You oppose the rule of law. We get that now.
I oppose the extreme militarization by every single alphabet-soup agency with an enforcement arm. Somehow this country did just fine without sending out 82 vehicles full of agents (actual count) and SWAT teams in APCs, no knock warrants, on and on, to apprehend non-violent suspects. I oppose "1st Amendment Zones" being an actual suppression tool.
I see the shift in tactic is to attempt to discredit anyone who disagrees with the .gov overreach by pretending they are infowars groupies. Yawn. That is equivalent to saying that you agree with child rape and kidnapping if you don't agree with how Janet Reno handled Waco and Elian Gonzalez.
I am as disturbed with those saying the protesters should have been slaughtered as I am with those wishing the feds were. On the bright side they are most likely sad little simpletons who wouldn't have the courage to be on either side.
Both sides had scoped rifles in high positions aimed at the other below them(something that gave me the chills when I saw, I but hope I never see it again). Only one side declared they would shoot without being shot at first. Thankfully it ended how it did, it would have been a disaster for everyone. Instead it was just a disaster for Bloomberg and his minions. :thumbsup:
As for Bundy? He will end up chickening out of jail and paying his bail plus a fine at some point if he doesn't keel over first, but I don't really care about the merits of his case.
The real story isn't about cattle grazing or once "endangered" tortoises. The real story is that unlike at Kent State, civilians exercising guaranteed freedoms went home uninjured and victorious.
Last edited: