Assholes making trouble in Oregon

[ClosedCaption]

What is this obsession liberals have with piss & shit?

Seek counseling

You are the one who likes shit shoved in your ass. You're white, right?

Didnt you do time also? My characterization is right up your....alley, shall we say.

I was in prison. A prison with a 70% black population. Lots of faggots. 70% black

You plus how many others?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

What is this obsession liberals have with piss & shit?

Seek counseling

You are the one who likes shit shoved in your ass. You're white, right?

Didnt you do time also? My characterization is right up your....alley, shall we say.

I was in prison. A prison with a 70% black population. Lots of faggots. 70% black

You plus how many others?

Almost ALL the blacks were faggots. Seemed typical, no boundaries for the thugs

 

[ClosedCaption]

What is this obsession liberals have with piss & shit?

Seek counseling

You are the one who likes shit shoved in your ass. You're white, right?

Didnt you do time also? My characterization is right up your....alley, shall we say.

I was in prison. A prison with a 70% black population. Lots of faggots. 70% black

You plus how many others?

Almost ALL the blacks were faggots. Seemed typical, no boundaries for the thugs

Suuuure and I'm supposed to believe a criminal huh?

 

[Skylar]

Armed white guys take over federal building demanding free stuff! Blames "The Man" for their lot in life.

Whats the "free stuff" they're demanding?

Free logs, free ore and free grazing rights.

And of course, free rent. For 'years, if necessary'.

Yep, Skylar! Did you see the guy on TV that just joined up with the Bundy thugs? He has said goodbye to his family and claims he is willing to give his life if necessary for the 'cause'. It's one of those situations where you laugh at the absurdity, and cry at the stupidity.

Not only did I see him, I posted his whole youtube video including distrubing calls by the militia man for Dwight Hammond to 'die here with us'.

 

[BlueGin]

Armed white guys take over federal building demanding free stuff! Blames "The Man" for their lot in life.

Whats the "free stuff" they're demanding?

Free logs, free ore and free grazing rights.

And of course, free rent. For 'years, if necessary'.

Yep, Skylar! Did you see the guy on TV that just joined up with the Bundy thugs? He has said goodbye to his family and claims he is willing to give his life if necessary for the 'cause'. It's one of those situations where you laugh at the absurdity, and cry at the stupidity.

Then he stated it would never get that far. Please do go overboard some more.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Armed white guys take over federal building demanding free stuff! Blames "The Man" for their lot in life.

Whats the "free stuff" they're demanding?

Free logs, free ore and free grazing rights.

And of course, free rent. For 'years, if necessary'.

Yep, Skylar! Did you see the guy on TV that just joined up with the Bundy thugs? He has said goodbye to his family and claims he is willing to give his life if necessary for the 'cause'. It's one of those situations where you laugh at the absurdity, and cry at the stupidity.

Then he stated it would never get that far. .

So he said he would die there for no reason?

 

[BlueGin]

Armed white guys take over federal building demanding free stuff! Blames "The Man" for their lot in life.

Whats the "free stuff" they're demanding?

Free logs, free ore and free grazing rights.

And of course, free rent. For 'years, if necessary'.

Yep, Skylar! Did you see the guy on TV that just joined up with the Bundy thugs? He has said goodbye to his family and claims he is willing to give his life if necessary for the 'cause'. It's one of those situations where you laugh at the absurdity, and cry at the stupidity.

Then he stated it would never get that far. .

So he said he would die there for no reason?

He said they were seeking peaceful negotiations. Not blood shed.

Get back to be when they call for the police to be "fried like bacon".

 

[AvgGuyIA]

No. They were tried, convicted, jailed, and served a reduced sentence that an appeals court overturned. With the legally required sentence imposed instead.

With credit for time served.

With credit for time served.

OTHERS who did the same thing, were simply FINED for the act, the original judge understood that this was not TERRORISM but a simple accident, as the Hammonds had permission from the gov't to burn the land, and it simply got out of control and burned approx. 20 acres of Fed. land, with NO INJURIES or PROPERTY DAMAGE to anything!

Burning the grass will make it come back stronger and greener than ever.

Burning firefighters makes them very dead. And that well could have happened with the fire the Hammond's set. Mister, you are an idiot.

And you also believe the ExXon Valdez permanently destroyed that harbor in Alaska and the Gulf oil spill destroyed shrimp fishing. You're the idiot.

 

[Skylar]

Whats the "free stuff" they're demanding?

Free logs, free ore and free grazing rights.

And of course, free rent. For 'years, if necessary'.

Yep, Skylar! Did you see the guy on TV that just joined up with the Bundy thugs? He has said goodbye to his family and claims he is willing to give his life if necessary for the 'cause'. It's one of those situations where you laugh at the absurdity, and cry at the stupidity.

Then he stated it would never get that far. .

So he said he would die there for no reason?

He said they were seeking peaceful negotiations. Not blood shed.

Get back to be when they call for the police to be "fried like bacon".

Perhaps we're citing a different man. The youtube video I cited was of a militia man calling on Dwight Hammond, saying 'Do you want to die in prison, labeled a terrorist? Or do you want to die here with us, a free man? I want to die a free man."

That hardly sounds like a call for 'peaceful negotiations'.

 

[bullwinkle]

Whats the "free stuff" they're demanding?

Free logs, free ore and free grazing rights.

And of course, free rent. For 'years, if necessary'.

Yep, Skylar! Did you see the guy on TV that just joined up with the Bundy thugs? He has said goodbye to his family and claims he is willing to give his life if necessary for the 'cause'. It's one of those situations where you laugh at the absurdity, and cry at the stupidity.

Then he stated it would never get that far. .

So he said he would die there for no reason?

He said they were seeking peaceful negotiations. Not blood shed.

Get back to be when they call for the police to be "fried like bacon".

Not the guy I saw. He was in his car, dressed in what looked like a Carhart jacket and with a buzz cut. The clip I saw did not go beyond his willingness to lose his life. Perhaps you are thinking of someone else interviewed. Or maybe he was waffling after his first blurb and I missed the coverup.

 

[Old Rocks]

Status of Restoration - Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council

Lingering Oil
Updated 2015
The most recent studies indicate that key injured resources are no longer being affected by the lingering oil that remains in the substrate of certain beaches. Passive samplers deployed for 10 days in summer 2015 in the intertidal zone of one of the most contaminated beaches detected no Exxon Valdez oil leaching into the water, confirming that the oil remains sequestered in the subsurface and is not biologically available, despite remaining in a largely un-weathered state.

Measures of population status of species such as harlequin ducks and sea otters are now similar between oiled and unoiled sites, indicating recovery from long-term effects of the spill, including consequences of exposure to lingering oil (Esler et al. 2015b).

However, while the natural resource damage from lingering oil is largely abating, twenty-five years of research on the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill has demonstrated the surprising persistence of the toxic components of Exxon Valdez oil in the environment. This research illuminates the long-term effects of the Spill and the chronic damage that took nearly a quarter of a century to abate.

PERSISTENCE OF THE LINGERING OIL
Oil lingering from the 1989 Spill has been identified in discontinuous patches buried in sediments in the intertidal zone of some beaches in western Prince William Sound (PWS), where it was deposited soon after it washed ashore from the Spill. The patches are not visible on the beach surface, as they are buried at average depths between 12 to 18 cm (Fig. 1) and typically under the "armour" of bouldered beaches.

Need it be repeated, you are a fucking idiot, Av.

 

[Camp]

Two ranchers accidently burn some brush and the Liberals call it terrorism. A few hundred Black Lives Matter protesters intentionally burn a couple city blocks and they call it justice.

How fucked up is that?

You are playing down what they were convicted of. This is lightly populated county and the ranchers were convicted by a jury made up of the local folks. The government alone did not convict them. Their neighbors convicted them. Add the fact that they have accepted the ruling of the court and disavowed any relationship to the people who have taken over the wildlife refuge and a more accurate assessment can be made. The domestic terrorists are not speaking for the ranchers or the people who live in that area.

Do you think someones neighbours should be on their jury?

A jury of your peers, silly ass.

A jury of ones peers is fine, neighbours, which is what was posted, is not fine, silly ass.

You arguing about the meaning of "neighbor" all day is what is silly.

 

[Tilly]

A jury of your peers, silly ass.

A jury of ones peers is fine, neighbours, which is what was posted, is not fine, silly ass.

"peers" like this?:

Peers is peers.

 

[Tilly]

Ah, I didn't realise that. Thank you.

Watch yerself n00b!!!

Watch yerself, dancing Pug

 

[Tilly]

Two ranchers accidently burn some brush and the Liberals call it terrorism. A few hundred Black Lives Matter protesters intentionally burn a couple city blocks and they call it justice.

How fucked up is that?

You are playing down what they were convicted of. This is lightly populated county and the ranchers were convicted by a jury made up of the local folks. The government alone did not convict them. Their neighbors convicted them. Add the fact that they have accepted the ruling of the court and disavowed any relationship to the people who have taken over the wildlife refuge and a more accurate assessment can be made. The domestic terrorists are not speaking for the ranchers or the people who live in that area.

Do you think someones neighbours should be on their jury?

A jury of your peers, silly ass.

A jury of ones peers is fine, neighbours, which is what was posted, is not fine, silly ass.

You arguing about the meaning of "neighbor" all day is what is silly.

No it isn't. The idea of a jury is that they are unencumbered by personal knowledge, experiences, grievances, or biases against the defendant. 'Neighbours' don't normally fall into that category. Clearly its not a word you should have used, so get over it already.

 

[Camp]

You are playing down what they were convicted of. This is lightly populated county and the ranchers were convicted by a jury made up of the local folks. The government alone did not convict them. Their neighbors convicted them. Add the fact that they have accepted the ruling of the court and disavowed any relationship to the people who have taken over the wildlife refuge and a more accurate assessment can be made. The domestic terrorists are not speaking for the ranchers or the people who live in that area.

Do you think someones neighbours should be on their jury?

A jury of your peers, silly ass.

A jury of ones peers is fine, neighbours, which is what was posted, is not fine, silly ass.

You arguing about the meaning of "neighbor" all day is what is silly.

No it isn't. The idea of a jury is that they are unencumbered by personal knowledge, experiences, grievances, or biases against the defendant. 'Neighbours' don't normally fall into that category. Clearly its not a word you should have used, so get over it already.

You are confusing the objective term "next door neighbor" with the multiple meaning and subjective word "neighbor". The word neighbor can be used subjectively in a way that relies on the context of its use. The word is derived from the root "NEAR" and near is a word that has no definite distance or time. That is what makes it subjective and open to interpretation of the person using it. The US borders Canada, hence a person living in Texas or Florida can declare themselves a neighbor of Canada. A person living in a border state might describe them self as a "next door neighbor". I happen to consider all the people in a sparsely populated county in the middle of a sparsely populated region in the middle of nowhere to all be neighbors in that county. It being a subjective definition, I am perfectly correct with my language interpretation and word definition and used it in the manner I used.

 

[Old Rocks]

And that is how the people in that area view it. All are neighbors, for there is little help in an emergency other than the other people in that sparsely populated area, other than the people there.

 

[jillian]

You are playing down what they were convicted of. This is lightly populated county and the ranchers were convicted by a jury made up of the local folks. The government alone did not convict them. Their neighbors convicted them. Add the fact that they have accepted the ruling of the court and disavowed any relationship to the people who have taken over the wildlife refuge and a more accurate assessment can be made. The domestic terrorists are not speaking for the ranchers or the people who live in that area.

Do you think someones neighbours should be on their jury?

A jury of your peers, silly ass.

A jury of ones peers is fine, neighbours, which is what was posted, is not fine, silly ass.

You arguing about the meaning of "neighbor" all day is what is silly.

No it isn't. The idea of a jury is that they are unencumbered by personal knowledge, experiences, grievances, or biases against the defendant. 'Neighbours' don't normally fall into that category. Clearly its not a word you should have used, so get over it already.

historically, juries were from the same community as the accused or the litigant. they did know the person. in modern times, the juries are not supposed to know anything about the case before them.

so i'm not quite certain what you're talking about

 

[jillian]

Ah, I didn't realise that. Thank you.

Watch yerself n00b!!!

seems more sock-ish than noob. no?

 

[Mad Scientist]

ITT: Too many posters don't know what grazing rights are.