• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Oregon standoff leader attends meeting, hears chants of 'go'

ajn678 said:
If you didn't have the reading comprehension skills of a spec of dust you would have seen and understood that I listed many crimes that they have committed. I do not need to provide specific violations in federal law to know that they have committed a crime, in the same way that I do not need you to come right out and say that you support these small brained idiots who think their rights supercede everyone else's rights in the area. Do you ever think the reason there is a long line of people questioning your ability to think to be connected to the fact that you can't reason whatsoever? The only line I would be getting in is if you ever got elected to a high position in this country. This line would be the first flight out of the country before you destroyed it.
Click to expand...

:lamo

So feisty!

So...you think they should be arrested on some vague interpretations of what you are certain is a crime. Yeah man...you are all over it.

:lamo

If they are guilty of a crime, they should be held accountable. They probably shouldnt be arrested for what you are just by golly SURE is a crime.
 
VanceMack said:
:lamo

So feisty!

So...you think they should be arrested on some vague interpretations of what you are certain is a crime. Yeah man...you are all over it.

:lamo

If they are guilty of a crime, they should be held accountable. They probably shouldnt be arrested for what you are just by golly SURE is a crime.
Click to expand...

What is vague in any of the issues that I listed? Stop using the word "if". We already established you believe they committed a crime. There is no reason to continue to use this word.
 
ajn678 said:
What is vague in any of the issues that I listed? Stop using the word "if". We already established you believe they committed a crime. There is no reason to continue to use this word.
Click to expand...
Sure there is. This country was founded on the principle of 'if'. Its called presumption of innocence. If they have committed a crime they should be held accountable. A bigger question might be why it has you and so many other wetting yourselves over the word.
 
VanceMack said:
Sure there is. This country was founded on the principle of 'if'. Its called presumption of innocence. If they have committed a crime they should be held accountable. A bigger question might be why it has you and so many other wetting yourselves over the word.
Click to expand...

You don't seem to understand basic logic. I believe that is why I and many others are "wetting" ourselves over it. The presumption of innocence has nothing to do with the fact that they have obviously committed crimes. What matters in that issue is if they will be convicted of a crime. Again, people commit crimes all the time and are not convicted. There is not doubt "if" they committed a crime. There is doubt if they will be convicted of that, seeing as they haven not formally been brought in on charges. You yourself have admitted they committed a crime. So therefore, we can get past the fake issue of "if" and get down to the real issue. The real issue being that you support federal criminals who **** all over the rights of other Americans with terroristic actions.
 
VanceMack said:
:lamo

I am the one that has said all along that if they are guilty of a crime that they should be held accountable. You are just another in a long line of people here bleating on about **** you know nothing about. You KNOW they are guilty of crimes...but you havent the first ****ing clue what they are 'guilty' of. Your failure to cite the laws proves that.

Back to the back of the line. Im sure there will be someone to take your place to make the same ridiculous claims.
Click to expand...

Right, breaking into a federal facility and occupying it by force of arms is totally legal. Go try it at your nearest federal facility and see how that works out for you. You can always claim you had no idea that doing such a thing violated any laws.
 
JasperL said:
Right, breaking into a federal facility and occupying it by force of arms is totally legal. Go try it at your nearest federal facility and see how that works out for you. You can always claim you had no idea that doing such a thing violated any laws.
Click to expand...
What are the laws you are sure they have broken? Quick now...without Google....

If they have committed criminal acts they should be held accountable. Never said otherwise.

You too...back to the back of the line. Better yet...
 
VanceMack said:
What are the laws you are sure they have broken? Quick now...without Google....

If they have committed criminal acts they should be held accountable. Never said otherwise.

You too...back to the back of the line. Better yet...
Click to expand...

At least trespassing and vandalism or destruction of federal property (they took down a fence that a local rancher then fixed). They've used federal equipment without authorization, plowed a new road (more destruction of federal property) that was fenced off (which they removed, another crime) to protect an archaeological site (native American burial ground). If that site was damaged, another serious federal crime. They've been seen rummaging through files, using federal computers, artifacts stored at the facility - all of that unauthorized.
 
The moron party is over. Good riddance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom