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.

 

The Citizens For Constitutional Freedom (OR standoff) Never Made Any Actual Verbal Threats

page: 3
22
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 08:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: tweetie
a reply to: Gryphon66

That pretty much spells out the original plan and that's why so many people who could understand their cause could not support their plan.

I repeatedly came across the statement that someone gave them the keys to the refuge. Did anyone ever find out who it was?


Where did you come across that statement? Everything I've read (including in the right-wingosphere) has stated that they broke in to administration buildings while the Refuge was closed for the New Year's holiday.




posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 08:14 PM
link   
a reply to: TheBadCabbie

Ammon Bundy (1:02): "We're the point of the spear that's going to bring confidence and strength to rest of the the people ..."

Bundy (1:23): "We're asking people to come ... bring your arms."

Dipstick in Camo (1:30): "Yeah, like Ammon said, bring your arms."

I'll look more later for video quotes of the many times they talk about "defending" themselves against law enforcement; I'm chock to the gills with wingnut craziness ATM.



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 08:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Give me some time. I'll see if I can trace where it originated.



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 08:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66



Where did you come across that statement? Everything I've read (including in the right-wingosphere) has stated that they broke in to administration buildings while the Refuge was closed for the New Year's holiday.

I've heard that they "found" the keys. Not really relevant, in any case:

breaking and entering

n. 1) the criminal act of entering a residence or other enclosed property through the slightest amount of force (even pushing open a door), without authorization. If there is intent to commit a crime, this is burglary. If there is no such intent, the breaking and entering alone is probably at least illegal trespass, which is a misdemeanor crime. 2) the criminal charge for the above.
dictionary.law.com...

A conspiracy to commit even a misdemeanor is a felony. But, I don't think they've been charge with BnE. Yet.



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Fair enough, Tweetie. I just wondered if there was a conspiracy charge on the way for one of the Refuge employees who were sympathizing with the Bundy Gang ...

Excellent point Phage. It doesn't really matter if they "broke" in ... what matters is unauthorized entry and subsequent occupation, burglary, vandalizing, etc.



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

...None of which are actual, direct, verbal threats. If you take his point of the spear comment in context, he doesn't even go threatening with it. None of the other comments end up being actual threats, either. I did actually watch the whole video, you know.



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 09:02 PM
link   
C'mon guys, do we really have to write another forty pager just to get the video that someone could have posted on page one? I guess, whatever, more flags, more stars, yay...



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 09:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheBadCabbie
a reply to: Gryphon66

...None of which are actual, direct, verbal threats. If you take his point of the spear comment in context, he doesn't even go threatening with it. None of the other comments end up being actual threats, either. I did actually watch the whole video, you know.


... and the calls to arms to support the illegal occupation?



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 10:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Quit being silly, you know what I'm talking about. Actual, verbal, unveiled threats. The kind of threats that would justify a headline like this rawstory piece:
Oregon militants keeping women and children around at standoff despite threats to kill or be killed
There is no direct quote or video evidence mentioned in the article of these guys saying any such thing.

This whole 'kill or be killed' theme seems to be a popular one, though:
Oregon Militants Vow To 'Kill And Be Killed If Necessary,' But FBI Isn't Biting

BURNS, Ore. -- The gunmen who have occupied a federal building here for three days will resist with force any attempt to remove them, Ammon Bundy, a leader of the militants, said Sunday. But federal authorities have no immediate plans to rush in to retake the remote building, a federal law enforcement source told The Huffington Post.

There's a link in this first paragraph of the article, on the word Sunday. It leads to an OPB article and audio clip where nothing threatening is said by the occupiers. If I've somehow missed where the text given in the article is said in the linked clip or article, please correct me. It damn sure doesn't say anything like 'kill or be killed' though, I can tell you that. Yet that is what the headline reads.

How about this one?
Militia Leader Threatens 2nd Civil War In Oregon Standoff
Anyone reading this headline who didn't read the article would naturally assume that the threat stated in the headline was made by the occupiers, though the article is actually about Rhodes' commentary on the standoff. A little misleading, wouldn't you say?

Actual overt threats that were made by the occupiers are what I'm looking for here, as I've reiterated many times to you during this thread. If you can't provide that, it's cool; but please stop asking me over and over for clarification of what I have clearly explained to you repeatedly.



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 10:34 PM
link   
a reply to: TheBadCabbie

Actually I do NOT know what you're talking about. And you've never done anything to clarify what you're looking for. You keep repeating "actual threat" and more than one has been provided to you ... AND YOU'VE PROVIDED THEM YOURSELF!

Now, you can get testy and tell me to "get out of your thread" too ... but that will look as silly as it did the other time you did it.

Not to put too fine an edge on it, it seems that no matter how many examples of obvious threats are provided, you're still only looking for a homemade patriot video of one of the Gang members saying exactly what YOU WILL DEFINE as "a threat."

You're right. I don't have something that will satisfy that ridiculous request. I only have obvious and actual facts.



posted on Feb, 14 2016 @ 12:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Okay then. I guess I'll just keep looking to fulfill my ridiculous notion of finding actual verbal threats.



posted on Feb, 14 2016 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Fair enough, Tweetie. I just wondered if there was a conspiracy charge on the way for one of the Refuge employees who were sympathizing with the Bundy Gang ...

Excellent point Phage. It doesn't really matter if they "broke" in ... what matters is unauthorized entry and subsequent occupation, burglary, vandalizing, etc.


I'm not able to source what I was looking for so I'll have to take a rain check for now unless I happen across what I was looking for at a later date, which often happens. I, too, as Phage commented, previously read the refuge was unlocked and the keys to everything were in plain sight. I read last night that the man (caretaker) who lives there left right before the occupiers showed up. I don't know if he was forewarned or not or just happened to go somewhere.

It's not a big deal.



posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 05:36 PM
link   
Here's what I've been able to find so far then. Hehe. I actually found it a few days ago and just held off to see if anyone else would beat me to it.


Live video

This contains some stronger, more threatening language. It's dated Jan. 27th, though. A couple days after the Bundys were arrested and Finicum had been shot to death. I'll probably transcribe a little of it later.

Weak supporting evidence by the standards of my OP, then. Dismissible, really. While it does contain the obviously threatening language I was looking for, it was clearly made after the 'enforcement action' that happened well into the occupation.

It doesn't support the wording of early headlines portraying these people as just 'out for blood', or making actual verbal threats. It doesn't refute my OP argument that the original leaders of this protest never made any actual verbal threats.



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 08:42 PM
link   
I came across the linked article at The Oregonian this afternoon. Maybe you saw it before? "No threats," said Sheriff Ward, but the claim was intimidation. It was still early in the occupation when the article was posted. It was posted on January 11th but was updated today. There were non-mainstream reports of undercover agents pretending to be militia who actually were harassing people.

I wanted to include it because I often happen upon info I wasn't looking for but which relates back to something which was being discussed at an earlier time.

Link




edit on 22-2-2016 by tweetie because: added info



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 10:55 PM
link   
a reply to: tweetie

Right, the stories of government employees being harassed, the culprits of such who were later claimed to have been undercover agents.

Here again though, we have militia types strongly disavowing anything of the sort:

One of the network's founders bristled at the idea that his organization could be responsible for harassing law enforcement.

"That's not anything we tolerate and its not anything that we're doing," Joseph Rice said.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife employees have told the Sheriff that they've been approached by self-styled militia members while grocery shopping or running errands with their families. The militia members would "engage employees and family members in debates about their status as Federal employees," Sheriff Ward said.

"The people on the refuge – and those who they have called to our community – obviously have no consideration for the wishes or needs of the people of Harney County," Sheriff Ward said. "If they did, they, too, would work to bring this situation to a peaceful close."

While it's unclear which groups or individuals Ward is referring to, Rice said he has had an open and friendly dialogue with law enforcement. And if he was to discover one a Pacific Patriot Network member doing that, he or she would be barred from any future activities involving the organization, Rice said.

"Unequivocally, it's not our people," he said.



posted on Feb, 23 2016 @ 10:57 PM
link   
Certainly no local reports of violence, robbery, assault, rape, or anything like that that could be attributed to any of these people that I've seen. If there had been, I'm pretty sure we would have heard something about it.

The big, bad, militia types...who didn't hurt anybody...who didn't threaten anybody...who though armed, were apparently completely peaceful. Sure, you can't just run up, pepper spray em in the face, zip tie em, and haul em off like your average peaceful protester, because they might shoot you if you tried. Still peaceful, nonetheless.

If we're trying to view this issue with clarity then this is what I'm seeing so far. Early articles say something about threats being issued in an early phone interview that I can't find, maybe there's something there. Also the megkel interview where she gets all muley with Ammon there seems to be some reference to Ryan having said something he shouldn't have, so perhaps there's something there I've yet to find. If there were an initial indiscretion or two, the group seems to have cleaned up their act pretty quickly. There doesn't really appear to have been any major trash talking, as some headlines would suggest.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 01:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: DuckforcoveR
The glaring memory I have is of Fincum going ballistic about the government spying on us with power grid cameras...that did it. I was done. I mean, he was absolutely BALLISTIC about "FBI" cameras that turned out to be just monitoring the power grids. I mean, the IQ on display in that YT video was enough for me.

For the record, it's a damn travesty (as I've said before) that any "anti government" person from here on out has to answer the "so you're like the Oregon folk?" question. And the cherry on top is the "I just wanted my MJ & UFO truth" guy from yesterday....



compartmentalizing people is not that hard isn't it.



posted on Apr, 1 2016 @ 07:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: DuckforcoveR
The glaring memory I have is of Fincum going ballistic about the government spying on us with power grid cameras...that did it. I was done. I mean, he was absolutely BALLISTIC about "FBI" cameras that turned out to be just monitoring the power grids. I mean, the IQ on display in that YT video was enough for me.

For the record, it's a damn travesty (as I've said before) that any "anti government" person from here on out has to answer the "so you're like the Oregon folk?" question. And the cherry on top is the "I just wanted my MJ & UFO truth" guy from yesterday....


But, DuckforcoveR, there's no ballisticness in that video that you linked. They're just taking the cameras down and saying stuff like "Well gosh, those sure were some cameras up there". I'm confused about what you meant about this huge antigov rant in there. I watched the video you referenced and I saw nothing of the sort.



posted on Mar, 5 2017 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Thought I should reply to this thread to update and add that seven of the prime defendants from the MNWR standoff have been acquitted as of October 2016.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join