• 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!

One author's response to a local story reporting on Oregon ocuppuation

Unitedwestand13

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,738
Reaction score
6,290
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
In response to this headline:

Occupiers want U.S. to surrender all federal lands | OregonLive.com

A notable author named Ursula K. Le Guin demolished the article in a letter to the editor of the paper.

Federal land: The Oregonian's A1 headline on Sunday, Jan. 17, "Effort to free federal lands," is inaccurate and irresponsible. The article that follows it is a mere mouthpiece for the scofflaws illegally occupying public buildings and land, repeating their lies and distortions of history and law.

Ammon Bundy and his bullyboys aren't trying to free federal lands, but to hold them hostage. I can't go to the Malheur refuge now, though as a citizen of the United States, I own it and have the freedom of it. That's what public land is: land that belongs to the public — me, you, every law-abiding American. The people it doesn't belong to and who don't belong there are those who grabbed it by force of arms, flaunting their contempt for the local citizens.

Those citizens of Harney County have carefully hammered out agreements to manage the refuge in the best interest of landowners, scientists, visitors, tourists, livestock and wildlife. They're suffering more every day, economically and otherwise, from this invasion by outsiders.

Instead of parroting the meaningless rants of a flock of Right-Winged Loonybirds infesting the refuge, why doesn't The Oregonian talk to the people who live there?

Ursula K. Le Guin

Northwest Portland
Click to expand...

Headline on Malheur occupation is inaccurate, irresponsible: Letters to the Editor | OregonLive.com
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
In response to this headline:

Occupiers want U.S. to surrender all federal lands | OregonLive.com

A notable author named Ursula K. Le Guin demolished the article in a letter to the editor of the paper.



Headline on Malheur occupation is inaccurate, irresponsible: Letters to the Editor | OregonLive.com
Click to expand...

I wonder if the author of the letter could even so much as find the bird refuge on a map, let alone if the author has ever actually visited there. I wonder the same thing about the OP and everyone else that is spun up over this.
 
VanceMack said:
I wonder if the author of the letter could even so much as find the bird refuge on a map, let alone if the author has ever actually visited there. I wonder the same thing about the OP and everyone else that is spun up over this.
Click to expand...

What difference does that make? Anything the author said you disagree with? Sounded right on to me. IMO, it's a mistake and irresponsible in fact to give these morons and thugs a vehicle to spread their insane 'demands.'

And I agree an appropriate article would be to note that armed thugs continue to hold the federal property and disrupt life in that county and to ask residents what they think of these a$$holes. Or just ignore them. Either works for me. Listing their 'demands' on the front page is a mistake IMO. Gives these armed idiots legitimacy they don't deserve.
 
JasperL said:
What difference does that make? Anything the author said you disagree with? Sounded right on to me. IMO, it's a mistake and irresponsible in fact to give these morons and thugs a vehicle to spread their insane 'demands.'

And I agree an appropriate article would be to note that armed thugs continue to hold the federal property and disrupt life in that county and to ask residents what they think of these a$$holes. Or just ignore them. Either works for me. Listing their 'demands' on the front page is a mistake IMO. Gives these armed idiots legitimacy they don't deserve.
Click to expand...
If true, then it makes the authors poutrage as silly as yours.
 
VanceMack said:
If true, then it makes the authors poutrage as silly as yours.
Click to expand...

If what is true?

And I love how you go from thread to thread on this topic insisting you don't care, which is why you appear in all of them saying you don't care, and then insulting anyone who comments on these assholes.
 
JasperL said:
If what is true?

And I love how you go from thread to thread on this topic insisting you don't care, which is why you appear in all of them saying you don't care, and then insulting anyone who comments on these assholes.
Click to expand...

How did I insult you?
 
VanceMack said:
How did I insult you?
Click to expand...

LOL, "silly" "poutrage" isn't a compliment.

But why not find another Bundy thread to go tell everyone how much you don't care, over and over and over....:lamo
 
Poutrage is what you are expressing...not what you are.
 
VanceMack said:
Poutrage is what you are expressing...not what you are.
Click to expand...

OK- doesn't matter to me either way.

I am still wondering what difference it makes if anyone has been to the refuge or not....
 
JasperL said:
OK- doesn't matter to me either way.

I am still wondering what difference it makes if anyone has been to the refuge or not....
Click to expand...

It's the equivalence of a little kid running screaming to mom because an uncle 'got her nose'. It's nothing. This group of dumbasses decided to 'occupy' an abandoned shack in the middle of a bird refuge in the middle of winter...and you and others are making them relevant.

Just turn off the utilities and fricken ignore them and watch how soon this thing ends.
 
VanceMack said:
It's the equivalence of a little kid running screaming to mom because an uncle 'got her nose'. It's nothing. This group of dumbasses decided to 'occupy' an abandoned shack in the middle of a bird refuge in the middle of winter...and you and others are making them relevant.
Click to expand...

Well, unfortunately, they are "relevant" because morons with lots of guns and bullets pose a risk to the community, to anyone going onto PUBLIC property, they're disrupting the entire county, and so require many law enforcement officers to baby sit these morons to make sure no one is KILLED by them.

Just turn off the utilities and fricken ignore them and watch how soon this thing ends.
Click to expand...

I agree, but us commenting here isn't affecting anything. My big complaint with the article (that was actually the point of the OP) was that it gave these armed thugs legitimacy they do not deserve - front page coverage for their childish "demands." I thought giving them that was irresponsible.
 
JasperL said:
Well, unfortunately, they are "relevant" because morons with lots of guns and bullets pose a risk to the community, to anyone going onto PUBLIC property, they're disrupting the entire county, and so require many law enforcement officers to baby sit these morons to make sure no one is KILLED by them.



I agree, but us commenting here isn't affecting anything. My big complaint with the article (that was actually the point of the OP) was that it gave these armed thugs legitimacy they do not deserve - front page coverage for their childish "demands." I thought giving them that was irresponsible.
Click to expand...
I frankly do not see them posing a threat to the community. And I see you and others responding with hatred and 'feelings'. To be blunt...if **** goes bad it will be because people like you made the decision to respond foolishly.
 
VanceMack said:
It's the equivalence of a little kid running screaming to mom because an uncle 'got her nose'. It's nothing. This group of dumbasses decided to 'occupy' an abandoned shack in the middle of a bird refuge in the middle of winter...and you and others are making them relevant.

Just turn off the utilities and fricken ignore them and watch how soon this thing ends.
Click to expand...

You may not like the messenger or their methods (neither do I) .........but the message is clear. The BLM has been illegally grabbing land for decades, and then making laws "ad hoc". It's no wonder people like the Hammonds and Bundy's are at odds.
 
RetiredUSN said:
You may not like the messenger or their methods (neither do I) .........but the message is clear. The BLM has been illegally grabbing land for decades, and then making laws "ad hoc". It's no wonder people like the Hammonds and Bundy's are at odds.
Click to expand...
There are people that see that map and think thats a GOOD thing. Of course, those same people also manage to justify the fed spying on its own citizens (depending on who is 'occupying' the White House at the time).
Western-Lands-map-e1428092674911.jpg
 
VanceMack said:
I frankly do not see them posing a threat to the community. And I see you and others responding with hatred and 'feelings'. To be blunt...if **** goes bad it will be because people like you made the decision to respond foolishly.
Click to expand...

Well, the local cops, FBI, etc. who are dealing with them on a daily basis disagree with you.

And if crap goes bad it will because morons heavily armed themselves and then "occupied" federal property, from which they should be evicted without incident. If that can't happen, look at the thugs with guns illegally 'occupying' that federal facility.
 
JasperL said:
Well, the local cops, FBI, etc. who are dealing with them on a daily basis disagree with you.

And if crap goes bad it will because morons heavily armed themselves and then "occupied" federal property, from which they should be evicted without incident. If that can't happen, look at the thugs with guns illegally 'occupying' that federal facility.
Click to expand...
If the members of the federal government are so inept that they cant negotiate a successful end to THIS incident without bloodshed then perhaps they ought to just quit.
 
VanceMack said:
If the members of the federal government are so inept that they cant negotiate a successful end to THIS incident without bloodshed then perhaps they ought to just quit.
Click to expand...

Negotiate? What the hell do we need to negotiate about? No need to negotiate with terrorists just arrest them.
 
Crosscheck said:
Negotiate? What the hell do we need to negotiate about? No need to negotiate with terrorists just arrest them.
Click to expand...
And how do you propose to do that?

Negotiate doesnt mean to surrender. It doesnt really even require giving in to any concessions. Negotiation simply means to come to a mutually agreeable peaceful conclusion. I have had to negotiate with people holding their families at knife point. Ive had to negotiate with people holding themselves at gunpoint. Its not like at the end of the crisis call everyone was just walking away winners getting everything they wanted. They just all survived it.
 
RetiredUSN said:
You may not like the messenger or their methods (neither do I) .........but the message is clear. The BLM has been illegally grabbing land for decades, and then making laws "ad hoc". It's no wonder people like the Hammonds and Bundy's are at odds.
Click to expand...

You'll need a cite or some other support for that claim.
 
VanceMack said:
And how do you propose to do that?
Click to expand...

You're hilarious. On the other thread you said this: "I see the possession of weapons as irrelevant. " And here you note the blindingly obvious that them being armed changes everything of any significance. They cannot be simply arrested, because the armed thugs occupying the federal facility are liable to start killing people if law enforcement tries to arrest them.

