It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Where are the militia groups, when tyranny and oppression are crushing the people?

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 03:41 PM
It's because it's not some old white guy on his ranch.
That's why they're not there.

Hopefully there are enough decent people actually willing to go there and do what the "Gun Owners" always talk about doing... standing up to the Gov/Police who are acting illegally.

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 03:43 PM
What would militias do? Adding an bunch of poorly trained. poorly lead with guns to the mix would just be a disaster. I mean look at the collection of idiots that showed up at Bundys ranch? Would anybody want those morons in the mix. It is better mitias stick to what they do best make Youtube videos, post on miltia forums, get together once in awhile for some training AKA driking and open carry in places like coffee shops. It is best they stick to doin that sort of stuff.

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 03:44 PM

originally posted by: switchqm8
For what it is worth i am a member of oath keepers and sent them this question and posted this to their boards.
First i am a member on the east coast but what i want to know is where are the oath keepers to help keep the peaceful protesters from getting abused by law enforcement? They were quick to get to the Bundy ranch but have not heard a thing about getting to ST Louis? I would like a answer to this question. If the oath keepers are not going to respond to this i will no longer be a member. Our rights are our rights no matter what neighborhood they are in.
They allowed it to be posted on the board after mod review but still am waiting for a answer. Also what are the gun laws in that state out of curiosity anyone know.

Where are the Missouri Oath Keeper's?
Don't know. Should they be reaching out or speaking up? Probably.

Missouri state law allows open carry but may be overridden. STL prohibits open carry.

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 03:52 PM
a reply to: LDragonFire

Why not just come out and say the obvious.

It's no secret the people being oppressed are black people so the response from some is very muted.
They have ALWAYS been at the vanguard of the oppression and tyranny of America.

If this was a white kid killed and they were doing the same you would have a far different response from the people who came out for the Bundy types and the gun people who are pretty quiet now
And people wonder why Black people are left wing liberal politically.

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 03:54 PM

originally posted by: blupblup
It's because it's not some old white guy on his ranch.
That's why they're not there.

Hopefully there are enough decent people actually willing to go there and do what the "Gun Owners" always talk about doing... standing up to the Gov/Police who are acting illegally.

Hmmm....there are plenty of law abiding gun wielding people who are standing up and taking things into their own protecting their businesses against the looters. I have yet to see a cop with a wide screen TV in his arms in this case.

And please, how are they acting illegally? I'm not defending them, I'm just asking.

Is it because you are not there and it is only your opinion? Letting your emotions get the better of you? Hmmm?

By looking at past peoples hate of police, Ferguson should be quiet and peaceful, because according to many here, all LEOs are Eeeevvvvvillll!, and by that standard, all the protesters would be dead...wouldn't they?

Just asking.

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 04:17 PM
I'm sorry, but am I the only one to see the irony here? The same people that normally call militias crazy conservative white racists with guns and a myriad of other names now want those same people to swoop in and save the day? My question is why should they even consider it after being labelled as such largely by the people now calling for their aid?
Sorry, but the world just doesn't work that way.

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 04:20 PM
a reply to: SpaDe_

The same people that normally call militias crazy conservative white racists with guns and a myriad of other names now want those same people to swoop in and save the day?

This is how they call out people so they then can call them racists.

It's a trap

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 04:23 PM
a reply to: SpaDe_

Nope your not, I said something similar earlier.

All a ruse and I think they really couldn't care less what happens.

Manufactured outrage is all it is.

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 04:25 PM
I guess when people of color stand up for what they believe in , its civil disobedience, ignorance, a bunch of monkeys and thugs but when whites do it they are patriotic, proud to be american, heros. Im very bother by the amount of white folks using this incident as a step towards their "racial war" I will tell you this concept is all in the white mans head. When blacks speak of it , it refers to defense and now that I see americas true colors I have lost hope that we will unite against the real tyrannt and enemy of the american family. Blacks are in the position they are in for the same reason whites are in theirs.
edit on 08pm48America/Chicago3127k by magnetik because: spelling

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 04:38 PM
How does a militia show up to an event like this and defend looting and setting business's on fire, how are these people being oppressed, it would seem they were allowed to loot what ever they wanted the first night.

