By now, you've probably heard that a group of armed white militia-nuts have seized some government property in Oregon -- and they say they are willing to kill to keep it. They claim they did it to "defend" the Constitution. That's ridiculous. You don't defend the Constitution with an armed rebellion against it.
What they have done is to break federal law. They are traitors, and they have seized property that belongs to all citizens of this country. Most conspicuous is the complete absence of any kind of law enforcement officials. Some talking heads on TV have said the government doesn't want to provoke any violence. Evidently they think these nuts will just go away if they ignore them. I disagree. It will just encourage the right-wing extremists to do the same thing in other places.
When did ignoring lawbreakers become the optimum way to deal with criminals? Is it because they are right-wingers, white, and christian? Is this just another example of how some in our society have more privileges than other citizens have? It sure seems that way. Do you really think a group of armed muslims, or black activists, or immigrants (or any other minority group) would be ignored by law enforcement if they illegally seized a government facility and threatened to kill to defend it? Of course not -- and the public would be demanding action.
These men are criminals -- and traitors to their country. It is the job of law enforcement to deal with criminals and traitors. Law enforcement should surround that facility and starve the fools out. And when they do come out, they should be tried and given long prison sentences (and denied the right to own a firearm once they finish that sentence). And if any of them are stupid enough to actually shoot at law enforcement, they should be dealt with even more harshly.
That's my opinion. What do you think?
it would be wounded knee 2016. sorry, but this time, go in with tanks take 'em all and ship them off to gitmo where they can spend some time with their brothers at heart.
ReplyDeleteI doubt if we disagree in the slightest on our opinions of these fools, but as for handling them, your attitude gives them just what they want. They WANT publicity, they want 'persecution' and for some even martyrdom would be ace[table if it moved the country in their direction, And it's sorta typical of people that a serious, well-deserved attack (verbal, physical, legal, or military) creates s defense. Look at Waco, where a bunch of similar traitors no have their name honored because of the (justified, oh so justified) Clinton/Reno response.
ReplyDelete'
They want to be attacked, to be tried, to have their (totally non-existent) case argued back and forth on all the news channels.
'
"Leave them alone and they'll kill themselves by their own stupidity" can be a tricky path, and a dangerous one (See Trump, Donald) but if it includes a considerable amount of ridicule, it can work better than the confrontation they deserve but which they also want. I'm not sure if it is authentic or an Onion-type piece, but there is a piece in circulation about them begging for their supporters to sent them snacks See "Juanita Jean's" for the details, and this may be the first time I've cross-recommended. since I sent Susan (JJ) your piece on Sid Miller, one of her favorite targets.
'
But using the 'full force of the law' against them is like moving against the political preachers who publicly defy the law against endorsing candidates and beg the government to come and arrest them. They deserve it, but the cost is giving them what they want.
Apparently the people involved in this treasonous act have been able to come and go at will from the occupied building. WTF? Why isn't law enforcement arresting those leaving? They are criminals who have committed treason. They need to be locked up. The fact that there were no repercussions after the first Bundy standoff has only served to embolden these fools. Lock them away for as long as possible.
ReplyDelete