likes
I don’t think I agree. I think they were not acting for the greater good, but for their own economic interests, against the wishes of the people they were holding the protest for. I see it as them protesting against a loss of privilege rather than for some sort of common, collective good.
But also remember that even people who were in civil rights protests were arrested and charged with crimes.
21 Likes
Are you talking about the Clinton administration exit where they notoriously left things a mess?
What the fuck? It’s solely a victory for domestic terrorism of the white culturally-appropriate variety.
11 Likes
Oh I didn’t know they forcibly took the property. Thought it was unoccupied at the time.