By showing up you look just as guilty as the people committing these crimes.

Comparing this to the event in Nevada with a rancher is at best race baiting.

People want help from oppression they have to stop acting crazier then the people that are supposed be oppressing them.

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 04:45 PM
a reply to: LDragonFire

From what I remember of the Bundy Ranch incident, he was in the middle of nowhere with only his family to protect him, he had advanced warning they were coming, and he put out the word that he wanted help if anyone could give it.

Did anyone ask the militias to come help them before they decided to riot, then protest in Ferguson? Did any of the protestors protest the riots that affected people who had nothing to do with the police?

It's one thing to show up in advance to protect a guy that the Bureau of Land Management is harrassing with Hueys and tanks in the middle of Nevada scrubland, and quite another to expect them to show up in the middle of a crapstorm in a city, where they're the "cracker minority" as it is, and "restore order."

Aside from that, the area is a liberal cesspool with liberal politicians and liberal voters who fight tooth and nail every year to take away gun rights from law abiding citizens. Maybe that has something to do with it too. Aside from that, the reliable and law abiding Black Panthers showed up, and Holder has their backs, so there's your militia, unless you expect the militias and the Black Panthers to sing Kumbaya as they hold hands in a show of solidarity against the hated police.

Asking the militia to show up in Ferguson, and being "irate" that they haven't, is like expecting the Black Panthers to show up in whitebread USA and restore "order" if something was happening there, as if they would be taken seriously by the locals. lol.

Get a damn grip people, and stop trying to force your racial crowbar into every issue you can think of. It isn't playing well anymore, and is a losing card because most aren't afraid to call your bluff anymore, and a bluff is all it is.

I'm sure all the people in Ferguson are expecting the white militias to ride in and save the day real soon, and would welcome gun toting civvy dressed rednecks with open arms!

There are plenty of guns/ammo in Ferguson, and plenty of PEOPLE in the area too, unlike Bundy ranch where the safety in numbers wasn't going to happen until they arrived. You want people who don't live there to move in and take over in a CITY when there are plenty of people ALREADY there who should be able to find the guts to stand up if they truly believe in their cause? Why should the militias show up? Because the locals are brave enough to riot and steal, but not brave enough to stand up to cops who try to prevent peaceful protests?

Maybe the Bundy "cause" was much less blurry than this? It was a rancher who didn't pay his grazing fees, because the BLM refused to MANAGE the land that his fees were supposed to pay for, so he said "up yours" to the blm and many agreed with his stance, and since he was all alone out there, they went to help him and his family. I know the people who showed up to help Bundy didn't start off by tearing his ranch apart, it was the govt that did that and killed his animals.

Seems to me the corrupt cops and the rioters deserve each other down there. That innocent people get broadbrushed in with the bad is unfortunate, but it's all a matter of perception, and the perception is that when people riot, they have no respect for themselves or anyone else, and if the locals have to count on outside militias to come in and stand between the out of control cops and the out of control rioters to protect peaceful protesters, then maybe the protestors don't believe in their "cause" too much to begin with, as it is they who should be taking that role as the buffer between the rioters and the cops. There are plenty of people already there to stand up to an oppressive government and idiot looters. Why the hell do you think loads of white people should be brought in to solve the problem, when supposedly, according to Jesse and Rev AL, whitey is the cause of all the problems to begin with anyway?

What a caricature of logic the left is.

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 04:49 PM
a reply to: magnetik

I would have to say it's all in your head. Others can see it for what it really is.

Criminal activity. Nothing more, nothing less.

I just saw on the news that even the community of Ferguson is recognizing that the few are making the rest look bad.

Peaceful protests I love, burning and looting, not so much.

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 05:06 PM
The militias are not going to join in because they can't see the commonalities with is going on in Fergeson. The most favored tactic of the elites throughout history (besides bread and circuses, fear, terror, exaggerating outside threats, threat of violence) has been divide and conquer.

The shape that takes in this country is how any group can be co-opted. Just imagine if Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party had realized they have more in common than they differ instead of getting hung up on cosmetic, style or ad hominem issues (i.e. Tea Party people are just old cranky racist white people or OWS people are just lazy hippies who crap in public parks) -- if they figured out that the real problem isn't "Big Government" or "Big Business" but "BIG". (Anything big, "big religion" is too corrupt).

The American people have been conditioned well not to take up for groups that are not like them or even fight against their own interests. Its not just a modern thing, either. Poor whites in the South took up arms and died by the hundreds of thousands for a slavery system that ultimately kept them poor by driving wages down. Its a shame that the poor whites didn't rise up against the plantation owners to eliminate slavery and then demand that EVERYONE gets fair wages.
edit on 14-8-2014 by rangerone314 because: better thought out

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 05:09 PM
a reply to: LDragonFire
Kind of hard to defend the actions we saw the first few nights there. Who would want to?

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 05:21 PM

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: TDawgRex
a reply to: Sremmos80

As long as the peaceful yet silent protesters do nothing to stop the violence, then yes, I lump them together. They may be to scared to interfere, but that is no excuse.

We see this all the time.

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

And since the peaceful protesters are not doing anything to stop the bad apples, they are guilty by association. Plain and simple.

So You're taking the side of the police. Meaning? a. it's okay to murder an unarmed kid as long as you have a badge. B. Protesting should be illegal. c. you don't believe in the constitution. d. It's never okay to film cops and report their illegal activities.

Got it.

Already tried and convicted the officer then!

So I can now discount all of your posts as heavily biased and therefore irrelevant to the discussion.

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 05:22 PM
a reply to: Sremmos80

Solidarity is about as useful as an internet hug.

I shall now go sing a chat, march in a circle, in a figurative manner.......all virtually of solidarity with those in Ferguson...

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 05:24 PM
We are not criminals. We are not looters. We do not deserve to be shot at with tear gas and rubber bullets while standing in our own yards.
Last night police fired their grenades and rubber bullets into houses.

The night of the shooting SOME people started to loot and riot. Most of those arrested weren't even from Ferguson.
We, the protesters, did not support that. Many of us tried to stop it.
The people instigating are actually very very few, and we try to stop them. Many of us including me have suffered at the hands of the police(I don't even have a criminal record).

I call the militias cowards. I also use it to describe those who scream they would never stand for oppression, who laugh and say they'd never let the government get that far, but are unwilling to even give a word of support to the protesters of Ferguson, or even to the journalists having their rights trampled.

I and dozens upon dozens of others have stood peacefully in front of the police, in our streets, our side walks, even our yards. And they open fire.

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 05:40 PM
I keep reading the phrase "one or two bad apples" and I find it quite confusing.

I didn't see the live feeds so can only go on the comments here that refer to looting, rioting and arson. Where I come from, one or two individuals breaking into a property is called burglary, it takes a damn site more than that to start being referred to as a riot.

I would say that when a large group of people get together, the majority of them would need to be actively participating in the activities described to be classified as a riot. Further more, I would suggest that if the situation got to the point of becoming ariot, those who truly were wishing to protest peacefully, and unable to quell the rioters, would happily remove themselves from the area in which rioting was occurring.

So can someone please clarify for me, was rioting occurring, therefore justifying a heavy response by the police that the militia would deem appropriate and not requiring any attendance, or have peacefully protestors had there constitution all rights trampled?

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 05:51 PM
On Saturday night there WAS a riot. A quick trip was looted and burned to the ground, and some other businesses were looted also.
A vast majority of those arrested for that were not even from Ferguson. They were thugs taking an advantage of a terrible situation.

The following nights have been almost entirely peaceful. A very few people HAVE lashed out, but only AFTER being gassed and shot. And many of us worked to stop them.

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 05:51 PM
Was this too much to ask for?

new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in