Posted on Jan 4, 2016
2
2
0
Is sedition now allowable? What do you think the reaction from the authorities would have been if this was being done by a "Black" group in an urban environment? What do you think the reaction from the authorities would have been if this was being done by a "White" group in an urban environment? What do you think the reaction from the authorities would have been if this was being done by a "Muslim" group? What do you think the reaction from the authorities would have been if this was being done by a "Christian" group?
What's Happening in Oregon Is Nothing Less Than Armed Sedition
Posted from esquire.com
Politics
Terrorism
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 6
1
1
0
0
0
0
COL Ted Mc Actually, I'm pretty sure 'urban' removes the race/religion question instantly. They'd go in. The only reason they haven't is because the place they chose is tiny, in the wilderness, and insignificant. Why give them headlines? They'll wait them out.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Oregon The Hammonds and the Refuge standoff: The Truth Vs Fiction by Veritas 13Fox
Here is an interview with Veritas Fox who spent three days at Burns Oregon. He will explain everything that he knows about the Hammond situation and the Wild...
That is a LIE. Oh and excellent reputable source for the story as well "Esquire" good grief. Check your definition of Sedition Sir. Here is an hour long interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyevYENMEDI BLM is out of control and under its charter has no arrest powers I would suggest you do a little more research. Here is an in depth article as well as an interview.
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/01/03/full-story-on-whats-going-on-in-oregon-militia-take-over-malheur-national-wildlife-refuge-in-protest-to-hammond-family-persecution/
Here is what the LAW states as written by Cornell.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3559
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/01/03/full-story-on-whats-going-on-in-oregon-militia-take-over-malheur-national-wildlife-refuge-in-protest-to-hammond-family-persecution/
Here is what the LAW states as written by Cornell.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3559
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
PO3 Brad Phlipot - PO; You might have missed the fact that I didn't express an opinion one way or the other on the situation - only asked questions about it.
That being said, the BLM isn't attempting to arrest anyone, however the FBI is seriously considering it and (the last time I checked) the FBI did have "arrest powers".
I'm not quite sure how you relate the law of sentencing to the law of trespass and/or the law of theft by conversion, so possibly you'd like to explain it to me.
You might also want to explain to me what is "illegal" about a properly constituted appeal court hearing an appeal from a decision of a lower court and imposing a different sentence than the lower court did. As far as I know that is a perfectly allowable way for the legally constituted court system to operate.
On the other hand, possibly you didn't notice that the "militia" (which would be designated as "illegal combatants" if they weren't Americans inside America) isn't "protesting" anything that the BLM had done - it is "protesting" a legally constituted court imposing a legally allowable sentence. You might want to take into account that the originally imposed sentenced was NOT varied under the provisions of Ss. 3559(c)(7).
PS - There is something inherently amusing about someone who accepts the word of "Veritas 13Fox" and "Professor Doom1" (who have no verifiable reality at all) as intrinsically and unarguably true but then claims that a journalist who publishes under their real name in a publication which can actually be located is intrinsically and unarguably false.
That being said, the BLM isn't attempting to arrest anyone, however the FBI is seriously considering it and (the last time I checked) the FBI did have "arrest powers".
I'm not quite sure how you relate the law of sentencing to the law of trespass and/or the law of theft by conversion, so possibly you'd like to explain it to me.
You might also want to explain to me what is "illegal" about a properly constituted appeal court hearing an appeal from a decision of a lower court and imposing a different sentence than the lower court did. As far as I know that is a perfectly allowable way for the legally constituted court system to operate.
On the other hand, possibly you didn't notice that the "militia" (which would be designated as "illegal combatants" if they weren't Americans inside America) isn't "protesting" anything that the BLM had done - it is "protesting" a legally constituted court imposing a legally allowable sentence. You might want to take into account that the originally imposed sentenced was NOT varied under the provisions of Ss. 3559(c)(7).
PS - There is something inherently amusing about someone who accepts the word of "Veritas 13Fox" and "Professor Doom1" (who have no verifiable reality at all) as intrinsically and unarguably true but then claims that a journalist who publishes under their real name in a publication which can actually be located is intrinsically and unarguably false.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google