It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bundy Militia Used Women As Human Shields

page: 4
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 05:49 AM
link   
One more thing.


In other words, no nation on earth supports the assertion that civilians may lawfully be used to shelter military objectives.


They are not civilians, they are armed, voluntary belligerents, soldiers. Not housewives. Not little old ladies or little girls. They're armed, trained, and ready to kick ass.

MY SOURCE




posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 05:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Davian
 


I don't see any where in the definition of human shield, where it says "forcibly" or "coerced", merely a group positioned in a line of fire.



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 05:53 AM
link   
So the same people who are saying that there is inequality with women and pay find it difficult to believe that women and men stand together on a front line?

Freedom doesn't know a gender.



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 05:56 AM
link   

Davian

They are not civilians, they are armed, voluntary belligerents, soldiers. Not housewives. Not little old ladies or little girls. They're armed, trained, and ready to kick ass.


So then, why did the sheriff single out women?

If they are equal belligerents, why did he want them at the front?

How can you even defend this?

Are you so brainwashed against the government that you will take the position against them, no matter what it is??



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 05:58 AM
link   
reply to post by AlphaHawk
 


*self edit*

The problem I have, is seeing ho anyone could be for the heavy-handed approach to the BLM actions towards the rancher.

Is this the new normal?

If you owe the government money, expect snipers and SWAT and "free speech zones"?
edit on 15-4-2014 by beezzer because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 06:03 AM
link   
Mod Note

Lets keep personal attacks out of this thread.

Do not reply to this post



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 06:10 AM
link   

So then, why did the sheriff single out women?

If they are equal belligerents, why did he want them at the front?


I thought it was obvious I was suggesting they volunteered. Did that thought not cross your mind? *Facepalm*
Please, divert your attention away from me. Now.



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 06:11 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Beezer... its NOT about being brainwashed and you damn well know it! Shame on you!

Sure... many of those women happily would be at the side of her husband and not behind him... If I was in a fight with my husband by God by his side I would be.

HOWEVER, its a whole different thing to say, "Okay, you want to fight by our side, then lets position it for maximum psychological effect to the general population so we can make the government look bad... lets make sure we televise them killing women!"

Thats a #ing bull# attitude and YOU know it!

It's playing the same damn psychological warfare bull# as the government against the citizens of this country.

What the # is wrong with people!
edit on 15-4-2014 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 06:14 AM
link   

AlphaHawk

Davian

They are not civilians, they are armed, voluntary belligerents, soldiers. Not housewives. Not little old ladies or little girls. They're armed, trained, and ready to kick ass.


So then, why did the sheriff single out women?

If they are equal belligerents, why did he want them at the front?

How can you even defend this?

Are you so brainwashed against the government that you will take the position against them, no matter what it is??


lol, tactics, ya think?

why did the feds bring automatic assault rifles into the mix?

lol! and snipers?

is this egypt or syria?

iran?

who is trying to intimidate who?

it's stupid what the gov is doing. force for what should be fines?





posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 06:16 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Who says I'm siding with the government?

Just because I'm standing against the people that thought it would be a great idea to single out women and put them on the front line of a potential fire fight, doesn't mean I automatically side with the government.



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 06:16 AM
link   

AlphaHawk

Davian

They are not civilians, they are armed, voluntary belligerents, soldiers. Not housewives. Not little old ladies or little girls. They're armed, trained, and ready to kick ass.


So then, why did the sheriff single out women?

If they are equal belligerents, why did he want them at the front?

How can you even defend this?

Are you so brainwashed against the government that you will take the position against them, no matter what it is??


My work here is done. Peace.
2nd



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 06:16 AM
link   
reply to post by OpinionatedB
 


It's all about perception.

The government is in the wrong, in so many ways.

So women were in front. So? The government over-reached. The government tried bully tactics.

I have yet to hear how any woman was forced to stand in front.

If the government feels that it is appropriate to kill women and men because a rancher owes money for having his cattle graze on public land (as has been done for over 100 years) then I fear for our nation.



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 06:19 AM
link   
AlphaHawk, I present the post of mine you quoted, with the part you ignored engraved.


Davian

They are not civilians, they are armed, voluntary belligerents, soldiers. Not housewives. Not little old ladies or little girls. They're armed, trained, and ready to kick ass.


Feeling brainwashed yet?



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 06:19 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


I fear for the nation where the rebellion is no better than the government they stand against!
edit on 15-4-2014 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 06:23 AM
link   

OpinionatedB
reply to post by beezzer
 


I fear for the nation where the rebellion is no better than the government they stand against!
edit on 15-4-2014 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)


Our nation is turning into a police-state.

Any opposition to the heavy-handed approach should be encouraged.

I didn't see any rancher place snipers on the BLM.
I didn't see any rancher denying 1st Amendment rights.
I didn't see any rancher taze a BLM agent.
I didn't see any rancher use dogs to disperse crowds.



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 06:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Davian
 


They ALL volunteered to stand at the front did they?

Were you there? Can you categorically state that every single woman there volunteered to be the first to be gunned down on international television?

Because that's what the plan was:


“If they are going to start shooting, it’s going to be women that are going to be televised all across the world getting shot by these rogue federal officers,” he said.

This is what you're defending, you're defending a group willing to put women (armed or not) at the front for "sympathy" and you dare speak to me as if I'm the idiot??



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 06:26 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Damn it Beezer look at other country and their uprisings, when the uprisers are no better than the government they are fighting when - just tell me when does that turn out well????

I dont want to trade one police state for another!



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 06:26 AM
link   
AlphaHawk



How can you even defend this?

Are you so brainwashed against the government that you will take the position against them, no matter what it is??









Yes, people are that brainwashed.



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 06:30 AM
link   
So everyone tears the OP a new one when they think it's liberal spin or don't like the source, but when we find out a militia member did say it and Fox & The Blaze report the exact same thing, nobody mentions it?
Typical ATS political nonsense, this thread is a sad example of how ats is now a political cess pool



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Davian
AlphaHawk, I present the post of mine you quoted, with the part you ignored engraved.


Davian

They are not civilians, they are armed, voluntary belligerents, soldiers. Not housewives. Not little old ladies or little girls. They're armed, trained, and ready to kick ass.


Feeling brainwashed yet?


Ignored?

No..



See where I say equal belligerents? As in, being there on their own volition.

Yeah that would me NOT ignoring what you're saying.



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join