This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: Liberty Movement Rising
Submitted by Brandon Smith of Alt-Market.com,
"Freedom had been hunted round the globe; reason was considered as rebellion; and the slavery of fear had made men afraid to think. But such is the irresistible nature of truth, that all it asks, and all it wants, is the liberty of appearing." - Thomas Paine
The label of “fringe” is a common one used by statists, bureaucrats and paid shills in order to marginalize those who would stand against government corruption. The primary assertion being sold is that the “majority” joyously supports the establishment; and the majority, of course, is always right.
The liberty movement, which is a collection of numerous freedom organizations and political activists brought together by a shared philosophical bond, has been accused of “fringe” status for quite some time. With corporatist dominance over the mainstream media for decades backing an elitist machine in Washington and a global banking cartel footing the bill with money created from thin air, any such accusation can be made to seem “real” to those who are unaware.
The problem has always been a matter of physical action giving rise to an acknowledgment of numbers.
We have all heard the old story of the debate within the ancient Roman government over the idea of forcing the slave population to wear distinct armbands so that they could be more easily identified among the regular population. The concept was rejected on the realization that if the slaves were given a visual confirmation of their considerable numbers and strength, they would be encouraged to revolt against the Roman tyrants. That is to say, as long as the slaves felt isolated, they would remain apathetic and powerless. Of course, that was not always the case. Sometimes, a small group would stand up despite their supposed isolation, and the rest of the world, wide-eyed and astonished, would take notice.
The liberty movement has just experienced one of its first great moments of realization and empowerment in Clark County, Nev., and millions of past naysayers have been shell-shocked.
I covered my views in detail on the Bundy Ranch saga in Nevada in my article “Real Americans Are Ready To Snap,” amid the usual choir of disinformation agents and nihilists desperate to convince Web audiences that the liberty movement would do nothing to stop the Bureau of Land Management’s militant assault on Cliven Bundy’s cattle farm. This assault included hundreds of Federal agents, helicopters, contractors hired essentially as cattle rustlers and even teams of snipers.
The statists and socialists were certainly out in force to misrepresent the Bundy issue and frighten anyone who might consider taking a stand for the family. The Southern Poverty Law Center, not surprisingly, was hard at work spreading lies and disinformation about the confrontation in Nevada, painting a picture of fractured patriot groups and militiamen with “little training” going to face unstoppable Federal BLM agents and likely “ending up dead.” The SPLC insinuated that the movement was ineffective and in over its head.
The reality was much the opposite. Liberty groups arrived in droves and were staunchly unified — not by a centralized leadership, but in defense of the basic moral principles outlined in the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. Sources on the ground at the Bundy ranching operation relayed to me that at least 1,000 activists and militia members arrived over the weekend, with many more on the way. This one event proved certain points:
- The liberty movement is not afraid to put itself in harm’s way for the right cause — even if this means facing off against highly armed government thugs.
- The liberty movement has the ability to field a response team or even an army anywhere in the country at any time within a couple of days.
- The liberty movement has the ability to change the course of events, even to the point of removing Federal agents from a region who are acting in an unConstitutional manner.
- The Federal government is not invincible, nor is it unfazed by liberty movement opposition. They worry about our strength and ability.
Over the past weekend, we witnessed the true influence of the liberty movement. As thousands of activists and militia arrived in the area, the BLM finally began to understand what it was facing. The government agency that has been terrorized farming communities throughout the West for years, the agency armed with military-grade weaponry and hundreds of agents, ran away, as freedom fighters descended on the region.
Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval and Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie, two politicians who were deathly silent during the beginning of the Federal incursion on the Bundy ranch, have now suddenly become vocal in defense of Nevada ranchers against the BLM. It’s amazing how “inspired” politicians can become to do the right thing when they see an army of liberty activists marching against tyranny in their own backyard.
Not only was the BLM forced to remove itself from the area, but it was also forced to relinquish all the cattle it had stolen from Bundy over the course of the past week. Here, liberty groups close in on the cattle holding pens of the BLM and take back Bundy’s property.
Statists are indignant and furious over the surrender of the BLM. The same people who boasted that liberty activists would be slaughtered by Fed agents are now frothing at the mouth because they did not get their massacre. Not only that, but the bureaucracy they worship has shown itself to be impotent in the face of Constitutional champions. All I can say is nothing puts a bigger grin on my face than to see statists cry like babies when their delusions of grandeur are trampled on.
This was a major victory for the liberty movement. But let’s be clear; the fight is just beginning.
I suspect that the Bundy event will be spun by news agencies and the government until it is unrecognizable. They will claim that the BLM left not because they were wrong, but because they were trying to keep people safe. They will claim that liberty movement protesters were the aggressors and the poor BLM agents were just trying to do their jobs. They will play the race card as they always do, much like this pathetically lazy and unprofessional article from Slate, which asserts that if the Bundy's had been black, the Liberty Movement would have never supported them. They will argue the so-called Federal legality of the raid itself, and paint Bundy as a “freeloader” who refuses to pay taxes and who is living off the American people. They will do everything in their power to destroy the image of the victory and soil the name of the Bundy family.
What they don’t seem to understand, though, is that the liberty movement does not care what the Federal government deems “legal” or “illegal.” Our only interest is what is Constitutional and what is moral. The dispute was never about the “legality” of Bundy’s use of the land, which his family used for grazing without interference for generations — until 1993, when the BLM used the absurd endangered species protection racket to put all of his neighbors out of business and threaten his ranch with invasion. Add to this the recently discovered fact that Senator Harry Reid's former assistant and friend Neil Kornze is now head of the BLM due to Reid's influence, and the fact that Harry Reid and his family are reaping financial rewards by driving farmers from all over the region where Cliven Bundy's ranch sits while arranging land deals with Chinese solar companies, and one has to ask, why should Bundy pay any of his hard earned money to the federal government when they are just going to use it to bulldoze his cattle and make Harry Reid more rich?
Disinformation websites like Snopes contend that Reid's "projects" are not being established anywhere near the Bundy Ranch, yet, one such project has already been launched only 35 miles south of Bundy, and, the BLM has erased a page from its website specifically mentioning the Bundy Ranch and it's "interference" with Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone Projects, the same projects Harry Reid and his son are heavily involved in.
What is amazing to me is that in light of this information hardcore socialists are still willing to defend Reid and the BLM. My question is, if the BLM is so innocent, then why are they erasing such data from their website at all? What were they trying to hide?
Harry Reid has not responded to the facts behind his financial involvement in the BLM's attacks on Nevada farmers, except to say that they are "conspiracy theories". He added when asked about the status of the confrontation:
“Well, it’s not over. We can’t have an American people that violate the law and then just walk away from it. So it’s not over...”
Yes, Harry, it won't be over until men like you are thrown behind bars.
Note that he says "an American people"; as if he is separate, as if he is referring to all of us as a subservient organism, or servant class. What Reid is saying is, the elites can't have "an American people" openly exposing their criminality and defying their tyranny, and then just walking away. I'm sorry to break it to Reid, but that is exactly how all of this is going to end.
Statists and bureaucrats like Reid continually attempt to argue this issue from the standpoint of Federal legality, obviously because the Federal government has the legislative and bureaucratic power to make any despicable action legal (at least on paper) if it wishes. However, the liberty movement has no interest whatsoever in Federal interpretations of legal precedence. We are only concerned with what is right. As the old saying goes, when injustice becomes law, rebellion becomes duty.
The liberty movement also fully understands that the Bundy victory was only one battle at the beginning of a long war.
The BLM may very well be waiting for activists to leave the area before attacking again. And even if that is not the case, tyrannical systems have a way of attempting to make up for signs of weakness by escalating violence during the next siege. That is to say, we should expect the next event involving the BLM or other government agencies to be even more vicious than the Bundy incident. It is simply the natural inclination of totalitarian systems to exaggerate their power when their failings have been exposed.
That said, it should be noted that corrupt leadership often crumbles in the face of steadfast resolve and courage. We have a long way to go before this Nation is once again truly free, but the liberty movement has proven its invaluable worth over the course of the past several days. We arrived at a crossroads, and we are now moving forward in the right direction — without fear and without regret. It is in these moments when history is made — when common men and women thwart the odds, defy the darkness and make good on their beliefs by risking everything in the name of freedom.
