• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Oklahoma Considering State-Sanctioned Tea Party 'Militia'

GreNME

Philosopher
Joined
Sep 16, 2007
Messages
8,276
I kid you not.

These knuckleheads are aiming to "to create a new volunteer militia to help defend against what they believe are improper federal infringements on state sovereignty."

The irony: this is the same state where one of the most devastating domestic terror attacks in US history was perpetrated by an anti-government right-wing extremist, and now a populist anti-government right-wing extremist group is looking for state sanction to "defend" (translation: attack) the federal government.

The hubris: as poor as the state of OK is, if they ever tried to fund such a militia it would be at least in part paid for using federal tax dollars given to the state (a form of "welfare" and "wealth redistribution") that was paid by the more commerce and wealth-rich states, like those liberal (North)East and West coast states that certain TP celebrities have implied aren't "real Americans."

The tragedy: I'm sure there will likely be people who will actually consider this a good idea.
 
It's good to know that Oklahoma won't be running out of fertilizer this year.

Seriously, they cite the fact that they can't get their ideas through politically, so they're going to make a militia? That's a big bitchslap these 'Constitutionalists' are giving democracy there.
 
The irony: this is the same state where one of the most devastating domestic terror attacks in US history was perpetrated by an anti-government right-wing extremist, and now a populist anti-government right-wing extremist group is looking for state sanction to "defend" (translation: attack) the federal government.


Irony on top of irony. Up until the terrorist attack of which you speak, the most devastating domestic terrorist attack to have taken place in the United States was perpetrated by the federal government itself. McVeigh cited this as his reason for carrying out his attack, in which he murdered about twice as many innocent people as the federal government had murdered in the terrorist attack which McVeigh thought he was avenging.
 
Your woo is noted, Mr. Blaylock.

Really, that you have to make an argument defending McVeigh's actions to try to make a (fallacious tu quoque) point shows just how ridiculous an argument in favor of what the TP-ers are trying to do in Oklahoma truly is.
 
I'm predicting insurgent violence that drives people screaming away from the movement.
 
I'm predicting insurgent violence that drives people screaming away from the movement.

this.gif


The more I see things like this taking place in the Tea Party and extreme political circles, the more I see the likelihood that these knobs with the megaphones or at the decision-making tables are over-playing their hands. Keep walking right up to the edge of violence with a group of people who are being driven by anger, and sooner or later one or more of those angry followers are going to cross the line.
 
Your woo is noted, Mr. Blaylock.

Really, that you have to make an argument defending McVeigh's actions to try to make a (fallacious tu quoque) point shows just how ridiculous an argument in favor of what the TP-ers are trying to do in Oklahoma truly is.


I wasn't defending McVeigh's actions. I was merely pointing out that he claimed, as his motive for committing a horrendous act of terrorism, a perceived need to avenge a previous horrendous act of terrorism that had been carried out by the government. He was certainly correct in identifying the torture and murder of approximately eighty members of an unusual religious cult in Texas for what it truly was.

But ultimately, McVeigh's act was to commit an even greater crime, than the one he felt he was avenging. Approximately eighty innocent civilians were murdered in the previous act of terrorism, so McVeigh murdered approximately twice that many innocent civilians. This makes him no better than the criminals who were responsible for the attack in Texas. The only real difference is that McVeigh ultimately was held accountable for his crime.
 
I wasn't defending McVeigh's actions. I was merely pointing out that he claimed, as his motive for committing a horrendous act of terrorism, a perceived need to avenge a previous horrendous act of terrorism that had been carried out by the government. He was certainly correct in identifying the torture and murder of approximately eighty members of an unusual religious cult in Texas for what it truly was.

But ultimately, McVeigh's act was to commit an even greater crime, than the one he felt he was avenging. Approximately eighty innocent civilians were murdered in the previous act of terrorism, so McVeigh murdered approximately twice that many innocent civilians. This makes him no better than the criminals who were responsible for the attack in Texas. The only real difference is that McVeigh ultimately was held accountable for his crime.
Wow.
Just...Wow.:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp
 
I read the thread and story expecting that the militia would be formed by and of Tea Partiers. Imagine my surprise when I found the title of the thread to be completely misleading and inflammatory.

It's still an idiotic thing for the state of land thieves to even consider.
 
I say we take off and nuke the entire state from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
 
I just hope that this doesn't end up being used to justify a crack down on all dissidents
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom