What's the difference between Black Lives Matter and the Oregon militia?

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Last I check the Oregon occupation was costing state and federal tax payers over 300k combined and climbs as they continue their fruitless protest.

originally posted by: Sillyosaurus
a reply to: centarix

Edit: I consider the fact they did in fact light fires in federal property the reason it was a bad excuse for a protest. They may have saved thier property but they broke the law. That is the point of civil disobedience at that. An act is good but illegal. Therefore if one does that aforementioned good but is caught he goes to jail and serves time to let everyone know he did good and is punished. Maybe laws need to change. But I'm drifting off track.

Nobody should go to jail for $100 in damages for more than 1 single day. Citation: Common Sense. Anything more than 1 day over $100 in damages is itself a crime worthy of imprisonment. The original judge should go to jail for assigning more than 1 day, and the even worse judge in the double jeopardy case after being tried twice for the same crime should also go to prison.

If you are correct and he plead guilty, then clearly it wasn't being done as a protest. Anyone who pleads guilty, IS guilty in my opinion. I take everyone at their word. Don't say guilty if you didn't do anything wrong, because I'm going to take your own word for it if you say you're guilty. Its morally wrong to plead guilty if you aren't guilty!

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Last I check the Oregon occupation was costing state and federal tax payers over 300k combined and climbs as they continue their fruitless protest.

That is their fault for spending money they don't need to. The Hammonds or whoever are running the wildlife refuge, which should SAVE the government money. So its on them for spending the 300k. Spending other people's money is done funly, and without any concerns. They'll print more and spend more. Not a problem for them. Just a problem for the victims who screwed them selves by voting for people willing to piss away hundreds of thousands of dollars on something that requires $10,000 in mediation and $10,000 in arbitration.

You're government in Oregon has spent $280,000 over par on a fancy ego trip.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Name the BLM protest that has shut down anything, any town anywhere for over a month?

Actually don't bother ... there haven't been any.

Despite the personal anecdotes, assumptions and disjointed metaphors ... the facts remain clear.

(Along with the attempt to minimize what these Bundy Occupiers did and the effect they had into non-existence.)

I think the point is made. Thanks for your input!

No, you assume that some point has been made by your snarky comment, but it has not.

BLM has done plenty to either "shut things down" (the town of Burns was not "shut down") or make living in certain places (Ferguson and St. Louis, for examples, or Baltimore) a living hell for locals of the area. Like I keep reiterating, thinking it'll get through to people (but it hasn't to you, apparently), I don't condone the tactics of either group, but as far as disrupting communities, BLM has a much worse tract record than these Oregon protestors.

In Burns, Oregon, show me the looted businesses owned by innocent civilians who did nothing to the protestors. Show me the burned vehicles on the streets, or the burned businesses. Show me the rocks and Molotov cocktails hurled at LEOs who are just there trying to keep the peace. Show me the cops shot while sitting in their vehicles because of the rhetoric created by the militia. Show me the individual LEOs dragged through the mud, whose lives were ruined, because of accusations hurled by these militia members.

See, I can maintain the stance that both the BLM tactics that resulted in the mentioned lawlessness and violence and the militia in Oregon are both wrong, and I can do so intelligently. But what one can't do intelligently is pretend that the negative impact that both groups have had on the local communities in which they've caused problems is even remotely on the same level of lawlessness.

So, yes, the facts do remain clear, you are just choosing to only look at one side of the facts in order to dismiss BLM--at least, that's the only deduction that can be made by your comment.

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Last I check the Oregon occupation was costing state and federal tax payers over 300k combined and climbs as they continue their fruitless protest.

Care to balance out that comment with (a) a link to that information, and (b) a cumulative total that the destruction and riots fueled by BLM has cost all of the taxpayers in those locations over the years? Don't forget to include the cost to insurance companies for the destruction to private and public property...that affects the individuals, too.

If we're going to start asserting concern about the cost to taxpayers and the local communities, let's do it fairly, shall we?

And also, I would argue that much of what the state and federal authorities have done in response to this militia has been overkill, so just because they may have spent that much because of these guys doesn't mean that all of the expenditures were necessary. But then again, the way LEOs write the bill for exercises like this is suspect anyhow--it's not like they had to run out and hire all new teams of people to handle this situation...this is why they were already on the payroll.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

No snark intended. Just facts. You notice I didn't add any personal commentary, stories from my own experience that reminded me of the topic, gross equivalences and generalities and hope that those would be considered as actual evidence ... and while I pointed at those in your comment, I didn't rail on you for it it. I'm sorry that you seem to have gotten your feelings hurt, that was not my intention.

But, you're still doing the same thing in this post, so I guess I need to be a bit more direct. Further, you seem to think that logical opposition to your opinions somehow indicates that I don't understand ... I do, I just don't agree, and I've been very clear as to the factual basis of why.

Let me try to get through to you ...

It is only your opinion that BLM has made life "a living hell" for residents of Ferguson, St. Louis and Baltimore (not to mention rather silly exaggeration). Do you live in any of those cities? "A living hell"? Really? That doesn't seem over the top for you?

No, you didn't just compare the two groups objectively ... you reduced a month long occupation in Oregon ... which has totally disrupted a town, the facility itself, et. al. to a suggestion that "folks could just telework" ... you made it sound like they're getting a little vacation from work or something ... rather than acknowledge that the Bundy Gang has staged an armed takeover of a Federal facility, has completely stopped operation, has threatened any employees who tried to come to work, every day, for well over a month!

Should the kids just "teleclass" as well? How about the ones who can't sleep because they're frightened of the strangers carrying weapons through the streets?

Can you name one BLM protest that even INVOLVED the group marching around, setting up security checkpoints, keeping people from going about their lives ... all via the open display of firearms? Come on! I can't even IMAGINE the outrage that would have generated.

BLM did all the looting in Ferguson? Do you have proof? Or are you just throwing more blatant exaggeration at the wall and hoping it sticks?

Be specific if you want to be taken seriously ... you say you're stating facts, do so. Give us instances, reports, etc.

Show us the businesses that BLM have burned.

Show us the cops shot by BLM in their vehicles.

Show us policemen drug through the mud, with ruined lives by BLM members.

Further you aren't and don't feel that the two groups are similar and saying so, in my opinion, is the exact issue this thread is pointing to.

In your presentation, Bundy's group of good ol boy patriots really hasn't done anything wrong ... why they're really just giving the folks in Harney County a little break ... while on the other hand BLM is responsible for every riot, every looting, every fire ... and yet you provide NO ACTUAL EXAMPLES.

You're certainly free to express your opinion all day long.

Doesn't make it fact, however, and really, you're just proving the point of the OP with every post you make.

In my opinion.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: SlapMonkey

I'm sorry that you seem to have gotten your feelings hurt, that was not my intention.

Ha...no feelings hurt, I was just pointing out the inferred tone of your comment. If that was not the intention, so be it, although I fail to see the truth behind your accusations that I'm basing things on personal opinion. So, let's address that, shall we?...

It is only your opinion that BLM has made life "a living hell" for residents of Ferguson, St. Louis and Baltimore (not to mention rather silly exaggeration). Do you live in any of those cities? "A living hell"? Really? That doesn't seem over the top for you?

Well, no, I don't live in either of those cities. But when I see interviews with the business owners of destroyed structures and residents who were afraid to even walk the streets during the weeks (in Ferguson, at least) where these riots and protests were going on, and they are all talking about how scared, sad, and disappointed that their lives have been disrupted and (for some) destroyed by the destruction, I can safely use those examples to form an "opinion" that BLM cause a living hell for some of the residents in those areas. Sure, the phrase "living hell" is subjective, but when your businesses are destroyed and you're afraid to walk your own neighborhood or drive through certain areas of your own town because of what's happening (not because of speculation about what MIGHT happen, like was happening in Burns), then I'll confidently call that a living hell.

I ran the St. Louis Tough Mudder last year and stayed two nights there in a hotel. I spoke with many of the people there about the riots happening in Ferguson, and every one of them said that it absolutely scares them enough to (a) avoid Ferguson, and (b) pray that it didn't make its way to St. Louis. I left the morning that the BLM folks had planned to march to the Arch and start protesting there. And no, I didn't just talk to white people.

Do you live in any of those towns? If not, what makes you think that you have a better understanding than I do?

No, you didn't just compare the two groups objectively ... you reduced a month long occupation in Oregon ... which has totally disrupted a town, the facility itself, et. al. to a suggestion that "folks could just telework" ... you made it sound like they're getting a little vacation from work or something ... rather than acknowledge that the Bundy Gang has staged an armed takeover of a Federal facility, has completely stopped operation, has threatened any employees who tried to come to work, every day, for well over a month!

35 days. "Well over a month!" (that's hyperbole)

Well, first off, I didn't suggest the telework option--that was mentioned as something that many were doing in lieu of going to work. It's an option that the federal government offers many of its employees, and trust me, it's much more of a little vacation that you seem to understand.

And if you're actually trying to be fair, I have stated multiple times on this thread and in others that I DO NOT AGREE WITH THE TACTICS THAT THE MILITIA IS USING. Is that in plain enough English for you, or do we need to continue this song and dance more so that you understand that I do not support what they are doing? Can you get that? Is it making sense now? Seriously, I need a direct answer to that, because if you pretend again during our discussion that I'm supporting them, you will lose any bit of credibility that you have remaining in this conversation.

What I have done is pointed out that the real-world effects of the militia's actions compared to the tenure of destruction and chaos (and LEO deaths) that the BLM movement has directly or indirectly caused is not balanced. At all. You can have a differing opinion if you want to, but the evidence doesn't support your claim out here in the real world.

Should the kids just "teleclass" as well? How about the ones who can't sleep because they're frightened of the strangers carrying weapons through the streets?

Now you're just being ignorant. One's right to openly carry firearms in a non-threatening manner is not trumped by other people's feelings. Oregon is an open-carry state, so unless that was breaking a law, quit using that strawman argument, as my entire discussion with you is about things that are done that was illegal by both groups, not things that appeal to emotion, like talking about people scared of those legally exercising their rights.

And the poor wittle school kids will be okay for missing a few weeks of cwass. It'll all get made up, and in the grand scheme of life, it won't affect their learning one bit, so rest easy on that strawman, also.

Can you name one BLM protest that even INVOLVED the group marching around, setting up security checkpoints, keeping people from going about their lives ... all via the open display of firearms? Come on! I can't even IMAGINE the outrage that would have generated.

BLM did all the looting in Ferguson? Do you have proof? Or are you just throwing more blatant exaggeration at the wall and hoping it sticks?

Now you're just getting belligerently ridiculous. For starters, if it's legal for them to do so at the time of protesting, I could care less if they're all armed. I'm armed nearly everyday, so that doesn't scare me nor does it make me think that, just because they are legally carrying firearms, that they're suddenly going to start mowing down the general public. See, I'm rational about things like that, so take those arguments to someone else. It's not my fault that other people in America are irrational with their outrage.

And about the belligerence I mentioned--I already grouped the rioting and destruction under the blanket of BLM or the rhetoric/message that they were trying to get out. So now trying to pigeon-hole me and pretend that I blamed it solely on the BLM members is disingenuous, and a tactic that isn't going to work on me. Reading comprehension--it's a real thing.

Be specific if you want to be taken seriously ... you say you're stating facts, do so. Give us instances, reports, etc.

Show us the businesses that BLM have burned.

Show us the cops shot by BLM in their vehicles.

Show us policemen drug through the mud, with ruined lives by BLM members.

See my comment directly above that quote. Figure it out.

In your presentation, Bundy's group of good ol boy patriots really hasn't done anything wrong ... why they're really just giving the folks in Harney County a little break ... while on the other hand BLM is responsible for every riot, every looting, every fire ... and yet you provide NO ACTUAL EXAMPLES.

Yeah, your reading comprehension truly is lacking, and I don't think that anything I can say at this point will make you understand what I'm actually saying, so I suppose that in the spirit of avoiding pointless activities in my life because there are more important things to do, you can respond if you want, but honestly, it won't matter, as I have zero faith that you understand what I'm writing anyhow.

Call these ad hominem attacks if you want, but you truly are misunderstanding what I'm saying. I can't fix that.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey

And the poor wittle school kids will be okay for missing a few weeks of cwass. It'll all get made up, and in the grand scheme of life, it won't affect their learning one bit, so rest easy on that strawman, also.

Yeah. You've made your point. Good job.

a reply to: Gryphon66

It figures that you only attach your reply to the inconsequential snarkiness (that was mimicking the sound of your whiny appeals to emotion and bringing light to the immaturity involved in saying, "What about the children?!") and avoid the main points.

Thank you for confirming my understanding that conversing with you on this topic is a lesson in futility. I truly was hoping that you would actually engage again and prove me wrong.

Color me disappointed, but not surprised.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: Gryphon66

It figures that you only attach your reply to the inconsequential snarkiness (that was mimicking the sound of your whiny appeals to emotion and bringing light to the immaturity involved in saying, "What about the children?!") and avoid the main points.

Thank you for confirming my understanding that conversing with you on this topic is a lesson in futility. I truly was hoping that you would actually engage again and prove me wrong.

Color me disappointed, but not surprised.

If you don't want to have your words quoted, don't type them. Surely you stand by them?

The more you type, the more you prove OP's point. I see that you're one of those who want to have "the last word" at least in their own mind.

You stated that the conversation was done, and that you had formed your opinion and now you come back, to repeat the same comments again.

You want to talk more about your estimation of me than about the topic. Best.

Supporters of the Skousenite Gun Club Boys (aka the Bundy Gang) are rabidly certain that the entire Federal government, every Federal agent and agency, are all corrupt, murderous dogs (along with, in this case, the Oregon State Police and the Harney County Sheriff's Department because ... well, just because) ... and the same people, regarding complaints made by Black Lives Matter that certain Urban Police Departments have acted in a a corrupt, murderous fashion ... are conversely utterly in support of the Authorities, and the Police beyond all measure, are the harshest "law and order" supporters (at least for the Black Lives Matter folks) endlessly screeching "Don't do the crime if you can't do the time" and insisting that a young man's fist can be a deadly weapon (from 30 feet away) threatening an adult, well-trained and armed officers life, while simultaneously claiming that a speeding truck (and at least one sidearm) at point blank range in the hands of a criminal and self-professed extremist are not ...

What's the biggest difference here?

I mean, is there some really obvious difference between these two groups that would inspire two completely different reactions?

I submit that it turns out that Chris Hitchens was absolutely correct in what he surmised over 4 years ago ...

Now, here is the difference. Glenn Beck has not even been encouraging his audiences to reread Robert Welch. No, he has been inciting them to read the work of W. Cleon Skousen, a man more insane and nasty than Welch and a figure so extreme that ultimately even the Birch-supporting leadership of the Mormon Church had to distance itself from him. It’s from Skousen’s demented screed The Five Thousand Year Leap (to a new edition of which Beck wrote a foreword, and which he shoved to the position of No. 1 on Amazon) that he takes all his fantasies about a divinely written Constitution, a conspiratorial secret government, and a future apocalypse. To give you a further idea of the man: Skousen’s posthumously published book on the “end times” and the coming day of rapture was charmingly called The Cleansing of America. A book of his with a less repulsive title, The Making of America, turned out to justify slavery and to refer to slave children as “pickaninnies.” And, writing at a time when the Mormon Church was under attack for denying full membership to black people, Skousen defended it from what he described as this “Communist” assault.

So, Beck’s “9/12 Project” is canalizing old racist and clerical toxic-waste material that a healthy society had mostly flushed out of its system more than a generation ago, and injecting it right back in again. Things that had hidden under stones are being dug up and re-released. And why? So as to teach us anew about the dangers of “spending and deficits”? It’s enough to make a cat laugh. No, a whole new audience has been created, including many impressionable young people, for ideas that are viciously anti-democratic and ahistorical. The full effect of this will be felt farther down the road, where we will need it even less.

Tea'd Off, Vanity Fair, December 2010

Black Student Groups Demanding Segregation, 'Safe Spaces'

There are 76 groups which have listed their demands for college administrators. Some of the demands are the same, and some of the demands differ, but all want some pretty unreasonable things.

While a few of the demands are somewhat reasonable, here are some of the more “original” demands:

Black Liberation Collective (Multiple Colleges)

WE DEMAND free tuition for Black and indigenous students.

Click to Tweet
Amherst College

President Martin must issue a statement of apology to students, alumni and former students, faculty, administration and staff who have been victims of several injustices including but not limited to our institutional legacy of white supremacy, colonialism, anti-black racism, anti-Latin@ racism, anti-Native American racism, anti-Native/ indigenous racism, anti-Asian racism, anti-Middle Eastern racism, heterosexism, cis-sexism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, ableism, mental health stigma, and classism. Also include that marginalized communities and their allies should feel safe at Amherst College.
Dartmouth College

Place all undocumented students in the domestic/U.S.A. applicant pool, not the international admissions pool. If not placed in the domestic pool, the admissions office shall release a statement explaining the processes taken in admissions for undocumented students.
Michigan University

We demand an opportunity to educate and be educated about America’s historical treatment and marginalization of groups of color through race/ethnicity requirements throughout all schools and colleges within the university.
UCLA

Rebranding the Afrikan Diaspora Floor with Residential Life. Black students lack spaces where they feel safe and comfortable. The Afrikan Diaspora floor is a way for us to connect more to other Black students, the Afrikan Student Union, and the Afro-Am department. The floor should be branded as a safe space for all Black students.
Basically, the demands are stating: pay for it, apologize, categorize people, tell people about how evil America is, and segregate.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. fought, non-violently, to end segregated portions of society and equality regardless of race.

Do these groups realize that some of the things they are demanding take society back 50 years and completely negate the changes Dr. King fought for?

a reply to: TheBulk

Wow ... compare that with

Oregon Domestic Terrorists Have 2 Lists Of Demands. One Includes Miracle Whip. The Other Is Insane.



BLM doesn't seem to be asking for that much ... the "Militia" though ... hoo boy!

a reply to: Gryphon66

Yeah just more racism and racial segregation!

originally posted by: TheBulk
a reply to: Gryphon66

Yeah just more racism and racial segregation!

Now now, just because all of the Bundy Gang was White, doesn't necessarily mean they were racist.

I mean, they are Skousenite Fundamentalists ... so I wouldn't be surprised, but ...