»
- 72702 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
No, not England. But Nigel Farage is a fucking clown (want to bash the EU, well, stop sucking its teat). And the UKIP is an oxymoron: "non racist anti-immigration"... It's the more "palatable" version of the Tories, whom nationalist-populist wouldn't touch with a laser pointer. But very much the same, in a different package.
Thanks for your honest opinion.
What you are missing big time in this Bundy incident is that -- whether the precise conditions of the confrontation were perfect or not, and on how many occasions are they perfect? or whether Bundy is 100% in the right -- it was a golden opportunity for freedom loving believers in small constitutional government to confront the criminal federal government and send a messgae to them that "Enough is Enough".
In my view, that was a very important message to send.
There was a very important moment a couple years ago. A moment which made TPTB shit in their pants. So much they had to send the militarized police thugs to beat the shit out of the protesters, and start changing a lot of laws just to make their way of protesting virtually impossible. THAT was the moment for everyone fed up with the federal government to send the message of Enough is Enough.
But regrettably, many of today's Bundy-style "freedom lovers", where too distracted seeing sickles and hammers in the soup to actually join the fight. And now they see a thief, who shat on his community and stole from the public thing; and just because he uses the tatemae of "I don't recognize the Federal Govt" and brandishes guns and threatens with violence, only now these so called "freedom lovers" think it's time to rise.
Yeah, do me a favour. Rise on this faux crusade. Maybe when you fail miserably and discover how stupid this cause was, then maybe next time a real protest against the injustice of the Federal State arises, all these "freedom lovers" might join and do everyone a favor, instead of siding with a cheap ass thief.
I'm sure there are many occasions in history which should have inspired people to react against the State. But people have a lot of tolerance and it takes time for the pressure to build up. I could give you a list as long as your arm of pieces of UK anti-liberty legislation which should have brought millions out onto the streets and brought down the government etc. Here's one that comes to mind: when government banned private ownership of guns nearly 100 years ago. Laws which have become ever tighter since. And yet, the very same people in Britain who sat back and let this happen and still take no action against the endless flow of police-state laws, complain at TV footage of the State's thugs in other countries beating or shooting down innocent, unarmed protesters. They cannot connect the dots. Others are in denial and cannot face reality. Those who can see what's happening and urge action against it are labelled by the Left as "extremists" and more recently "domestic terrorists".
History records that what we see happening in the US, UK and large parts of Europe will get a whole lot worse before enough people connect the dots and take action against it. Sadly, the job will be much harder and take a lot longer.
I won't deny the slow boiling water and frog analogy. Yes, that happens. People are conformist. People like stability and want to be left alone, etc...
"when government banned private ownership of guns nearly 100 years ago."
I knew a lot of Brits who were all very happy with that, though. The idea of a saturday night at bars (as they do there) knowing people would be armed just gave them the shivers. Specially after spending some time in places where gun laws are way too lax, or not enforced at all.
"History records that what we see happening in the US, UK and large parts of Europe will get a whole lot worse before enough people connect the dots and take action against it."
I'm not so sure about that. While I don't think that an encroaching surveillance state (and specially with the UK's libel laws) can have much of a happy ending; if there's one thing that history, and I mean the history of my country, taught me is that any government cannot last without the support of the people. Maybe now with technology they might make a breakthrough with that, but that's yet to be seen.
My own stupid country had some decades back a very harsh dictatorship. It wasn't lefty, commie, socialist nor nothing of that sort. It was led by what might be called a "hard right", but that term is too empty for my taste. They were conservative, religious, elitists and were more or less in bed with Washington (who was hell bent on their so called "war on communism"). They summarily executed tens of thousands of people and conducted a reign of terror, while selling the country's assets away like fresh bread. But they didn't rise out of nowhere. They had complete popular support (at least in the beginning). Because the country had devolved into a political mess by that time. And the slogan of fighting "communism" and "terrorism" was the pill they got the people to swallow, and almost everyone clamored for the dictatorship to take control because of that. But the truth was, by the time the dictatorship rose, all those "left" leaning militias had already been exterminated by "hard right" paramilitary commandos. It was all a lie, but people just wanted some stability and peace. And they got the worse of it all.
But the terror, the economic mess, the loss of political freedom (or freedom at all), the prosecution of those who thought different, of the "lefties" and all that shit; ended up tiring the people. And they needed no guns and no revolution for the dictatorship to end. They did it to themselves. They just couldn't last without popular support. Once they lost it, they were gone.
BTW, I don't know what you mean by the "left" labeling extremists. But if you talk about H Reid... I'd put in contest the notion he is what colloquially could be called left. The "leftiest" the US has today probably is Amy Goodman and that woman from the socialist party elected to a state legislature a couple months ago (and I'm not so sure about her either...).
Sometimes the terms "left" "socialism" "communism", etc... are just empty labels to which assign everything people think is bad. And repeated over and over (as has been in the western world since the cold war), as Göbbels said, it becomes truth-iness. That's why I bother so much with definitions. Without them, those terms have no real meaning, but that which the ever rambling "propaganda" ("ideas or statements that are often false or exaggerated and that are spread in order to help a cause, a political leader, a government, etc." - Merriam Webster) decides.
You should take good care before using any of those words, nowadays so bastardized. You might end up playing the hand of someone else. Someone whose interests might have nothing to do with your well being.
AA, wake up:
http://bit.ly/P6SHpc
If agreeing with such a guy is being awake, damn, I'd like to be the Sleeping Beauty...
Of course he knows it, it's his job. He's not very good you see so he's trying extra hard right now so he doesn't lose the 4th job he's tried to hold down in as many months. Those anime boxed sets are expensive.
I've been at my job since 2007, if that means anything to you.
Anime Box sets? The only one I'd get is the Evangelion Renewal Red Box edition, from 2007 I believe. For anything else there's streaming and torrent.
But if you're talking about Revoltech's, Figma's and Gunplas... damn, that's another thing. My biggest expense after good booze.
So you work in a comic book shop and get paid to infest this forum as a side job? I admire your work ethic but that's about all.
No, I wish I'd work on something like that. But have a more tedious job doing finance for a real estate company. Wish I could get paid to post independent thought on forums like this, but that's just a past time I got when I started sutying politics in college.
"when I started sutying politics in college."
Whatsamatta? You forget to use the spell check button you arrogant prick? Didn't you criticize Waterfallsparkles for the same thing below?
"Your spelling's worse mate. There's a spell-checker on the posting box. On the 6th day God created it and saw it was good and rejoiced."
Yeah, a typo which I missed after posting so much in such a short time. Which is rather different from someone who can't really spell shit. There's a difference between pressing the wrong keys and not realizing your mistake, and not knowing how to spell words even when you typed the keys you wanted to.
Looking for the fifth leg of the cat arentcha?
Excuses, excuses. Fail!
Sure mate, whatever you say big guy. You the man, right?
Liberty is not license, but great responsibility.
Of course! Agree completely. It means being responsible for your actions. Means following the law. And if you don't like the law, then use the institutional channels to change it. It means taking charge of your situation and future by participating in the community and politics (as politics is the science of the state). License is just Cartman saying "I do what I want", completely irresponsible for his actions. And that's Bundy. "I graze where I want and don't pay shit, fuck you sir", "I extract from the public thing and don't give a fuck, fuck you", "If you don't like me doing whatever I want, shitting on whoever I want, and extracting whatever I want without any sort of compensation, fuck you". That's Bundy. That's license. That's not freedom. That's irresponsibility.
Or read Animal Farm and 1984, HRC's fav book.
I believe the definition of socialism has existed long before nationalist cartoons from the mid 20th century demonized and warped the image of socialism so that support for capitalism would grow in the peak of The Cold War. What you know is derived from your political camp and the pundits that reside therein. Am I to accept the definition of socialism as interpreted by it's critics? Or should I accept the definition of socialism by those who are socialists and have a genuine interest in it?
