MercenaryChef Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 Sunday I was at a dc bar and a gentleman sat next to me. The bartender asked 'are we gonna firebomb oregon? ' I inquired on this and learned this chap was fbi and had just gotten off a call regarding this matter. He told me something was going to happen. Here it is I guess. Apparently the leaders had been lodging at a hotel most of the time and there was a good number of occupiers who were looking for an armed confrontation with the fbi. Here is to hoping there is no further loss of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkhangel Posted January 27, 2016 Author Share Posted January 27, 2016 FBI agents tell bartenders and random strangers who ask them about details of current operations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueMetis Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 "something is going to happen" is hardly details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MercenaryChef Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 Certainly not the most detailed or reliable bit of investigative news work, but what do you want from a reporter (me) who was a few pints in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wise Fool Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 Stranger things have happened at bars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 If this quote is accurate there is clear evidence that the occupiers were looking for armed confrontation, specifically the guy who ended up being shot and killed. Quote "This is where I'm going to breathe my last breath, whether I'm 90, 95 or 55," Finicum told The Associated Press on Jan. 5. " ... I'm going to not spend my days in a cell." http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11580659 So there you have it. The guy was intent on being a suicide gunman, becoming a martyr to the cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 17 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said: If this quote is accurate there is clear evidence that the occupiers were looking for armed confrontation, specifically the guy who ended up being shot and killed. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11580659 So there you have it. The guy was intent on being a suicide gunman, becoming a martyr to the cause. Was that the guy under the blue tarp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Was that the guy under the blue tarp? Don't know anything about a blue tarp. I've only read news about this I've not watched any TV news on the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kairparavel Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 19 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Was that the guy under the blue tarp? Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 56 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said: If this quote is accurate there is clear evidence that the occupiers were looking for armed confrontation, specifically the guy who ended up being shot and killed. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11580659 So there you have it. The guy was intent on being a suicide gunman, becoming a martyr to the cause. Is your argument that if they are asking for it, then we should go ahead and give it to them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 7 minutes ago, Swordfish said: Is your argument that if they are asking for it, then we should go ahead and give it to them? Is it your mission in life to ask me dumb questions? I'm not making any argument, it's all observation. If I was to make an argument it would be along the lines of, in a trigger happy culture if you go looking for an armed stand off you are likely to find one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 Just now, The Anti-Targ said: Is it your mission in life to ask me dumb questions? Why so sensitive? Quote If I was to make an argument it would be along the lines of, in a trigger happy culture if you go looking for an armed stand off you are likely to find one. Fair enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 13 minutes ago, Swordfish said: Why so sensitive? You've only initiated a conversation with me twice in the recent past, both of times asking me a dumb question which doesn't actually relate to anything I wrote. So I'm wondering what's motivating you. Framing your question in a different way may have initiated a more fruitful conversation. For instance, to what lengths should arresting authorities go to avoid a fatal conflict when a person who is subject to an arrest warrant has effectively said "You ain't taking me alive" / "I ain't giving up peacefully"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 6 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said: You've only initiated a conversation with me twice in the recent past, both of times asking me a dumb question which doesn't actually relate to anything I wrote. So I'm wondering what's motivating you. That's purely accidental, I assure you. I don't even recall what other post you're talking about. I was curious about what you were saying so i asked. it's really that simple. ETA: you can disregard the rest of this post. quote feature shenanigans. Couldn't get rid of any of it. Quote Framing your question in a different way may have initiated a more fruitful conversation. For instance, to what lengths should arresting authorities go to avoid a fatal conflict when a person who is subject to an arrest warrant has effectively said "You ain't taking me alive" / "I ain't giving up peacefully"? Spoiler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 Just now, Swordfish said: Reveal hidden contents There's nothing in the spoiler tags. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 1 minute ago, The Anti-Targ said: There's nothing in the spoiler tags. yeah, sorry about that. I couldn't remove the tags. They got in there inadvertently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 1 minute ago, Swordfish said: yeah, sorry about that. I couldn't remove the tags. They got in there inadvertently. Right you are then. Out of interest, what do you think police should do when they have a need to arrest someone and they publicly say they will not be taken alive? Seems like at some point someone's bluff has to be called and if the alleged offender is firm in their stance then if there's going to be a fatality in the outcome it will be his/hers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 1 minute ago, The Anti-Targ said: Right you are then. Out of interest, what do you think police should do when they have a need to arrest someone and they publicly say they will not be taken alive? Seems like at some point someone's bluff has to be called and if the alleged offender is firm in their stance then if there's going to be a fatality in the outcome it will be his/hers. I think it really depends on the circumstances. These confrontations can escalate quickly to involve innoccent bystanders. how much of a danger are they to others. What is the offence. What are the consequences of doing nothing, compared to the likelihood of bloodshed. Etc.... Certainly there are some situations that warrant forcing the confrontation anyway. But I'm on the fence about whether this one rises to that level. It's also often tough to tell in advance how serious people are when they make those claims, which makes it even more complicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 Quote Out of interest, what do you think police should do when they have a need to arrest someone and they publicly say they will not be taken alive? Seems like at some point someone's bluff has to be called and if the alleged offender is firm in their stance then if there's going to be a fatality in the outcome it will be his/hers. I don't think what is written is really relevant. It's the actions taken when confronting police. It sounds like in this case he clearly committed suicide by cop, because he was waving a weapon around. It's unfortunate he had to die, but the problem is the cops don't know when someone is serious or not. And if they make the wrong call, the cop will be the one in the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 10 minutes ago, Martell Spy said: I don't think what is written is really relevant. It's the actions taken when confronting police. It sounds like in this case he clearly committed suicide by cop, because he was waving a weapon around. It's unfortunate he had to die, but the problem is the cops don't know when someone is serious or not. And if they make the wrong call, the cop will be the one in the ground. In the immediate situation there was very little choice involved. But in whatever negotiations may have taken place in the days and weeks prior some sort of non-lethal solution may have been achievable. I'm not sure when in the timeline this guy basically announced his intention to become a suicide gunman*, but the feds/cops knew this guy was pretty serious about not being taken alive before they set up a probably lethal situation. I hope there's some investigation of the situation and an examination of what could be done differently to avoid that kind of death. The best outcome is to actually get the guy behind bars. Achieving exactly the opposite of what he wants is the only way to achieve a victory over such a group. If the Feds / cops resigned themselves to probably having to kill him then he'd pretty much won a moral victory before the confrontation even happened. In the minds of LaVoy and his supporters the only way he loses is if he ends up alive and in prison. I don't call it suicide by cop, because this guy was looking to die and kill for a cause, which is not much different to a suicide bomber. Suicide by cop is someone just wanting to die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.