Go to ...

Joseph Kaminski

History, Sociology, & More

Joseph Kaminski on YouTubeRSS Feed

October 22, 2019

Oregon Under Attack: No, an Armed Militia is NOT “PEACEFUL Protesting”

We couldn’t even go an entire week in 2016 without something bat-shit crazy happening in America, couldn’t we. For a nation that is supposedly the “land of the free” we see a lot of these news stories. At least 372 mass shootings occurred within the United States in 2015, making it “The Year of Mass Shootings”. Due to these 372 mass shootings, 475 people were killed and 1,870 were injured. That means, statistically, you’re more likely to die in a domestic mass shooting (or how I believe they should be called, Terrorist Attack) than the self-propagated ISIS terror attacks the Republican party wants you to be so afraid of.

Well, welcome to 2016, everybody. How do we start off the New Year? Well, Saudi Arabia started it off by executing 47 people. America should probably not do anything radical, right? Lets just sit back, watch some fireworks, have some nice New Year Resolutions like, oh, I don’t know, “Don’t shoot anybody”? Or how about “Don’t murder innocent people”? We learned a lot from 2015, right?


Oregon Under Attack

Some members of the Oregon Attack.

Oregon Under Attack

An armed militia of “150 men” has broken into and occupied a United States government building in Oregon, declaring its utmost desires to “break free from the shackles of federal control” and stating that they are willing to “kill or be killed” in doing so. This, of course, has caused a huge reaction on social media outlets like Twitter and Facebook. But, like most things, our terrible mainstream media has managed to have increasingly limited coverage on it. Well, this is just another example of terrorism going unnoticed in America’s mainstream news media. Why? Because this group is white, people.

While a reporter has claimed he saw evidence of no more than a dozen people at the scene, the group itself has claimed to have 100 to 150 members involved in the action. But size makes no difference. Again, if a single Muslim or African-American played a role in this, we’d see every media outlet calling them a terrorist attack.

Imagine if a group of 150 Muslim-Americans or 150 members of the Black Lives Matter Movement managed to take over a federal building. Even if they were unarmed, this would be media uproar. We’d have every news outlet labeling the groups as terrorists, anti-American, a danger to society. But this group is white. And they’re armed.

Led by the son of a prominent Oregon rancher named Cliven Bundy (who went through his own legal dispute a few years back), a group of self-proclaimed American patriots who are heavily armed have occupied a remote headquarters of the federal Bureau of Land Management near Burns, Oregon. The outpost was unoccupied at the time of the takeover, but the group of men have declared in phone interviews to local reporters that they, of course, are willing to “kill and be killed” for their cause.

You know what kind of groups say and do this kind of stuff? Terrorist groups.

But what have news outlets called this group of radical, white men? Protesters.

What the Hell is wrong with our news outlet? If one man who looks even remotely non-white manages to shoot something up, they’re labeled as a Terrorist. If a white man does it, though, our mainstream media comes up with some other title for them. Lone wolf, shooter, white supremacist. We see people saying, “They couldn’t have been a terrorist! They’re a good, white Christian!”

Well, it was the Christian who declared the Crusades, was it not?

These people, led by Ammon Bundy, are doing everything terrorist groups do, from taking over a federal building to calling for more support and inflicting terror across the region. But, of course, since they’re white, they couldn’t possibly be involved in terrorism, right?

Well, here is the FBI definition for the word “terrorist”, taken straight from their website.

“Domestic terrorism” means activities with the following three characteristics:

  1. Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law.
  2. Appear intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, to influence to policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping,
  3. Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States of America.

This group has done all three of these things. They’ve created a dangerous and armed situation, violating law by literally taking a Federally owned building. They’ve proven that they’re intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population by claiming that they are willing to “kill or be killed” to make sure their point is across. And they’re doing it all within Oregon, which is within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States of America. This group, regardless of what any mainstream news media claims, is not protesting. They may have started off protesting, but now this step has propelled them to a status that any other group would claim as terrorism.

ABC has posted an article (that they’ve since renamed) that was called “Peaceful Protest followed by Oregon wildlife refuge action”. Now, if you go to that article, it’s been renamed to “Militia Members Occupy US Building in Oregon After Protest” after an incredible amount of backlash received on social media. In short, the title should be simply “Terrorist Group Takes Federal Building with Intent to Kill”. You can’t claim it’s fear mongering when it’s one-hundred-percent the truth.

It seems like 2016 is going to be a sequel to 2015 in terms of acts that endorse violence.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

2 Responses “Oregon Under Attack: No, an Armed Militia is NOT “PEACEFUL Protesting””

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *