But which SIDE, would they be on..... That s the question..... would they be backing up the FBI, State Police, and Sheriff..... Or would they be coming in a backup force for the Protesters.... Interesting Questions..... Inquiring Minds, would like to KNOW.....
They fight for who ever pays them, no questions asked: "Murder women and children? Sure, do you want to pay a per woman/child fee or just want to pay a flat fee for us to do it? Kill US citizens on public roads when the BLM is too gutless? Sure, no problem."
You paint an ugly picture of Mercs. More, they do what is required to complete the mission. This is all dependent on the scope of the mission and the rules of engagement governing the mercenaries in their carrying out the mission parameters. And, if this report is true; I too ask: "Who are they working for"?
That is the real question and the shortest answer is who is paying them? Other than a mission to accomplish, mercenaries have very few rules of engagement.
Like I said, that all depends on the mission. In the third world, yes; they are deployed with few limitations. On U.S. soil I would believe the parameters governing hostile engagement to be limited to avoid the public becoming aware of their use.
No, I paint an accurate picture of Blackwater. I suppose I could always find a Wiki article to back up what I said.
That is an I guess and a for sure I don't know. My experience with Mercenaries was the Nungs and Brus Same as quite a few Mercs, they weren't nice people at all. Brus were different.
Well the Feds don't need them and the protesters can't afford them so I have my doubts about the story unless there's a new player.
OMG....when will the inanity and insanity that is the failed Bundy and Associates Malheur occupation ever cease??? Whenever I see a bit of flaky Youtube nutbaggery being posted prefaced by..."I don't know the truth about this" (But I just saw it and I'm passing it on anyway). I just despair of anything sensible coming from it. First of all, When a judge is at the very centre of this kind of allegation, one might just assume that the judge would add weighty judicial support to the claim...after all...it came from a "Judges' mouth....and Judges are particularly credible people aren't they? (well, most of the time....mind you I find SCOTUS Justice Tony Scalia more incredible than credible, (but that's a whole different bowl of argle bargle ) But you'd be badly mistaken about the "Judge" at the heart of the "mercenaries" in Oregon conspiracy theory Youtube clip. Judge Gary Darby is not a statutorily appointed Judge whose jurisdiction has any statutary authority to preside in any official government court of law. Judge Gary Darby has about the approximate authority that self-appointed "Judge" Anna Von Reitz has, which is actually less than Judge Judy, who was a genuine Law Court Judge before she became a celebrity TV "Judge". Gary Darby, giving himself the title, Judge, would be no more credible than Darby calling himself KIng Gary of the United Counties of Oregon. As to the suggestion that mercenaries (in the common undertood sense of the word) are presently swarming around Harney County Oregon, then I think that there is a greater credibility and probability of Harold Camping's rapture actually coming true as predicted by Camping.. .
Darn right it's not! Since I am the rightful King of Oregon he would be a traitor to the crown and an usurper! I will sic Blackwater on him if he tries to steal MY thrown!
Mercs in Oregon is a wild a$$ dream by someone severely lacking between the ears. As Forrest Gump said That's all I have to say about that.
Chel, you are pushing my patience . I put this out here for people with better resources than me to take a look at ,nothing more. So keep your SNIDE REMARKS TO YOURSELF. THIS GUY ON THIS VIDEO DOESNT KNOW EITHER. He is also looking for facts as are many of us. So if you dont have anything positive to say stfu !!
Somehow, I think you are aware that Blackwater is no more, hasn't been for several years. They morphed into Xe after that mess they got into. FWIW, back in the day, I worked with some mercs between contracts. Their conscience is for sale.
Here is the New york times article that connects te Clintons to Uranium and Russia http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/u...ssed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=0 Did Monsanto Really Buy Blackwater (Xe)? Academi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia So according to Wiki Academi is employed by the U.S. government as of today. Is it so far fetched now??? The Clinton Foundation received millions from investors as Putin took over 20% of US uranium deposits The Clinton connection to Russia’s claims on uranium - Times of India
That Monsanto bit was printed in 2012. Unlikely close to accurate, as it indicates. What's happened since then we'll leave to the student to research. Far fetched is up to speculation bordering on tin foil hat theorists. Possible? Of course. Bear in mind that Academi is a training facility that is available for various organizations, not just Xe (or whatever they are operating as these days.) IMHO, and no sources to cite.
Didnt this same crap happen with North Korea and Bill Clinton?? My Link on Monsanto debunked that . It said a group of private investors bought Academia.
All it required was Professor Google and about 5 to 10 minutes of finger boning a computer keyboard to discover whether the mercenary claim had any prima facie substance. They are the minimal resources that most folk would have here at SM....but even that requires too much effort for some. If my remarks have been excessively sharp, it perhaps is a measure of the exasperation that I sometimes feel when conspiracy theories are memetically spread without the agents of their spread actually expending some minimal effort of their own to verify claims as being at least credible, if not factual. Mere possibility is not a metric that inspires much, if any confidence in the truth of a claim. This opening post is yet another excellent candidate for the tinfoil hat forum, at least until it can be fact checked and verified as having some actual substance based on verifiable evidence.