While I agree that yesterday’s operation on behalf of public lands, law and order, and the American people, seemed to go very well indeed… she’s engaged in a lot of speculation there, that this was all planned this way all along, on the fed side.
That was my reaction. Sure, it could have all been part of a master plan from Day 1. But I can also easily see it as “gee, our plan to just wait them out isn’t working, and local and state officials are complaining loudly. Maybe we should try something else.”
There certainly were a lot of people asking for something to be done, or wondering why nothing much was. If “liberals” now includes all of those people… well then the “conservative” brand has become a very small tent indeed.
Whack-a-doodle Mike Savage was appalled at the “execution” of one of the Bundy criminals, and whined a bit about the Waco Whackos getting killed because of their own actions. Predictable. The loonies will idolize this cretin.
It sure seems a few LEO’s, from whatever agency, together decided “Enough of this shit, time to get these clowns”. I don’t see much evidence of a broader strategy decision.
St. Peter: “Welcome to your ultimate reward, Mr. Finicum,”
:: opens door to 72 Minecraft players with halitosis, arguing which DC universe is canon…::
No, but there was a “Why don’t they do something already?!” cry – which you’ll see echoed in many posts in this thread.
Somehow, I don’t see the Tarp of Malheur becoming as big a deal as the Shroud of Turin.
And most of that cry was for exactly what the feds eventually did - stop the free transit of people on and off the refuge, and arrest them when they leave. Very few were advocating for “trying to raid the wildlife refuge” or “give the militia the shootout at the refuge they wanted,” which is the strawman that Marcotte used.
Agreed. I can’t recall hearing anyone, not even a liberal, saying the feds should’ve gone in guns-a-blazin’. What I heard, and agreed with, was that the power and water should’ve been cut off immediately, and arrest those assholes when they try to leave.
Silly liberals, expecting the government to try to punish terrorists; typical nanny state bullshit.
It may not have been the genius master plan all along, but I’d bet it was at least one of their plans. They probably had a bunch of other plans too, this one just evolved to be the best one.
I saw a lot of debating back and forth.
One, admittedly really trivial, thing that keeps bugging me is: How the hell does someone get a nickname like “LaVoy”? I mean, I can kind of see someone’s parents naming them that. But how did Robert become LaVoy? Anyone know?
They had the three most obvious ringleaders of the group (both of the Bundy brothers and the “I’ll die before I surrender” guy) all tooling along a highway far from their sanctuary. Were I the government, I’d also seize the moment.
The one original guy that’s left, the one that’s hoping for a peaceful solution? He needs to put his guns down and walk out. How’s that for a peaceful solution?
What we all have missed is the real reason the Feds shot Finicum. I mean, it should be obvious. He was their double-agent mole inside the compound, secretly feeding them the crucial bits of information they needed to accomplish this very fortuitous-looking capture. And so they had to silence him with lead, lest he blab.
Seems to me the Feds have fucked this up royally. Their idea probably had some merit and chance it would work, but it was risky and they lost. They killed one of the dumbasses who is now predictably a martyr.
If they had arrested everyone without incident, then it would have been an excellent result: a bunch of tough talking clowns get taken down like babies by the Feds and end up in jail, sad, sorry and pathetic. Hard to build a legend out of that.
But the death means that this incident will become a rallying point; *the day some peaceful constitooshunal heroes in their trucks, just exercisin’ their freedom, were surrounded by cowardly Feds and met with a hail of bullets, takin’ down a True Patriot who wasn’t even shootin’ back. *
They’ll be singing songs about him shortly if they aren’t already.
No, you missed the bit about “furtherance” I think. A death caused by an LEO trying to stop a felony is not a death "in furtherance’ of the felony.
Terrorists? I’m struggling with this term. If the word has any distinctive meaning left whatever - and perhaps it doesn’t - surely it has to mean a person who uses severe violence or immediate threats of severe actual violence against people, to achieve a political end. These fuckwits just occupied a building that didn’t belong to them and talked tough.
I’m not saying they aren’t criminals or assholes or dumbasses, all of which they clearly are, but “terrorists”?
Only if the term no longer means anything at all other than “bad guys”.
According to NBC news a few weeks ago:
I’m confused as to why it matters that the wingnuts view him as a martyr. I don’t. The vast majority of Americans don’t. The dumbasses do. So what?
I doubt it. Oh sure, maybe there’s 12 people in all of the US who will do this, but most of people prolly think “oh that guy who said he would not, under any circumstances, be arrested because he would rather die got shot to death; I guess he got what he wanted”.
So you missed all the times they threatened violence if anyone tried to remove them from the Refuge? Or they don’t count, for some reason? And you missed their political goals? Or they also don’t count for some reason? :dubious: :rolleyes: