Contrasting Liberal Occupy vs. Conservative Occupy....

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
_ldsfaqs
_Emeritus
Posts: 7953
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 11:41 pm

Re: Contrasting Liberal Occupy vs. Conservative Occupy....

Post by _ldsfaqs »

The CCC wrote:They came armed to kill any one who tried to stop them. So not really a mistake, but of a deliberate action.


Since when was self defense immoral? You liberals are entirely willing to stand against police, throw rocks at them, do damage to property, etc. if they dare to arrest you? Isn't it also the "peoples" property? Since when did the government have rights? So, what right does the government have to use deadly force peaceful protesting? You wouldn't be fine if the FBI came to your protest and used force against you all and your leaders. Yet somehow you think it's fine for force to be used against conservatives simply because we are armed, willing to defend ourselves.

by the way, EAllusion lies as usual..... All costs involved were at least a Million dollars, not simply the damage done.
Further, stop lying, because it's not the first time..... Do you know the costs that resulted from Occupy Wallstreet? I rest my case.
"Socialism is Rape and Capitalism is consensual sex" - Ben Shapiro
_EAllusion
_Emeritus
Posts: 18519
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:39 pm

Re: Contrasting Liberal Occupy vs. Conservative Occupy....

Post by _EAllusion »

ldsfaqs wrote:And to the idiot who said the Wisconsin protests were all "legal"..... bull.
They took over the Capital Building, sleep in there, etc. for a couple of weeks, which was completely illegal. Capital Buildings are not "free rain" do what you want when you want. They close, all kinds of things. That situation was absolutely no different than the Oregan people. Both Occupied against the "rules" period.


I live in Madison. I lived in Madison in 2011. The Capitol building was always open to the public. It was only certain areas that had restricted access. That was part of Wisconsin's tradition of open government going back a century. You could be in the Capitol at night if you wanted to. People held protests there all the time. The only difference in this case was the sheer scale of the protest.

The Walker administration, as part of its general culture of closing down open government and as a means of preventing protests, created more restrictions on when people could be in the building, but this was not unlawful at the outset of the protest. The police issued specific statements on permission to do so, in fact. Simply look up local articles about it at the time or read a history of citations issued during the protest time.

One was bad law, and entitlement that liberals wanted to maintain, and the other was blaiming Wallstreet for what Liberal Lawmakers forced Wallstreet to do.


Yes, the "bad law" that allows people to freely negotiate with their employer in groups. But I thought being conservative was about wanting more freedom and being liberal was about wanting less. So why do you favor a law that limits people's freedom to negotiate with their employer collectively? Why can't I, as a free market participant, tell my employer that I will only agree to terms or not agree the same in tandem with my coworker Bill?

Oh well..... As I prove over and over again, liberals and liberalism is corruption, perversion, lying, and not based in Freedom.


What's the word for someone who uses "freedom" to describe the literal opposite of it?
_Blixa
_Emeritus
Posts: 8381
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 12:45 pm

Re: Contrasting Liberal Occupy vs. Conservative Occupy....

Post by _Blixa »

ldsfaqs wrote: There is no sign of them "damaging" the property or otherwise.


I posted this before, but it speaks to the issue of "property damage." From Indian Country Today, "Oregon Militia Nuts Hold Paiute History, Artifacts Hostage"

Some highlights:

"The tribe is demanding federal action under both the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 and a "protection against bad men” provision in the treaty the tribe signed with the United States in 1868."

-----

"Bundy supporters have damaged Native American archaeological sites before, most notably, when they drove ATVs through a canyon trail in Utah in protest of protected federal lands trampling the ruins of homes belonging to the ancient Puebloans. Also, the Southern Paiute tribes in Nevada have accused the Bundy family of defacing ancient Paiute petroglyphs in Gold Butte. Incidentally, Southern Paiute community members held a rally last week in Las Vegas in support of the Burns Paiute tribe.

“I understand they took a bulldozer and built a line around the refuge headquarters,” Roderique said. She notes that in the past when a water line was put in at the refuge the tribe’s cultural resources department oversaw the work done to make sure no artifacts or sites were disturbed. “We have a good working relationship with them."

-----

"Carla Burnside, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's archaeologist at the refuge, has told the tribe that she has seen pictures in news reports of militants sitting in her office, even at her desk with files open that contain sensitive information about archaeological sites belonging to the tribe.

This past week, the Burns Paiute tribal council passed a resolution to formally recognize Malheur Lake and its shoreline as “Sacred Places and Traditional Cultural Properties” of the tribe and cited the tribe’s own “Aboriginal Lands Protection Policy” which covers “the tribe's aboriginal territory beyond current Trust lands (Resolution 2006-12) which defines cultural resources as: ‘any material objects of human life or activities that are of cultural, historical, archaeological, sacred, spiritual, or traditional interest to the tribe. This shall include all remains, sites, objects, structures, artifacts, implements, plants, animals, and locations within the tribe's aboriginal territory.’”

-----

"Roderique told ICTMN that it is not only title to the land that matters to her but the plants and wildlife on the land some of which are going extinct. “We are the Wadatika people. The plants we are named after grow on the banks of the Harney and Malheur lake. If they put cattle in there [Bundy has called for the land to be returned to private ranchers] they will destroy these plants.”


And this article talks about the ignorant arrogance of LaVoy Finicum and others rifling through Native American artifact archives:

"The militiamen stationed at a federal wildlife refuge in eastern Oregon are now rummaging through artifacts and documents of the Paiute tribe, sparking outrage among local Native Americans whose ancestors originally occupied the land.

LaVoy Finicum, one of the leaders of the armed protesters occupying the Malheur national wildlife refuge, posted a video of himself inside a government building looking through cardboard boxes of papers and other items associated with the local tribe – and inviting Paiute leaders to meet with the militia and reclaim their belongings.

“We want to make sure these things are returned to their rightful owner,” said Finicum, who recently helped destroy a US Fish and Wildlife Service fence and remove cameras that he claimed the government was using for surveillance.
...

“I feel disrespected that they’re even out there,” said Jarvis Kennedy, the tribal council’s sergeant-at-arms. Kennedy said he was too upset to watch all of Finicum’s video. “It’s like me going through their drawers at their house.”

Tribe leaders and federal officials say the refuge stores confidential documents and thousands of historic artifacts, such as baskets, spears, tools and beads. The refuge is also home to Paiute burial grounds, making the militia’s recent decision to pave a road through the refuge particularly alarming.

“I could go to the Bundys where his grandparents are buried,” Kennedy said. “How would they feel if I drove over their grave and went through their heirlooms?”

In his video, Finicum said that he was showing how the wildlife refuge has done a poor job maintaining the artifacts and keeping storage rooms clean. “This needs to be taken care of, and so we’re reaching out to the Paiute people in the sincerest manner as we can,” he said on camera. “Let’s make sure that we take care of the heritage of the Native American people.”

Added militia member Blaine Cooper: “The rightful owners need to come back and claim their belongings.”

But Kennedy said the tribe has a good relationship with refuge officials and noted that the Paiute people refuse to communicate with militia leaders or visit the occupation.

“I’m not going to give them the satisfaction of meeting with them,” Charlotte Rodrique, chairwoman of the Burns Paiute tribe, told the Guardian last week.

Kennedy noted that the militiamen have had no trouble leaving and returning to the refuge and feared one of them might damage or steal their artifacts and documents. “All the stuff they are doing out there, it’s like a crime scene,” he said. “Once this is done, we’ll see what’s missing.”

There's also an interesting anecdote about the militia asking the Piautes for use of their facilities to hold a meeting after the county refused them access to public buildings in town (found in the first article I linked).

“They tried to ask us for our gathering center and our facility was booked up. We just kind of laughed and said they want to use our 'savage' facilities?”

Roderique was referencing a “Harney County Committee of Safety” website made by supporters of the takeover who profess to exist “to secure the property and lives of the association members from threats from the savages.”

Savages?

This is what it says on their website:

"Prior to the Revolutionary War, Committees of Safety existed in the frontier or wilderness areas where the government did not provide any troops or other protection against Indian attacks. The community got together and built stockades, enrolled militia, commissioned officers, and set watches, all to secure the property and lives of the association members from threats from the savages."

Yep. Native Americans referred to as savages. But yeah, these clowns are really interested in protecting "the heritage of the Native American people."
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered with/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."
_canpakes
_Emeritus
Posts: 8541
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 6:54 am

Re: Contrasting Liberal Occupy vs. Conservative Occupy....

Post by _canpakes »

faqs, I'm asking again, because you seem unable to deliver.

Can you articulate - in your own words - what our treasonous band of tantrum throwers in Oregan needed? I mean, besides French Vanilla coffee creamer and gaming supplies?

Before you begin, remember that this example below won't count as an actual response:

typical ldsfaqs response wrote:Guvermint Bad! Want Freedum's!! Evil Librul's!!1!!


Are you unable to answer the question?
_Gadianton
_Emeritus
Posts: 9947
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 5:12 am

Re: Contrasting Liberal Occupy vs. Conservative Occupy....

Post by _Gadianton »

I don't consider bundy a terrorist. The harshest rhetoric I've read yet comes from the mdb board. The fanatics over there are overcompensating for their own fanatical Mormon beliefs that fully justify what bundy did. They know darn well their own beliefs are not a whit better justified than bundy's.

What bundy did was stupid, and it was not to the ends of freedom. He spat on the sidewalk. Over and over he spat on the sidewalk, but first walked right up to the police officer and then spat, and then had it filmed and broadcast nationally and refused to stop spitting and threaten to protect himself with a gun should anyone try and stop him. He pushed LE to do boundary maintenance and protect the rule rather than mitigate real consequences. The rule of law has a massive issue with screwing people on technicalities, and bundy's actions only work to legitimize the dark side of law enforcement.
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.

LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
_MeDotOrg
_Emeritus
Posts: 4761
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:29 pm

Re: Contrasting Liberal Occupy vs. Conservative Occupy....

Post by _MeDotOrg »

Image

It's a very nice image. But remember Osama Bin Laden was a good family man, and Adolf Hitler had a dog and a girlfriend.

Image

It is not self-evident that people with loving families are invariably right. I don't know if the man is a terrorist or not, but as many people can sadly attest, your appearance in one photograph man not be an accurate portrait of your entire persona.

Could this man be a serial killer?

Image

Well yes, it's Ted Bundy who killed about 35 women. The women in the picture remembered Mr. Bundy as polite and attractive.
"The great problem of any civilization is how to rejuvenate itself without rebarbarization."
- Will Durant
"We've kept more promises than we've even made"
- Donald Trump
"Of what meaning is the world without mind? The question cannot exist."
- Edwin Land
_The CCC
_Emeritus
Posts: 6746
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 4:51 am

Re: Contrasting Liberal Occupy vs. Conservative Occupy....

Post by _The CCC »

ldsfaqs wrote:
The CCC wrote:They came armed to kill any one who tried to stop them. So not really a mistake, but of a deliberate action.


Since when was self defense immoral? You liberals are entirely willing to stand against police, throw rocks at them, do damage to property, etc. if they dare to arrest you? Isn't it also the "peoples" property? Since when did the government have rights? So, what right does the government have to use deadly force peaceful protesting? You wouldn't be fine if the FBI came to your protest and used force against you all and your leaders. Yet somehow you think it's fine for force to be used against conservatives simply because we are armed, willing to defend ourselves.

by the way, EAllusion lies as usual..... All costs involved were at least a Million dollars, not simply the damage done.
Further, stop lying, because it's not the first time..... Do you know the costs that resulted from Occupy Wallstreet? I rest my case.


No one is saying that self-defense is immoral; reaching for a gun in your coat while law enforcement is yelling to don't do it is not self defense, and is quite idiotic like you.

I've never condoned any attempt to "stand against police, throw rocks at them, do damage to property, etc. if they dare to arrest you?". They should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

The government has the legal right to protect itself against armed terrorists. No! It is not the Bundy's, or the private property of anyone else. It is government property, no different than a military base. Try taking over a military base by force of arms, and watch as they blow your damn head off. You are not defending yourself when you use force of arms to overthrow the government of the US.

Whatever their crimes the OWS didn't take up arms against the US government like the insurrectionists you love to defend.

If that is your best case, you are still an idiot.
_Maksutov
_Emeritus
Posts: 12480
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:19 pm

Re: Contrasting Liberal Occupy vs. Conservative Occupy....

Post by _Maksutov »

ldsfaqs wrote:Truly sad liberal intellectual skills and morality....

There is literally no difference between the two events other than the firearms which is a constitutional and civil right, and it being federal property is irrelevant, especially when it's rural property in which exceptions are made for that law, just like you all praise Obama for being so "gun friendly" that he signed a law allowing firearms to be carried in National Parks.

And to the idiot who said the Wisconsin protests were all "legal"..... bull.
They took over the Capital Building, sleep in there, etc. for a couple of weeks, which was completely illegal. Capital Buildings are not "free rain" do what you want when you want. They close, all kinds of things. That situation was absolutely no different than the Oregan people. Both Occupied against the "rules" period.

Anyway, it is truly sad how willingly fascist you liberals are.... I show clearly two situtations that are literaly no different, save the arms.
Just because liberals don't like guns and chose to be disarmed doesn't mean anything.

They both took over public property and buildings, and they both were expressing grievences and did NO HARM and threatened no harm to anyone (unless they were attacked). It's truly facinating to me how evil and warped the liberal mind is, how when it concerns conservatives, they entirely shut off their brains and morality, and become Fascists, but when it concerns their cause, they want all the rights and freedom in the world, especially wrongly, such as their Protests in Wisconsin and Occupy Wallstreet. One was bad law, and entitlement that liberals wanted to maintain, and the other was blaiming Wallstreet for what Liberal Lawmakers forced Wallstreet to do.

Oh well..... As I prove over and over again, liberals and liberalism is corruption, perversion, lying, and not based in Freedom.
Whether you all agreed or not they should have had guns or not, you should if you all had actual character and weren't hypocrites, recognize that they had every right to protest by "occupation", and that for occupying doesn't deserve arrest and death. PERIOD..... It's as simple as that. Yet you all fully support it, simply because of ideological differences, you being fine with Government abuse and takeover of land against the Constitution, and Conservatives not being so.


Well, FAQS, for the record I thought that the Occupy folks were largely pretentious vagrants and scofflaws. So there's that. But this guy? He was a traitor. He sought to take up arms against his government. Traitors are often called patriots by those sympathetic to them. But he sought to bring down the government that is produced by the Constitution that he waved around and never read. His death was unfortunate. I wish it hadn't happened. I'm sorry for his family's loss. But this man was not a hero but a traitor who wanted suicide by cop and he got it. He joins Bob Mathews and Gordon Kahl in the gallery of violent extremists who met violent ends. R.I.P.
"God" is the original deus ex machina. --Maksutov
_ldsfaqs
_Emeritus
Posts: 7953
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 11:41 pm

Re: Contrasting Liberal Occupy vs. Conservative Occupy....

Post by _ldsfaqs »

Maksutov wrote:Well, FAQS, for the record I thought that the Occupy folks were largely pretentious vagrants and scofflaws. So there's that. But this guy? He was a traitor. He sought to take up arms against his government. Traitors are often called patriots by those sympathetic to them. But he sought to bring down the government that is produced by the Constitution that he waved around and never read. His death was unfortunate. I wish it hadn't happened. I'm sorry for his family's loss. But this man was not a hero but a traitor who wanted suicide by cop and he got it. He joins Bob Mathews and Gordon Kahl in the gallery of violent extremists who met violent ends. R.I.P.


You need to educate yourself by watching the various videos of them..... There are a few videos of Finicam who he was, what he was doing and believed such as this one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EWfGtQvyb4 He knew the Constitution far better than you.
They/he was not at all what you are claiming. In fact, the complete opposite.
"Socialism is Rape and Capitalism is consensual sex" - Ben Shapiro
_canpakes
_Emeritus
Posts: 8541
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 6:54 am

Re: Contrasting Liberal Occupy vs. Conservative Occupy....

Post by _canpakes »

ldsfaqs wrote:
Maksutov wrote:Well, FAQS, for the record I thought that the Occupy folks were largely pretentious vagrants and scofflaws. So there's that. But this guy? He was a traitor. He sought to take up arms against his government. Traitors are often called patriots by those sympathetic to them. But he sought to bring down the government that is produced by the Constitution that he waved around and never read. His death was unfortunate. I wish it hadn't happened. I'm sorry for his family's loss. But this man was not a hero but a traitor who wanted suicide by cop and he got it. He joins Bob Mathews and Gordon Kahl in the gallery of violent extremists who met violent ends. R.I.P.


You need to educate yourself by watching the various videos of them..... There are a few videos of Finicam who he was, what he was doing and believed such as this one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EWfGtQvyb4 He knew the Constitution far better than you.
They/he was not at all what you are claiming. In fact, the complete opposite.

Maksutov got it right.
Post Reply