User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 11:00:29 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Plus, part of the new BLM contract was relinquishing water rights Bundy and family had in the area. Correct- which is the main pile of cash they wanted to steal from him. I wonder if the 8% of the population works for the government in some manner. Its very clear public opinion, not 50/50 or even 60/40. Its also funny how the posts read, sick of bullshit from an uparmored .fed versus the beholden who know Bundy is FSA thief. Very telling out of all the anti BLM group- NOBODY has called for anything similar to Anarchy, secession or even bleeding the tree, its a call for the reversal of the invasive feds in our lives, and an actual support for state and local. While the beholden find zero fault in any fed actions. Oh and we have a cop in the South who would have shot the guy on the bridge while high fiving the fed aiming at a cameraman.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 11:02:37 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Correct- which is the main pile of cash they wanted to steal from him. I wonder if the 8% of the population works for the government in some manner. Its very clear public opinion, not 50/50 or even 60/40. Its also funny how the posts read, sick of bullshit from an uparmored .fed versus the beholden who know Bundy is FSA thief. Very telling out of all the anti BLM group- NOBODY has called for anything similar to Anarchy, secession or even bleeding the tree, while the beholden find zero fault in any fed actions. Oh and we have a cop in the South who would have shot the guy on the bridge while high fiving the fed aiming at a cameraman. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Plus, part of the new BLM contract was relinquishing water rights Bundy and family had in the area. Correct- which is the main pile of cash they wanted to steal from him. I wonder if the 8% of the population works for the government in some manner. Its very clear public opinion, not 50/50 or even 60/40. Its also funny how the posts read, sick of bullshit from an uparmored .fed versus the beholden who know Bundy is FSA thief. Very telling out of all the anti BLM group- NOBODY has called for anything similar to Anarchy, secession or even bleeding the tree, while the beholden find zero fault in any fed actions. Oh and we have a cop in the South who would have shot the guy on the bridge while high fiving the fed aiming at a cameraman. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 11:42:51 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Correct- which is the main pile of cash they wanted to steal from him. I wonder if the 8% of the population works for the government in some manner. Its very clear public opinion, not 50/50 or even 60/40. Its also funny how the posts read, sick of bullshit from an uparmored .fed versus the beholden who know Bundy is FSA thief. Very telling out of all the anti BLM group- NOBODY has called for anything similar to Anarchy, secession or even bleeding the tree, its a call for the reversal of the invasive feds in our lives, and an actual support for state and local. While the beholden find zero fault in any fed actions. Oh and we have a cop in the South who would have shot the guy on the bridge while high fiving the fed aiming at a cameraman. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Plus, part of the new BLM contract was relinquishing water rights Bundy and family had in the area. Correct- which is the main pile of cash they wanted to steal from him. I wonder if the 8% of the population works for the government in some manner. Its very clear public opinion, not 50/50 or even 60/40. Its also funny how the posts read, sick of bullshit from an uparmored .fed versus the beholden who know Bundy is FSA thief. Very telling out of all the anti BLM group- NOBODY has called for anything similar to Anarchy, secession or even bleeding the tree, its a call for the reversal of the invasive feds in our lives, and an actual support for state and local. While the beholden find zero fault in any fed actions. Oh and we have a cop in the South who would have shot the guy on the bridge while high fiving the fed aiming at a cameraman. You either have a badge, or you don't.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 11:55:11 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You are barking up the wrong tree here I think. National Guard can be Federalized by the President, so the (low) potential for abuse of those Apache's doesn't change. The Army just figured out that active duty doesn't have enough Apache's, and can't afford to buy more. So they are trading some NG Apache's to AD for some AD Blackhawks to go to the NG (way more useful for typical guard uses such as search and rescue). They are also getting rid of the OH 58. Which is arguably the best helicopter for the gov to JBT people with. I guess it isn't completely impossible, but the lies required by the administrated to get our mil to turn on our citizens would have to be epic. I'm not going to be rolling Tanks to NV just because someone labeled Bundy a domestic terrorist. There will be a long discussion that involves lawyers, and words like Constitution, oath of office, Posse Comitatus... And lastly why isn't law enforcement doing it. Cops and Federal Agents enforce on the American public everyday. It is their job. It is pretty much illegal for the military except for some very specific purposes. TLDR version change the angle of your tinfoil antennae. You are getting a cross signal.  I think that is why obama wants a civilian army. Do his bidding in shit like this. Along with creating militarized units in every fucking government department. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 12:06:59 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think that is why obama wants a civilian army. Do his bidding in shit like this. Along with creating militarized units in every fucking government department. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: You are barking up the wrong tree here I think. National Guard can be Federalized by the President, so the (low) potential for abuse of those Apache's doesn't change. The Army just figured out that active duty doesn't have enough Apache's, and can't afford to buy more. So they are trading some NG Apache's to AD for some AD Blackhawks to go to the NG (way more useful for typical guard uses such as search and rescue). They are also getting rid of the OH 58. Which is arguably the best helicopter for the gov to JBT people with. I guess it isn't completely impossible, but the lies required by the administrated to get our mil to turn on our citizens would have to be epic. I'm not going to be rolling Tanks to NV just because someone labeled Bundy a domestic terrorist. There will be a long discussion that involves lawyers, and words like Constitution, oath of office, Posse Comitatus... And lastly why isn't law enforcement doing it. Cops and Federal Agents enforce on the American public everyday. It is their job. It is pretty much illegal for the military except for some very specific purposes. TLDR version change the angle of your tinfoil antennae. You are getting a cross signal. I think that is why obama wants a civilian army. Do his bidding in shit like this. Along with creating militarized units in every fucking government department. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 12:13:19 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think that is why obama wants a civilian army. Do his bidding in shit like this. Along with creating militarized units in every fucking government department. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You are barking up the wrong tree here I think. National Guard can be Federalized by the President, so the (low) potential for abuse of those Apache's doesn't change. The Army just figured out that active duty doesn't have enough Apache's, and can't afford to buy more. So they are trading some NG Apache's to AD for some AD Blackhawks to go to the NG (way more useful for typical guard uses such as search and rescue). They are also getting rid of the OH 58. Which is arguably the best helicopter for the gov to JBT people with. I guess it isn't completely impossible, but the lies required by the administrated to get our mil to turn on our citizens would have to be epic. I'm not going to be rolling Tanks to NV just because someone labeled Bundy a domestic terrorist. There will be a long discussion that involves lawyers, and words like Constitution, oath of office, Posse Comitatus... And lastly why isn't law enforcement doing it. Cops and Federal Agents enforce on the American public everyday. It is their job. It is pretty much illegal for the military except for some very specific purposes. TLDR version change the angle of your tinfoil antennae. You are getting a cross signal. I think that is why obama wants a civilian army. Do his bidding in shit like this. Along with creating militarized units in every fucking government department. You are on to something that is important. Would the oath for those civilians be changed from the current oath's that are now in effect for Military, Police, and other similar organizations? Tinfoil or not some questions need to be asked. Could this whole Range War have been an accidental opportunity to test or probe the citizens reaction? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 12:20:38 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So what? Is there a law against that now? If there was a law, would it be Constitutional? If SCOTUS ruled such a law "Constitutional," would it be any more "right" than the British in 1775? Natural, God-given civil rights like those enumerated in our Constitution are not given to us by any government and as such no government can take them away. You might play that game, but I won't, and the number of people on my side of the line is growing by the day. Pick your side. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You all act like this is something new for LEO's to break leather in the course of their duties. COPS has been on since 89 with lots of examples of weapons being pointed at people due to the varying degree of situations. I guess that I should not point a weapon at an armed robbery suspect or that felony vehicle stop. Fine. Point your gun at an armed robbery suspect. Don't expect the citizenry to give you the same benefit of the doubt when you point your gun at 1,000 people exercising their natural, God-given rights that are guaranteed in our Constitution. And half of those 1000 citizens were armed, no win situation for the LEO's. Damned if do or don't situation, it's not who you are, it's what you represent that people will always hate. So what? Is there a law against that now? If there was a law, would it be Constitutional? If SCOTUS ruled such a law "Constitutional," would it be any more "right" than the British in 1775? Natural, God-given civil rights like those enumerated in our Constitution are not given to us by any government and as such no government can take them away. You might play that game, but I won't, and the number of people on my side of the line is growing by the day. Pick your side. They already did, quite awhile ago. $$$$$. Just saying.... Just leave it be, they will regret it someday. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 12:27:35 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes on both. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Will Harry Reid run again; and will Nevada reelect him? Yes on both. Nevada didn't elect him, the unions did. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 12:43:10 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You are on to something that is important. Would the oath for those civilians be changed from the current oath's that are now in effect for Military, Police, and other similar organizations? Tinfoil or not some questions need to be asked. Could this whole Range War have been an accidental opportunity to test or probe the citizens reaction? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You are barking up the wrong tree here I think. National Guard can be Federalized by the President, so the (low) potential for abuse of those Apache's doesn't change. The Army just figured out that active duty doesn't have enough Apache's, and can't afford to buy more. So they are trading some NG Apache's to AD for some AD Blackhawks to go to the NG (way more useful for typical guard uses such as search and rescue). They are also getting rid of the OH 58. Which is arguably the best helicopter for the gov to JBT people with. I guess it isn't completely impossible, but the lies required by the administrated to get our mil to turn on our citizens would have to be epic. I'm not going to be rolling Tanks to NV just because someone labeled Bundy a domestic terrorist. There will be a long discussion that involves lawyers, and words like Constitution, oath of office, Posse Comitatus... And lastly why isn't law enforcement doing it. Cops and Federal Agents enforce on the American public everyday. It is their job. It is pretty much illegal for the military except for some very specific purposes. TLDR version change the angle of your tinfoil antennae. You are getting a cross signal. I think that is why obama wants a civilian army. Do his bidding in shit like this. Along with creating militarized units in every fucking government department. You are on to something that is important. Would the oath for those civilians be changed from the current oath's that are now in effect for Military, Police, and other similar organizations? Tinfoil or not some questions need to be asked. Could this whole Range War have been an accidental opportunity to test or probe the citizens reaction? I don't think so jbts are used to people obeying their orders and they don't know how to react when people don't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 12:51:10 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't think there are many rationale people that want to start shooting each other. However, federal government has shown time and again they do not respect nor care about the rule of law. So again, the question, to all is: What should we do? The answer to that question is probably one best not discussed on an open internet forum. Other than the typical responses of becoming politically active and attempting to elect folks that think the way you do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 12:58:59 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes on both. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Will Harry Reid run again; and will Nevada reelect him? Yes on both. 74 years old probably almost a billionaire from all his shady deals.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 1:03:15 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think that is why obama wants a civilian army. Do his bidding in shit like this. Along with creating militarized units in every fucking government department. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You are barking up the wrong tree here I think. National Guard can be Federalized by the President, so the (low) potential for abuse of those Apache's doesn't change. The Army just figured out that active duty doesn't have enough Apache's, and can't afford to buy more. So they are trading some NG Apache's to AD for some AD Blackhawks to go to the NG (way more useful for typical guard uses such as search and rescue). They are also getting rid of the OH 58. Which is arguably the best helicopter for the gov to JBT people with. I guess it isn't completely impossible, but the lies required by the administrated to get our mil to turn on our citizens would have to be epic. I'm not going to be rolling Tanks to NV just because someone labeled Bundy a domestic terrorist. There will be a long discussion that involves lawyers, and words like Constitution, oath of office, Posse Comitatus... And lastly why isn't law enforcement doing it. Cops and Federal Agents enforce on the American public everyday. It is their job. It is pretty much illegal for the military except for some very specific purposes. TLDR version change the angle of your tinfoil antennae. You are getting a cross signal. I think that is why obama wants a civilian army. Do his bidding in shit like this. Along with creating militarized units in every fucking government department. What are you talking about? FEMA corps? Or obama's little urban achievers? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 1:11:09 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nevada didn't elect him, the unions did. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Will Harry Reid run again; and will Nevada reelect him? Yes on both. Nevada didn't elect him, the unions did. Clark county is full of CA liberals and Salt lake City and Tucson. They get tired of the high cost of CA living move then vote the same people in the new town/city. Plus there are a lot of old people that retire to S. NV. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 1:14:59 PM EDT
[#14]
In case this hasn't already been posted (admittedly, I'm not following the thread closely)
Feds reportedly massing in Vegas |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 1:29:48 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Clark county is full of CA liberals and Salt lake City and Tucson. They get tired of the high cost of CA living move then vote the same people in the new town/city. Plus there are a lot of old people that retire to S. NV. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Will Harry Reid run again; and will Nevada reelect him? Yes on both. Nevada didn't elect him, the unions did. Clark county is full of CA liberals and Salt lake City and Tucson. They get tired of the high cost of CA living move then vote the same people in the new town/city. Plus there are a lot of old people that retire to S. NV. I'm 100% against restrictions on campaign donations but it would be interesting to see if the majority of Harry Reid's campaign finances came from inside or outside Nevada. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 1:38:01 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In case this hasn't already been posted (admittedly, I'm not following the thread closely) Feds reportedly massing in Vegas Yeager is leaving,... so there's that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 1:53:19 PM EDT
[#17]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 2:09:35 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote History"Dissolution of the federal government"? Either his supporters are living in fantasy land, or the news is being spun to paint them as loons. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 2:12:41 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: "Dissolution of the federal government"? Either his supporters are living in fantasy land, or the news is being spun to paint them as loons. Quote HistoryQuoted: "Dissolution of the federal government"? Either his supporters are living in fantasy land, or the news is being spun to paint them as loons. I'm going with that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 2:16:54 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm going with that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
"Dissolution of the federal government"? Either his supporters are living in fantasy land, or the news is being spun to paint them as loons. I'm going with that. Im going with that, as they couldnt even find a video clip of them saying anything of the sort.... Media loves to spin shit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 2:21:00 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
74 years old probably almost a billionaire from all his shady deals.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Will Harry Reid run again; and will Nevada reelect him? Yes on both. 74 years old probably almost a billionaire from all his shady deals.
Can't be that rich, he just got busted giving a granddaughter $17,000 out of his campaign funds. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 2:25:23 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeager is leaving,... so there's that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
In case this hasn't already been posted (admittedly, I'm not following the thread closely) Feds reportedly massing in Vegas Yeager is leaving,... so there's that. Too hot for him? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 2:26:27 PM EDT
[#23]
http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2014/04/20/Bundy-Family-Posts-Photo-Of-Dead-Cow-Euthanized-By-BLM
Doesn't the word euthanize mean "to peacefully put down". 
World English Dictionary
euthanize , euthanise , euthanaze or euthanase ('ju????na?z, 'ju????ne?z) — vb ( tr ) to kill (a person or animal) painlessly, esp to relieve suffering from an incurable illness 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 2:27:01 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Can't be that rich, he just got busted giving a granddaughter $17,000 out of his campaign funds. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Will Harry Reid run again; and will Nevada reelect him? Yes on both. 74 years old probably almost a billionaire from all his shady deals.
Can't be that rich, he just got busted giving a granddaughter $17,000 out of his campaign funds. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Haven't other politicians gone to jail for doing that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 2:27:34 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Too hot for him? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: In case this hasn't already been posted (admittedly, I'm not following the thread closely) Feds reportedly massing in Vegas Yeager is leaving,... so there's that. Too hot for him? Couldn't find a ditch? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 2:28:41 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Haven't other politicians gone to jail for doing that? Some animals are more equal than others. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 2:29:30 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"Dissolution of the federal government"? Either his supporters are living in fantasy land, or the news is being spun to paint them as loons. Quote HistoryQuoted:
"Dissolution of the federal government"? Either his supporters are living in fantasy land, or the news is being spun to paint them as loons. I noticed that, too. What a joke. I wonder how many "on the fence" types they'll convert to full on badge licker with that statement. This is nothing new, the media has been doing this forever. They divide every story into 2 halves, they fill their "news stories" with suggestive words, phrases and notions which prompts you to pick a side. By doing this, they can damn near MAKE you support any side they want on any given issue, and you have no idea they're doing it. According to "action news", Bundy owes millions in fees (it's millions now?). You owe fees, I owe fees, we all owe fees. Owing fees here and there and everywhere is a normal, everyday part of human life = Yeah I guess I'm on the BLM's side there. Now on this side over here we have Bundy supporters. They are calling for the dissolution of the federal government = OMG I don't want to dissolve the entire federal government I'm not a wackjob!! It's so ingrained in the media today that we don't even know it's happening anymore. It's a creative way of packaging and presenting a message, it's called the Hegelian Dialecticand authoritarian forms of government have been using it for centuries. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 2:30:22 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In case this hasn't already been posted (admittedly, I'm not following the thread closely) Feds reportedly massing in Vegas Didn't hit the link but let me guess, AFGE get together? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 2:36:26 PM EDT
[#29]
I wonder how many roads lead to Bundy's ranch. Be a shame if they were closed coming from Vegas.
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 2:48:01 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I noticed that, too. What a joke. I wonder how many "on the fence" types they'll convert to full on badge licker with that statement. This is nothing new, the media has been doing this forever. They divide every story into 2 halves, they fill their "news stories" with suggestive words, phrases and notions which prompts you to pick a side. By doing this, they can damn near MAKE you support any side they want on any given issue, and you have no idea they're doing it. According to "action news", Bundy owes millions in fees (it's millions now?). You owe fees, I owe fees, we all owe fees. Owing fees here and there and everywhere is a normal, everyday part of human life = Yeah I guess I'm on the BLM's side there. Now on this side over here we have Bundy supporters. They are calling for the dissolution of the federal government = OMG I don't want to dissolve the entire federal government I'm not a wackjob!! It's so ingrained in the media today that we don't even know it's happening anymore. It's a creative way of packaging and presenting a message, it's called the Hegelian Dialecticand authoritarian forms of government have been using it for centuries. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
"Dissolution of the federal government"? Either his supporters are living in fantasy land, or the news is being spun to paint them as loons. I noticed that, too. What a joke. I wonder how many "on the fence" types they'll convert to full on badge licker with that statement. This is nothing new, the media has been doing this forever. They divide every story into 2 halves, they fill their "news stories" with suggestive words, phrases and notions which prompts you to pick a side. By doing this, they can damn near MAKE you support any side they want on any given issue, and you have no idea they're doing it. According to "action news", Bundy owes millions in fees (it's millions now?). You owe fees, I owe fees, we all owe fees. Owing fees here and there and everywhere is a normal, everyday part of human life = Yeah I guess I'm on the BLM's side there. Now on this side over here we have Bundy supporters. They are calling for the dissolution of the federal government = OMG I don't want to dissolve the entire federal government I'm not a wackjob!! It's so ingrained in the media today that we don't even know it's happening anymore. It's a creative way of packaging and presenting a message, it's called the Hegelian Dialecticand authoritarian forms of government have been using it for centuries. Mr. Bundy had publicly stated that he doesn't recognize the federal government, so nothing would surprise me in terms of who is being drawn to his side of the argument. There are people who think like that, and Sheriff Mack-another supporter of Mr. Bundy-proved how "out there" he was when he talked of putting women in front of the feds so they'd be injured or killed as a negative PR strategy to be used against the government 
If Mr. Bundy is smart, he'll try to win this battle on the PR front to maximize public support. I don't think he's doing a very good job, and at this point I don't think too many Americans are going to be concerned if he goes down for this dog and pony show of defiance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 2:48:34 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2014/04/20/Bundy-Family-Posts-Photo-Of-Dead-Cow-Euthanized-By-BLM Doesn't the word euthanize mean "to peacefully put down".
Quote HistoryQuoted:
http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2014/04/20/Bundy-Family-Posts-Photo-Of-Dead-Cow-Euthanized-By-BLM Doesn't the word euthanize mean "to peacefully put down".
World English Dictionary
euthanize , euthanise , euthanaze or euthanase ('ju????na?z, 'ju????ne?z) — vb ( tr ) to kill (a person or animal) painlessly, esp to relieve suffering from an incurable illness I had to have one of my dogs euthanized a couple of months ago. The vet didn't use bullets. Did my vet do it wrong? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 2:49:01 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I wonder how many roads lead to Bundy's ranch. Be a shame if they were closed coming from Vegas. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile That's what helos are for. Closing the roads isn't going to prevent federal agencies from doing what they want to do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 3:10:52 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Mr. Bundy had publicly stated that he doesn't recognize the federal government, so nothing would surprise me in terms of who is being drawn to his side of the argument. There are people who think like that, and Sheriff Mack-another supporter of Mr. Bundy-proved how "out there" he was when he talked of putting women in front of the feds so they'd be injured or killed as a negative PR strategy to be used against the government
If Mr. Bundy is smart, he'll try to win this battle on the PR front to maximize public support. I don't think he's doing a very good job, and at this point I don't think too many Americans are going to be concerned if he goes down for this dog and pony show of defiance. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
"Dissolution of the federal government"? Either his supporters are living in fantasy land, or the news is being spun to paint them as loons. I noticed that, too. What a joke. I wonder how many "on the fence" types they'll convert to full on badge licker with that statement. This is nothing new, the media has been doing this forever. They divide every story into 2 halves, they fill their "news stories" with suggestive words, phrases and notions which prompts you to pick a side. By doing this, they can damn near MAKE you support any side they want on any given issue, and you have no idea they're doing it. According to "action news", Bundy owes millions in fees (it's millions now?). You owe fees, I owe fees, we all owe fees. Owing fees here and there and everywhere is a normal, everyday part of human life = Yeah I guess I'm on the BLM's side there. Now on this side over here we have Bundy supporters. They are calling for the dissolution of the federal government = OMG I don't want to dissolve the entire federal government I'm not a wackjob!! It's so ingrained in the media today that we don't even know it's happening anymore. It's a creative way of packaging and presenting a message, it's called the Hegelian Dialecticand authoritarian forms of government have been using it for centuries. Mr. Bundy had publicly stated that he doesn't recognize the federal government, so nothing would surprise me in terms of who is being drawn to his side of the argument. There are people who think like that, and Sheriff Mack-another supporter of Mr. Bundy-proved how "out there" he was when he talked of putting women in front of the feds so they'd be injured or killed as a negative PR strategy to be used against the government
If Mr. Bundy is smart, he'll try to win this battle on the PR front to maximize public support. I don't think he's doing a very good job, and at this point I don't think too many Americans are going to be concerned if he goes down for this dog and pony show of defiance. I've heard Bundy claim that he. Doesn't recognize the Federal Government's claim to the land he is using but I've never heard him claim that he doesn't recognize the federal government at all. Anyone got a link to that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 3:18:42 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I wonder how many roads lead to Bundy's ranch. Be a shame if they were closed coming from Vegas. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 3:20:27 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In case this hasn't already been posted (admittedly, I'm not following the thread closely) Feds reportedly massing in Vegas  |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 3:22:35 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeager is leaving,... so there's that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
In case this hasn't already been posted (admittedly, I'm not following the thread closely) Feds reportedly massing in Vegas Yeager is leaving,... so there's that. Yeager aside, take a look at the people that are left. They are all people who have openly stated they are looking for a fight with the fed gov. Vanderbough is a prime example - his health has been bad for awhile and the latest pictures of him look terrible. If this is one of his last rodeos, will he try to instigate a "historical event" (consequences or prudence be damned)? All that said, the make up of actors isn't necessarily good or bad, just something to think about when metagaming this to conclusion. At the same time, if the Feds come back, what will they come back for? More cattle roundup? "Arrests"? If they come back just for cows, this could spiral out of control and end up a major black eye if the militia tries to go on the offensive against them. If they come for heads, the people there are going to be anxious to fo and I think the national reaction will end up much differently. Again, more food for thought. At any rate, it looks like some real action may be brewing out there so everyone can stop flexing dick over grazing fee issues and other irrelevant topics. To be clear, the key issue here isn't anything to do with who is legally right or wrong on those legal issues. The key issue is that people are finally saying that, because of how far the government has gone, it really doesn't matter. It's one of the first major skirmishes of what might end up being the "conservative civil rights movement." |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 3:30:43 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeager aside, take a look at the people that are left. They are all people who have openly stated they are looking for a fight with the fed gov. Vanderbough is a prime example - his health has been bad for awhile and the latest pictures of him look terrible. If this is one of his last rodeos, will he try to instigate a "historical event" (consequences or prudence be damned)? All that said, the make up of actors isn't necessarily good or bad, just something to think about when metagaming this to conclusion. At the same time, if the Feds come back, what will they come back for? More cattle roundup? "Arrests"? If they come back just for cows, this could spiral out of control and end up a major black eye if the militia tries to go on the offensive against them. If they come for heads, the people there are going to be anxious to fo and I think the national reaction will end up much differently. Again, more food for thought. At any rate, it looks like some real action may be brewing out there so everyone can stop flexing dick over grazing fee issues and other irrelevant topics. To be clear, the key issue here isn't anything to do with who is legally right or wrong on those legal issues. The key issue is that people are finally saying that, because of how far the government has gone, it really doesn't matter. It's one of the first major skirmishes of what might end up being the "conservative civil rights movement." Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: In case this hasn't already been posted (admittedly, I'm not following the thread closely) Feds reportedly massing in Vegas Yeager is leaving,... so there's that. Yeager aside, take a look at the people that are left. They are all people who have openly stated they are looking for a fight with the fed gov. Vanderbough is a prime example - his health has been bad for awhile and the latest pictures of him look terrible. If this is one of his last rodeos, will he try to instigate a "historical event" (consequences or prudence be damned)? All that said, the make up of actors isn't necessarily good or bad, just something to think about when metagaming this to conclusion. At the same time, if the Feds come back, what will they come back for? More cattle roundup? "Arrests"? If they come back just for cows, this could spiral out of control and end up a major black eye if the militia tries to go on the offensive against them. If they come for heads, the people there are going to be anxious to fo and I think the national reaction will end up much differently. Again, more food for thought. At any rate, it looks like some real action may be brewing out there so everyone can stop flexing dick over grazing fee issues and other irrelevant topics. To be clear, the key issue here isn't anything to do with who is legally right or wrong on those legal issues. The key issue is that people are finally saying that, because of how far the government has gone, it really doesn't matter. It's one of the first major skirmishes of what might end up being the "conservative civil rights movement." |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 3:33:53 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If they come back just for cows, this could spiral out of control and end up a major black eye if the militia tries to go on the offensive against them. If they come for heads, the people there are going to be anxious to fo and I think the national reaction will end up much differently. Again, more food for thought. At any rate, it looks like some real action may be brewing out there so everyone can stop flexing dick over grazing fee issues and other irrelevant topics. To be clear, the key issue here isn't anything to do with who is legally right or wrong on those legal issues. The key issue is that people are finally saying that, because of how far the government has gone, it really doesn't matter. It's one of the first major skirmishes of what might end up being the "conservative civil rights movement." If they were going to come back for the cows, they shouldn't have released them in the first place. The only thing that would be accomplished by that is putting additional lives on the line. If this, I truly hope it remains MUCH more peaceful than the civil rights movement of the '60's. If it goes hot, as someone else stated many pages ago, we haven't seen bad yet but it is coming". Doesn't matter which side take it will not be pretty for either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 3:49:57 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Can I start a logging company on public land without paying for the wood? Can I hunt on public property without paying for a hunting license? Can I build a cabin on public land without paying property taxes? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
No but you can run cattle on public land as far as im concerned. The grazing of cattle in the desert has zero cost to the public or the land.Unless the government can give him an itemized bill for repair of damages his cattle have caused on the land they can and should go fuck themselves with their fees. Can I start a logging company on public land without paying for the wood? Can I hunt on public property without paying for a hunting license? Can I build a cabin on public land without paying property taxes? Lets say the land is sub par, that the trees that are there wont stop erosion problems and other issues. In return for the wood you sell, you plant new trees. Lets say you cut out the old wood, and replace it with faster growing trees with root systems more suited to the area. In that case, yes you should pay little or no additional fees, because the work you are doing is saving the land for generations to come istead of allowing it to wash away and silt up commerical water ways 500 miles down stream. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 3:56:59 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lets say the land is sub par, that the trees that are there wont stop erosion problems and other issues. In return for the wood you sell, you plant new trees. Lets say you cut out the old wood, and replace it with faster growing trees with root systems more suited to the area. In that case, yes you should pay little or no additional fees, because the work you are doing is saving the land for generations to come istead of allowing it to wash away and silt up commerical water ways 500 miles down stream. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No but you can run cattle on public land as far as im concerned. The grazing of cattle in the desert has zero cost to the public or the land.Unless the government can give him an itemized bill for repair of damages his cattle have caused on the land they can and should go fuck themselves with their fees. Can I start a logging company on public land without paying for the wood? Can I hunt on public property without paying for a hunting license? Can I build a cabin on public land without paying property taxes? Lets say the land is sub par, that the trees that are there wont stop erosion problems and other issues. In return for the wood you sell, you plant new trees. Lets say you cut out the old wood, and replace it with faster growing trees with root systems more suited to the area. In that case, yes you should pay little or no additional fees, because the work you are doing is saving the land for generations to come istead of allowing it to wash away and silt up commerical water ways 500 miles down stream. And who should make the determination that his logging will be beneficial and require no fee? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 3:57:25 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And who should make the determination that his logging will be beneficial and require no fee? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: No but you can run cattle on public land as far as im concerned. The grazing of cattle in the desert has zero cost to the public or the land.Unless the government can give him an itemized bill for repair of damages his cattle have caused on the land they can and should go fuck themselves with their fees. Can I start a logging company on public land without paying for the wood? Can I hunt on public property without paying for a hunting license? Can I build a cabin on public land without paying property taxes? Lets say the land is sub par, that the trees that are there wont stop erosion problems and other issues. In return for the wood you sell, you plant new trees. Lets say you cut out the old wood, and replace it with faster growing trees with root systems more suited to the area. In that case, yes you should pay little or no additional fees, because the work you are doing is saving the land for generations to come istead of allowing it to wash away and silt up commerical water ways 500 miles down stream. And who should make the determination that his logging will be beneficial and require no fee? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 4:05:42 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And who should make the determination that his logging will be beneficial and require no fee? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No but you can run cattle on public land as far as im concerned. The grazing of cattle in the desert has zero cost to the public or the land.Unless the government can give him an itemized bill for repair of damages his cattle have caused on the land they can and should go fuck themselves with their fees. Can I start a logging company on public land without paying for the wood? Can I hunt on public property without paying for a hunting license? Can I build a cabin on public land without paying property taxes? Lets say the land is sub par, that the trees that are there wont stop erosion problems and other issues. In return for the wood you sell, you plant new trees. Lets say you cut out the old wood, and replace it with faster growing trees with root systems more suited to the area. In that case, yes you should pay little or no additional fees, because the work you are doing is saving the land for generations to come istead of allowing it to wash away and silt up commerical water ways 500 miles down stream. And who should make the determination that his logging will be beneficial and require no fee? I think that that should be split up, maybe into three or four groups, the feds, state, locals and maybe some people familiar with the subject, but with no connection to either group, picked at random so that the chances of someone buying them all is lessened. The thing about letting one agency make the call is, it is easy to bribe them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 4:07:58 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think that that should be split up, maybe into three or four groups, the feds, state, locals and maybe some people familiar with the subject picked at random so that the chances of someone buying them all is lessened. The thing about letting one agency make the call is, it is easy to bribe them. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No but you can run cattle on public land as far as im concerned. The grazing of cattle in the desert has zero cost to the public or the land.Unless the government can give him an itemized bill for repair of damages his cattle have caused on the land they can and should go fuck themselves with their fees. Can I start a logging company on public land without paying for the wood? Can I hunt on public property without paying for a hunting license? Can I build a cabin on public land without paying property taxes? Lets say the land is sub par, that the trees that are there wont stop erosion problems and other issues. In return for the wood you sell, you plant new trees. Lets say you cut out the old wood, and replace it with faster growing trees with root systems more suited to the area. In that case, yes you should pay little or no additional fees, because the work you are doing is saving the land for generations to come istead of allowing it to wash away and silt up commerical water ways 500 miles down stream. And who should make the determination that his logging will be beneficial and require no fee? I think that that should be split up, maybe into three or four groups, the feds, state, locals and maybe some people familiar with the subject picked at random so that the chances of someone buying them all is lessened. The thing about letting one agency make the call is, it is easy to bribe them. In other words, you do not think ZMV can not decide to start a logging company on public land without paying for the wood. He must first get permission from other another entity or entities. Edit: And likewise, you would say that a rancher can not run cattle on public land without such permission. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 4:16:50 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In other words, you do not think ZMV can not decide to start a logging company on public land without paying for the wood. He must first get permission from other another entity or entities. Edit: And likewise, you would say that a rancher can not run cattle on public land without such permission. I would say that ZMV could not start a new logging company on public land without paying for the wood yes. If he were to replant trees that would save commercial water ways and create bigger trees faster he should have to pay much less, If anything. Because his services would pay forthemselves many times over in 40 years. The one sticky wicket with this is the Bundy family has used the range long before the BLM existed in it's current form. He had water and grazing rights that predate the BLM claim. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 4:19:50 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would say that ZMV could not start a new logging company on public land without paying for the wood yes. The one sticky wicket with this is the mans family has used the range long before the BLM existed in its current form. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
In other words, you do not think ZMV can not decide to start a logging company on public land without paying for the wood. He must first get permission from other another entity or entities. Edit: And likewise, you would say that a rancher can not run cattle on public land without such permission. I would say that ZMV could not start a new logging company on public land without paying for the wood yes. The one sticky wicket with this is the mans family has used the range long before the BLM existed in its current form. Which doesn't mean much when the entity with the authority to make those determinations decides to modify the considerations of its permission. I lived in an apartment complex once that was sold to another management agency. I had lived in that apartment longer than the new company had owned it. That didn't mean much when they rolled out brand new lease agreements with new language and difference rent rates. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 4:31:03 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which doesn't mean much when the entity with the authority to make those determinations decides to modify the considerations of its permission. I lived in an apartment complex once that was sold to another management agency. I had lived in that apartment longer than the new company had owned it. That didn't mean much when they rolled out brand new lease agreements with new language and difference rent rates. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
In other words, you do not think ZMV can not decide to start a logging company on public land without paying for the wood. He must first get permission from other another entity or entities. Edit: And likewise, you would say that a rancher can not run cattle on public land without such permission. I would say that ZMV could not start a new logging company on public land without paying for the wood yes. The one sticky wicket with this is the mans family has used the range long before the BLM existed in its current form. Which doesn't mean much when the entity with the authority to make those determinations decides to modify the considerations of its permission. I lived in an apartment complex once that was sold to another management agency. I had lived in that apartment longer than the new company had owned it. That didn't mean much when they rolled out brand new lease agreements with new language and difference rent rates. Please stop trying to make sense of all this. I f they haven't got it yet they wont. You're doing an excellent job defending good reasoning skills. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 4:33:11 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which doesn't mean much when the entity with the authority to make those determinations decides to modify the considerations of its permission. I lived in an apartment complex once that was sold to another management agency. I had lived in that apartment longer than the new company had owned it. That didn't mean much when they rolled out brand new lease agreements with new language and difference rent rates. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
In other words, you do not think ZMV can not decide to start a logging company on public land without paying for the wood. He must first get permission from other another entity or entities. Edit: And likewise, you would say that a rancher can not run cattle on public land without such permission. I would say that ZMV could not start a new logging company on public land without paying for the wood yes. The one sticky wicket with this is the mans family has used the range long before the BLM existed in its current form. Which doesn't mean much when the entity with the authority to make those determinations decides to modify the considerations of its permission. I lived in an apartment complex once that was sold to another management agency. I had lived in that apartment longer than the new company had owned it. That didn't mean much when they rolled out brand new lease agreements with new language and difference rent rates. Last time I checked common law is still common law. When a person has made a claim to land that predates an entity with the authority to make determinations on unclaimed land, it is theirs. That was how the west was settled. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 4:35:28 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which doesn't mean much when the entity with the authority to make those determinations decides to modify the considerations of its permission. I lived in an apartment complex once that was sold to another management agency. I had lived in that apartment longer than the new company had owned it. That didn't mean much when they rolled out brand new lease agreements with new language and difference rent rates. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
In other words, you do not think ZMV can not decide to start a logging company on public land without paying for the wood. He must first get permission from other another entity or entities. Edit: And likewise, you would say that a rancher can not run cattle on public land without such permission. I would say that ZMV could not start a new logging company on public land without paying for the wood yes. The one sticky wicket with this is the mans family has used the range long before the BLM existed in its current form. Which doesn't mean much when the entity with the authority to make those determinations decides to modify the considerations of its permission. I lived in an apartment complex once that was sold to another management agency. I had lived in that apartment longer than the new company had owned it. That didn't mean much when they rolled out brand new lease agreements with new language and difference rent rates. but if you had the money you could have bought the complex and bundy is boxed in and the feds keep jacking the lease conditions to the point they are unfair and do nothing but force him to get out of the cattle business. what if instead of selling your appt they told you you could only have 1 kid in the apartment and you had 2 at the time? do you lose a kid or try to fight for what's right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 4:36:05 PM EDT
[#49]
For those of you calling FSA on the Bundy Ranch, show me where they place on the .gov ag subsidies list.
http://farm.ewg.org/top_recips.php?fips=32003&progcode=livestock®ionname=ClarkCounty,Nevada |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 4:37:01 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Last time I checked common law is still common law. When a person has made a claim to land that predates an entity with the authority to make determinations on unclaimed land, it is theirs. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
In other words, you do not think ZMV can not decide to start a logging company on public land without paying for the wood. He must first get permission from other another entity or entities. Edit: And likewise, you would say that a rancher can not run cattle on public land without such permission. I would say that ZMV could not start a new logging company on public land without paying for the wood yes. The one sticky wicket with this is the mans family has used the range long before the BLM existed in its current form. Which doesn't mean much when the entity with the authority to make those determinations decides to modify the considerations of its permission. I lived in an apartment complex once that was sold to another management agency. I had lived in that apartment longer than the new company had owned it. That didn't mean much when they rolled out brand new lease agreements with new language and difference rent rates. Last time I checked common law is still common law. When a person has made a claim to land that predates an entity with the authority to make determinations on unclaimed land, it is theirs. Providing they have actual proof. Which Bundy has never been able to provide. And, of course, it's going to be damn hard for Bundy to find any proof when he claims to have started grazing in 1877, while the Feds laid claim to that land in 1861. The BLM's creation date is a red herring. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
