Yup. This is For Certain.

[CapnAwesome]

Also taken over by force? Force implies the use of, you know, force. Nobody was hurt, nobody was shot, nobody was terrorized. You guys are really stretching

You realize that force doesn't require violence, only the threat of it, right?

I think you need to understand the terms being used here. If I point a gun at you and demand your wallet, that is taking your wallet by force. Simply because I didn't shoot you doesn't mean force wasn't involved.

As for "terrorized", I didn't say anyone was.  What I said was that this is a textbook case of terrorism, which it is.

The comparison to ISIS is made in the first paragraph of that article! Did you read it?

Yes.  Here's that first paragraph:

If, in a vacuum, I told you that a bearded man with his head covered had posted a video on social media calling on his followers to leave their homes with weapons, migrate to a new area, take over government property “as long as necessary” and use violence if confronted by law enforcement, you’d probably assume that I was talking about the latest propaganda video released by Isis, filmed in Iraq or Syria and intended to recruit violent Muslim extremists.

That isn't a comparison.  That is pointing out the assumptions most  Americans hold. I've emphasized where that point is made.

Since when did you guys start sucking the dicks of cops?

You'll need to change your name to Captain Dumbass if that's the takeaway you got from my post.  Really, I had thought you were smarter than this.

Nobody is terrorized, no force was used, there has been 0 violence and you haven't had your coffee yet or something. If you think they should be labeled at terrorists, what do you think the government should do? Go in and shoot them all?

I would put good money that if these guys were left wing you guys would have no problem with them.