Negotiate doesnt mean to surrender. It doesnt really even require giving in to any concessions. Negotiation simply means to come to a mutually agreeable peaceful conclusion. I have had to negotiate with people holding their families at knife point. Ive had to negotiate with people holding themselves at gunpoint. Its not like at the end of the crisis call everyone was just walking away winners getting everything they wanted. They just all survived it.
Click to expand...

And I'm sure those efforts are going on every day. You're telling us things we already know. What you can't admit is a group of heavily armed and stupid people, some of them with dreams of martyrdom, is dangerous, and that's what LEOs and the community are having to deal with. You say they don't pose a threat, but acknowledge that it's because they're armed that officials are negotiating a peaceful end. If they posed no threat, there would be no doubt of a peaceful end.
 
JasperL said:
You're hilarious. On the other thread you said this: "I see the possession of weapons as irrelevant. " And here you note the blindingly obvious that them being armed changes everything of any significance. They cannot be simply arrested, because the armed thugs occupying the federal facility are liable to start killing people if law enforcement tries to arrest them.



And I'm sure those efforts are going on every day. You're telling us things we already know. What you can't admit is a group of heavily armed and stupid people, some of them with dreams of martyrdom, is dangerous, and that's what LEOs and the community are having to deal with. You say they don't pose a threat, but acknowledge that it's because they're armed that officials are negotiating a peaceful end. If they posed no threat, there would be no doubt of a peaceful end.
Click to expand...
Woah...all I asked was how they propose to do that. And if you are seriously stating that there isnt enough skill in the entire federal government to address this situation and bring about a peaceful end...dood...thats you calling this administration embarrassingly pathetic.

I dont know what efforts have or havent been made and neither do you. You would be better served if you stopped talking out of your ass. As it stands, the fed appears to be doing the right things. It MAY just be that they are smarter than you, better equipped at their job than you, making better decisions than you, have more balance than you and OBVIOUSLY far less emotional attachment and hatred than you.
 
VanceMack said:
Woah...all I asked was how they propose to do that. And if you are seriously stating that there isnt enough skill in the entire federal government to address this situation and bring about a peaceful end...dood...thats you calling this administration embarrassingly pathetic.
Click to expand...

You quoted then ignored the entire point. If they weren't armed thugs, it would be simple. Take a few cops and a bus up there, round them up, put cuffs on them, load them in the bus, off to jail. The in your opinion "irrelevant" fact that they're armed makes that obviously impossible.

I dont know what efforts have or havent been made and neither do you. You would be better served if you stopped talking out of your ass. As it stands, the fed appears to be doing the right things. It MAY just be that they are smarter than you, better equipped at their job than you, making better decisions than you, have more balance than you and OBVIOUSLY far less emotional attachment and hatred than you.
Click to expand...

That's nothing but a string of straw men. And it is completely unrelated to any point I made. In fact I haven't criticized anyone in the federal, state or local governments dealing with these armed assholes.

And it's weird how you insist that anyone who criticizes armed thugs feels "hatred" for them. They're too stupid to 'hate.'
 
JasperL said:
You quoted then ignored the entire point. If they weren't armed thugs, it would be simple. Take a few cops and a bus up there, round them up, put cuffs on them, load them in the bus, off to jail. The in your opinion "irrelevant" fact that they're armed makes that obviously impossible.



That's nothing but a string of straw men. And it is completely unrelated to any point I made. In fact I haven't criticized anyone in the federal, state or local governments dealing with these armed assholes.

And it's weird how you insist that anyone who criticizes armed thugs feels "hatred" for them. They're too stupid to 'hate.'
Click to expand...
I ignored nothing. Where did you get that? I acknowledge everything about the circumstance. In point of fact it is the circumstance that caused me to ask the other guy how he proposed to just arrest them. You remember...thats the point where you tripped over YOURself jumping in to comment and you STILL cant answer the question.
 
VanceMack said:
I ignored nothing. Where did you get that? I acknowledge everything about the circumstance. In point of fact it is the circumstance that caused me to ask the other guy how he proposed to just arrest them. You remember...thats the point where you tripped over YOURself jumping in to comment and you STILL cant answer the question.
Click to expand...

So, is the fact they're armed relevant? In one thread, you say this:

"I see the possession of weapons as irrelevant. "
"Yes. They are armed. And?"

So you "acknowledge everything about the circumstance" except that the fact they're armed changes, well, nearly everything about the situation. Every time someone notes that they're armed, you ignore them or shrug it off. Except here, where you note the obvious that because they're armed the LEOs cannot just arrest them. If they were unarmed college kids "occupying" the principle's office, the cops would merely walk in with enough police, and arrest them and remove them. But you compare this occupation to unarmed college kids. They're different in nearly every meaningful way except both groups are protesting.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom