They are terrorist. I don't have much need for them...
This is gonna get interesting! Militia takes over Ore. federal building after protest.
- Thread starter Uncle Ben
- Start date
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
if they were muslims, you'd be ejaculating homicide by now.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
they did give up.
then they went back on their word.
then they gave up again.
then they went back on their word again.
rinse and repeat until your hero koresh got all the free airtime he wanted, and still didn;t give up.
so they gave the guy what he wanted: a fiery death.
the whole thing went swimmingly in my opinion. justice was served.
i just wish they had killed more of those terrorists.
Clearly that wasn't a siege but I'm not surprised that you think so.
desert dude
Well-Known Member
How about the siege at Ruby Ridge, are you a fan of that one too?
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I've read that in the original court finding, the burn they did was determined to have been beneficial to the environment.
The fire was never out of control, the people being sent back to jail put it out. Burn permits are stupid and boot licking, but I believe they did get one.
They should get a break because they didn't harm a real person or a real persons property. They are the victims, not the criminals.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Duuuuude....it's not like they shit on the floor or sumpthin' give 'em a break!
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
why are you crying about david koresh?
he was a fucking pedophile, just like your buddy rob roy. and possibly undertheice.
Good to know your opinions. Too bad the law thinks otherwise. And glad! People without training should not be doing burned controls. They have no understanding of fire science. Hence permits. Where I live they are free, they just want to make sure you do an actual controlled burn and not burn half the town down.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Their law says nobody here should burn cannabis. Sometimes laws that criminalize behaviors without any real victims should be ignored.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
that might have been in the bests interests of the children, since they were victims of david koresh's pedophilia.
do any of the victims of your pedophilia say they want to die? i'd bet they do.
Not sure why I'm in your quote here. I'm referring to the terrorists holed up in one of America's wildlife refuege. And yeah if people are terrorist I don't have much need for them..
You know this thread is about those hillbillies with guns holed up in a wildlife refuege. Not the reason they are there..
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Sorry, I had meant to quote everybody's favorite Uncle. He seemed to have forgotten children were murdered by the government.
I will leave you with this...
People that threaten others with physical violence in a non-defensive fashion can certainly be terrorists. Do you think those re-sentenced men that never harmed anybody are going to jail because they believe they hurt somebody or because they believe if they don't, "somebody", will hurt them? Peace.
Not surprised that you brought that up too. Was Benghazi a siege too? Somehow I bet you think so.
You are just a fucking contrarian and not much else.
desert dude
Well-Known Member
How about the siege in Philadelphia. Are you guys fans of that one too? It resulted in a fire that burned some kids to death, so it has the right ingredients to produce a throbbing, erection for you fans of nettlesome laws.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
STFU klanman
desert dude
Well-Known Member
For you fans of the "siege" at Waco, I would like to point out that some of those who survived the cleansing fire were charged with the murder of a federal police officer. They were acquitted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege
Mellodrama
Well-Known Member
I see now why there's been some confusion about burning. That's because the Hammonds were caught illegally burning more than once. I quote from Wikipedia:
Dwight and Steve Hammond were convicted of arson in 2012 for setting fires on federal land adjacent to their property near Burns in 2001 and 2006.[8] Federal prosecutors said the first fire was set to conceal the site of an illegal deer hunt, while the second fire was an unauthorized backburn set on the slopes below a firefighting camp.[9] According to the Hammonds, they set the first fire to stop invasive plants from growing onto their grazing fields.[10]
The second fire was an "unauthorized" backburn. So I'm guessing no permit.
They should get a break because they didn't harm a real person or a real person's property?? In other words, people should be free to do whatever stupid thing they want as long as nobody got hurt that time?
You should go test that theory out. Try driving 90 mph down the freeway on the wrong side. As long as nobody's hurt or killed before the Staters pull you over, no problemo. You can tell them, "Let me go. I'm the victim here!"
Wait, wait, before you try that out, you're white, right? I wouldn't want anything to happen...