Burns Oregon Refuge Takeover Ends In Blood

FBI Blocking Most Lines Of Communication, Militants Say
OPB

As in the news media? They want attention.

It's an armed standoff, so... Duh

That's been the goal all along. They are doing this to bring attention to how the Government abuses it's power over federal land management. Well at least that was the original message used to recruit people, not sure what it's turned into.

Again while I don't agree with their methods, I do understand the message and the reasoning behind it.

They definitely suck at getting the right message out. Dunno if that is entirely their fault with the way our media is.

They lacked any kind of central message besides "government bad". I honestly think at least some of them were hoping for another Ruby Ridge.

At least they speak truth..

I suspect a little from column A, and a little from column B.
Kind of like they expected to use the media one way, but from the things they were caught saying, and doing, it got turned around on them pretty quick. Then again, It's not just the media, but social media like Twitter and the people on it who can pick apart the ***, or simply spread lies.
Though if I am to be fair, some of the people picking apart the *** tend to spread lies, or expertly take things out of context to create a new context - which can easily be said to go both ways. People with an agenda are always trying to color other peoples opinions a different color, or twist it into 50 shades of something different.

They were given a lot of slack to get their message out, and they just didn't do it. The FBI was letting them go wherever they wanted, with the media, and the result was..the locals hated them and wanted them gone. That was the biggest story, the local ranchers wanted them to pack up their ***and go home. And they still haven't, and their message is dead.

The fact that the ranchers the whole thing is in support of told them not to come at all speaks volumes for their intent.

They wanted to be martyrs for a cause, these are the kind of people who dress up like minutemen and photoshop 12th man style photos of Washington Crossing the Delaware. There are proper procedures for seeking redress, this isn't one.

I think the only reason the FBI wasn't quick to label them domestic terrorists is because of Waco and how much anti-government sentiment is floating around.

From what I can find every militia group they asked told them that it wasn't the right message to get behind and they would be torn apart by the media. The message needs to be clear and the cause totally justified. Not one or the other.

That's because if they clearly stated their message, everybody would see they were full of it.

"I want this land to do whatever I want with, as if it was my own. Nobody else can use it, and I get access free of charge"

Minutemen you say?

Why, as it happens, I know someone who they could assist while, in turn, generating a large amount of public approval for their aid. An endless amount of approval, one might say, if they're willing to drop whatever they're doing and go help.

Meet my friend.

I've already shown those lies to be wrong not only in this thread but in 2 other separate threads now. Stop spreading false narratives and learn something on the subject you are talking about.

You do know that the Bureau of Land Management is not the National Park Service right? And that the Bureau of Land Management does sell logging rights, and mining rights of federal land to people right?

Also I find it particularly ironic that someone so worried about another dustbowl thinks that ranchers who do prescribed burns are arsonists. Bro do you even agriculture?

But what I really don't like about you is how you basically spread lies and ignorance. I tried to look for a source of the protesters saying they wanted the land for either logging or mining. I found this article where they are quoted as saying "restore the rights to people so they can use the land and resources" and then the author of the article tacks on "for ranching, logging, mining and recreation." So as far as I can tell they have never stated they wanted it for those reason, but that sure is the way the media and their opponents are willing to spin it.

Interestingly enough while searching for Oregon protesters logging I found this article about different protesters upset about the BLM selling logging rights. And just for fun here is another one about putting a strip mine next to a river. Mmm mmm, I love the taste of acid mine drainage in my water and salmon.

In regard to the foresting article, it appears that what they're doing is a new technique in lumber harvesting? I'm generally against clear cutting but if the land is responsibly managed, replanting is done, etc. it doesn't have to be a terrible thing.

It's when areas are clear cut and left barren to be washed out that it really becomes a problem. People can complain about logging all they want but if you're against oil and against lumber harvesting, there go your plastic chairs and your wooden chairs, I guess you're going to stand or sit on the ground your whole life.


As for the mining, still an ongoing issue it seems at least based on as much Googlefu as I'm willing to do right now.

Looks like they're going to have to fight pretty hard for it.

I don't see it going through.

Personally, much like logging, mining done responsibly and right is necessary to our economy and way of life.

It's people cutting corners that leads to unsafe conditions for both environment and workers alike. And sadly that's the go-to way to profit in the mining industry.

That's something I don't understand. We have all these clear cut forests already, why aren't we replanting them? It wouldn't even be that hard either. Those places are full of rednecks and they love planting ***. Just give them some saplings and they will do it for free. I know because I've been a part of something like that.

It was way back when I was in the boyscouts and global warming wasn't even a thing. We lined up in pairs, one with a shovel and one with a bag of pine saplings an we worked like an assembly line to replant a hillside with trees. I think people forget that as humans we can basically bend nature to our will however we want. If we want a forest in a place we can make it happen.

But yeah that one style of logging sounds pretty cool. Where they just cut down the smaller ones and leave the older ones to to seed new trees. Lot less work then cutting everything down then replanting it over and over.

Many places do replant. And strategic harvesting isn't new, I'm not sure what about this particular action is changing the way things are done as I didn't look too closely into it, but I know back home they used to reseed stuff all the time.

While it's not necessarily surprising if true, -- he certainly appears as someone who would fit right in -- I don't see what that has to do with my statements regarding responsible forestry practices.

A convoluted, near conspiracy-minded plot, though not outside the scope of believability.

The Kochs are a lot of horrible things, but "dumb" and "too overt" are not among them.

This is some poe's law ***. I can't tell if CJ is actually a crazy conspiracy theorist, or just playing one at this point.

I admit elements make sense and are believable to me, but that could be a result of my own confirmation bias.

Yeah but that article he just linked had absolutely nothing to do with the point he was making other then it mentions both of those groups of people. Such a waste of my time I can't believe I read that utter tripe.

If the trail is so easy to follow lead the way. I've already proven I'll read whatever ridiculous article you link to, even if it is just about some whiny wannabe journalist crying about being compared to monkey balls.

You realize that you're posts put you firmly in that camp only only the opposite spectrum right? Same thing different narrative and agenda.