I should start a Movie Pitch thread.
9 Likes
White American Jesus, you mean.
3 Likes
The Rosenbergs were convicted of the good ole fashioned espionage (1917 recipe)
2 Likes
Nobody needs to - they are citizens. Consent of the governed cannot be assumed as absolute and unconditional, it can be revoked. Such as in instances where such a government may be acting in bad faith, or otherwise make itself unaccountable to the populace. When accountability is made asymmetrical, then democracy becomes symbolic and government assumes its own agenda.
Sure, this particular group seem to be bozos with an untenable position. But it is an instance of a sort of direct democracy in action. These people are, in a very real sense (for better or worse), the governmentâs employers.
The Rosenbergs were convicted of espionage, for an actual enemy nation, the USSR. These characters appear to not be exfiltrating secret info to any current enemy states, so there isnât much parallel. If the US was formally at war with the USSR, the Rosenbergs could possibly have been convicted of treason.
Citizens that have enacted an armed attack upon the government of the United States.
This is an open, and armed, rebellion against the duly elected officials of the United States. It isnât a protest.
9 Likes
It might seem like rebellion if you suppose that citizens are only accountable to elected officials, and not the reverse. It cuts both ways. Elected officials are also directly accountable to the people they claim to serve.
The citizens are the source of the governmentâs authority. Officials administrate this place at our sufferance. As public servants, they give up a degree of individual and collective autonomy.
Actually, Iâve been thinking that care packages may be the most effective strategy in ending this. I think we need to send them massive amounts of booze.
Normally, Iâd be against mixing drunkenness and firearms, but in this case Iâm willing to make an exception. Either they second amendment the shit out of each other without the rest of civilized society getting involved, or they make a first strike against law enforcement that justifies nuking their seditious asses from orbit.
===================================
Edit: And in reading the rest of the thread, I discover that @japhroaig has already suggested thisâŚ
10 Likes
Yes, but during sentencing the judge specifically used the word âtreasonâ to describe their actions regardless of the crime they were formally convicted of:
âI consider your crime worse than murder⌠I believe your conduct in putting into the hands of the Russians the A-Bomb years before our best scientists predicted Russia would perfect the bomb has already caused, in my opinion, the Communist aggression in Korea, with the resultant casualties exceeding 50,000 and who knows but that millions more of innocent people may pay the price of your treasonâ.
So basically you have âtreasonâ as legally defined by the Constitution and âtreasonâ in the broader sense of how the word is actually used.
2 Likes
These guys are seditious and are engaged in an armed insurrection. I have a special loathing for these people since Malheurâs a very important wildlife refuge for many species that theyâre doing some harm to and want to open up for pillaging (and because theyâre direct ideological descendants of the OKC bombers). Still, Iâm pretty sure to meet the strict criteria of treason theyâd need to be coordinating with a nation-state.
âTreason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.â - Article III Section 3
They arenât levying war and the âadhering to their enemiesâ partâs interpreted as assisting a nation state at war with the U.S. Theyâre terrible people doing real harm and should be brought to justice and made to pay for their crimes, but I think weâd be better off leaving treason off the table. They made the clause in the Constitution very hard to qualify for since claims of treason are ripe for abuse. If Jefferson Davis didnât manage to get tried for treason, these tools wonât, and thatâs okay with me. Theyâre bound for long prison terms, and Iâd rather they rot in jail than become glorious martyrs for the TeaHadis.
10 Likes
Itâs never just black or white.
And the vast majority of US citizens, including the local community, agree that Bundyâs militia is NOT a legitimate authority and are breaking laws that we have collectively instituted for the common good.
Laws arenât an âopt-inâ kind of thing.
14 Likes
No; thatâs what was so stupidly horrible about the theater siege. Any competent anaesthesiologist on the planet would have told you that the likely outcome of that plan was mass fatalities.
Pharmaceutically knocking people out is a bloody dangerous thing to do; essentially, what youâre doing is poisoning someone until they are almost (but not quite) dead. There is a reason why anaesthesiology is a highly skilled profession.
17 Likes
No, it seems like a rebellion because it is one.
I agree with you about the rights of citizens who are not in open rebellion against the United States. These guys are armed, took over federal buildings, and are destroying federal property. They are calling for others to join them. They have appointed their own court system and have their own laws which certainly differ from those of the United States. Soon they may try United States citizens in their court, by their laws â they have expressed this intent.
They arenât upset Oregonians standing up for their local rights, these are people from another State who have taken over Federal land because they believed this to be an easy target.
13 Likes
Well, thatâs rather irresponsible behavior for a judge, I would say! Basically telling them that they are convicted for one crime as a sort of retribution for not being able to apply some other charge.
I donât recall what might be said about it in the US Constitution, itâs been yonks since Iâve read that. I am going by my recollection of the US Code, which is where treason is officially defined. As for however else the word might be âactually usedâ, I donât know. People often throw the term around in reference to any serious dealings with the federal government. But as @LDoBe said above, many seem to use it interchangeably for sedition.
Even if this militiaâs actions donât meet the Constitutional definition of âtreasonâ they certainly do meet the dictionary definition.
4 Likes
That may indeed be their motivation. But I seriously doubt that they will have an easy time of it.
This I will go with, however, they have declared their own âUnited States,â have raised an âarmy,â appointed a judiciary, and are conducting acts of war upon the United States that VAST majority of residents inside the borders generally recognized as such respect. Again, they are developing a court system and their own laws â they arenât protesting the existing ones, unless its by an act of war.
They may be misguided and insane former American citizens, but theyâre pretty much their own little nation at war with us right now and occupying a piece of Oregon.
Regardless, I think we both agree â they need to be stopped. This is horrible. We need to clarify what a âWell Regulated Militiaâ is and regulate the fuck out of them. This has to end.
11 Likes
Fucking the kings wife also meets the dictionary definition of treason.
We donât have a king. Elvis has been dead for years. Plus he was more the Kaaaaang.
13 Likes
