Good ol’ boys you say?
2 Likes
Not that good 
2 Likes
I’ve already been playing that game, because what’s going on doesn’t make a lot of sense on the surface based on what we’ve been told.
My theory is that they’re just taking a wait-and-see attitude because they want to see who else shows up. There are still supporters arriving who think the occupiers have a good idea and are doing the right thing. This is a really good opportunity to find out more about a big bunch of anti-government folks who make, ahem, “interesting” choices. That seems like an FBI-ish thing to do.
As for what I would do if I were tasked with ending this… I’d send them a nice shipment of useful stuff. Contaminate it all with norovirus. When they leave to seek medical care, arrest them and charge them with ordinary (i.e., not “terrorism”) crimes, like destruction of property, misuse of goernment buildings, whatever they can make stick. With that, seize their weapons, make them subject to home arrest and ankle bracelets as bail conditions, and just let the system grind them down from there. Avoid another Waco or Ruby Ridge.
3 Likes
Every time the cops kill or maim some innocent bystander, or kill some black person for allegedly spitting g on the sidewalk, it occurs to me that cop shows have done nothing g to help me understand the thinking of police. Here again, when it’s white folk this time who are in their public cross-hairs, I kind of wish I understood what the cops are thinking about as they watch fresh supplies and ammo flow into the freehold compound.
If they want to keep the confrontation small, they’d apprehend anyone who leaves. All I can imagine is that they want as big a rap sheet as possible when/if these guys see trial. It’s sure not obvious how the public’s interests are being preserved.
4 Likes
I agree there’s not enough public messaging about the reasons for disparate treatment of armed occupiers. The NY Times published a story with a lengthy discussion of economic pressures created in rural Oregon by federal ownership of public land.
It reads like an apology for inaction and a hair-splitting response to the real economic concerns of the region. Why all of this context instead of other, tougher-minded context?
As noted by @anon15383236 above, why not interviews of law enforcement with quotes from legal experts and PERF?
Why not stories about the apparent double-standard for white male terrorists with quotes from ex spouses of the occupiers or civil rights leaders from other groups?
It’s terrible, horrible, no good, very bad journalism … and it’s dangerous for the people who live and work there to coddle armed extremists.
12 Likes
I liked that article. Here’s my favorite part:
Government paychecks … have helped keep Harney County afloat as private jobs have declined. With nearly 60 percent of the pay earned in the county now coming from the public sector — including schools and federal management jobs at the 188,000-acre wildlife refuge — this was the most government-dependent county in Oregon in 2013, according the most recent analysis by the state.
… but I suggest others also read the full article because that quote doesn’t summarize the whole thing.
4 Likes
I like that quote too, partly because it emphasizes the inevitable government role in peoples’ lives. A key question in rural counties is whether economic regulation can be less plutocratic and more democratic.
If timber and ranching are unavailable then communities should be supported to organize an alternative local economy.
And it’s lazy journalism to attribute rural economic suffering to impersonal “structural changes” in the economy. It matters whose ox is gored.
1 Like
That was the hardest I have laughed at the internet in a while.
2 Likes
1 Like
Isn’t this called bioterrorism?
4 Likes
Yes! That, that, exactly that I had in mind!
The existing situation would be a nice test setting for this tech.
At this point, I have absolutely no problem with this. When you have these armed assholes taking over public lands, destroying parts of it, and then getting to run roughshod without any consequences, the average person isn’t saying “well, maybe these reasonable people have a point”…
Your average US citizen is thinking “why haven’t these crazy bastards been taken in by the police or military yet?”. IMHO, the various branches of authority have shown remarkable restraint up to this point. If as suggested above, they ran 20’ of razor wire as a perimeter, then enforced it, I can’t imagine that anyone would have an issue with that, after all they’re not storming the shack guns-a-blazing. If said y’allqueda decide that’s provocation enough, and rush the military firing away, then we certainly don’t expect our uniformed men and women to just allow themselves to be shot do we?
And, I add that I say this not being the biggest fan of the police or military, but this is exactly the sort of situation that they exist for.
3 Likes
Why risk the lives of Americans to give these wanna-be martyrs what they want? Besiege them, use scent warfare (grilling steaks for dinner upwind of the besieged buildings) and let them surrender, starve, or attack.
In the first case, they get arrested and likely imprisoned for the rest of their lives given the crimes that have been reported.
In the second case, it’s easy to think of someone as a martyr if they die violently. Wasting away to nothing is a much less glamorous death.
In the third case, if the military is fortified they’ll likely do little damage and the message will be that they were killed in self-defense by the troops that were being attacked.
Don’t even give them that way out, just park stuff around them that is basically impervious to small arms and wait for them to run out of ammo.
5 Likes
Only if they actually shoot flowers . . . gently.
2 Likes
confetti
2 Likes
They might set fires or otherwise escalate the violence.
It’s been awhile since I read about Waco, and my recollection that people inside set fires and did other risky behaviors could be faulty. Even if it is, minimizing the risk of violence is important. And there are still many options, even with that caveat.
We don’t want to hurt anyone or increase the risk of anyone getting hurt. This is also an opportunity to reboot a “new normal” that may serve to strengthen arguments against officer-involved shootings and broken-window policing in other communities.
1 Like
M-x M-c distribute-christmas-crackers
2 Likes