As a socialist I agree with the anti-state event because the state clearly does not represent the people it is supposed to serve. As a socialist I believe power is too centralized -which probihits the government from functioning as an extension of the will of the governed. As a socialist I believe that government should run strongest on a local level and should be the force behind the will of the people. These ranchers want a government THEY control, not a government that oligarchs control like we have today. Now you can take the definition of socialism from a socialist, or you can stick to the semantics of your particular camp.
I don't really belong to a "political camp" as you say. To me, politics is a necessary evil and should be kept on a very tight leash.
The things you list that you believe in may amount to your definition of socialism but a better definition is based upon actions, not words. and your list of things is not on the list of any socialist, whatever they say. That's why I reckoned you misused the term.
Centralised planning & control, incompetent economic meddling, anti-liberty, nanny state, tax/borrow/spend and social manipulation are just a few of the terms that describe socialism in practice. Forget all those wonderful fluffy theories about "real socialism". Socialism is a fraud practiced by fraudsters. It's about fooling people and making empty promises to grab power so they can get their sticky hands on the levers and milk the treasury to create ever more monuments to socialism. It's an incurable mental disease.
If the term socialism has become sullied over the years, it's because those who peddle it have been found to be lying fraudsters, never delivering what they promised and never having any intention of doing so.
We all belong to a camp, whether or not it is mainstream is a different matter.
It isn't MY definition of socialism because I am not the father of the idea, but my definition holds true to what socialism truly is. Socialism isn't about the centralization of power, it's about the workers all becoming owners in the business they take part in and having a say about how it should operate. By that extension it is the people that have a stake in the business that determine how it will run through a democratic process. True socialists believe in private property; taxes should be implemented only when the majority of the people (not the so-called "representatives" we have) agree to them and only for specific programs approved by the people -exactly what our founding fathers intended, however they do not believe that large MNCs ought to own property and do not subscibe to the notion that corporations are people.
At the farm where I work at there are no individual leaders/bosses or one individual owner, only a competent group of farmers that all contribute their skills toward one common goal. We all have a say in what happens and how it operates. We all share the fruits of our labor by cooking food and drinking beer after the day is done, yet we adopt a capitalist mindset when we sell our produce to the general population and various grocery stores.
To say that socialism in practice is central planning, anti-liberty, and nanny state is like me saying that capitalism is always a zero-sum game, the rich will always subvert the masses, it's profit over people, and capitalists always adhere to greedy intentions -which isn't true. Capitalism today is used as a way to run the government and the seams separating the two have disappeared long ago but the main problem is the lack of empowerment on the individual citizen level. Socialism, like capitalism, democracy, and so on only work if the people are empowered instead of just giving the people an election every so often to choose who will fuck them over.
Probably one of the best posts I've read @ ZH in ages.
Yeah, "Centralised planning & control, incompetent economic meddling, anti-liberty, nanny state, tax/borrow/spend and social manipulation are just a few of the terms that describe socialism in practice". like for example Norway. Oh those poor norwegians suffering from their incompetent social system. They most probably would love their country to be more like, for example, Britain who blew up their oil reserves in pure bullshit and now can only export financial paper. Incompetent socialist Norway managed it differently and managed to redistribute the lands riches among its people. That's incompetence for you, as defined by the Merriam Webster Dictionary of Newspeak.
When Norweigians become a minority in Norway get back to me with the Socialist bullshit.
Nuthin hard about getting a bunch of white folks to share things.
Oh... so now it's a white thing... White socialism is cool, right?
I wonder when does this apply: http://www.zerohedge.com/help/notice-racism
so you're summoning the watchful eye of the Provolone Popes?
Scandinavian countries are among the most highly taxed people in the world. And they run a giant "nanny state" where (eg) kids are taken away from families by Social Services on spurious grounds because "the State knows better" how to bring up kids (ie: brainwash them with State garbage from an early age).
Without oil, Norway is nothing and would have degenerated into just-another-socialist-mush-state. It's virtually done that anyway.
Yeah, they're highly taxed because they have ample social services. You might call that "nanny state", but it's actually making the lives of people a lot easier and better. They are taxed heavily because a lot of money is spent on public education. They pay a whole lot in taxes, because a whole lot of money is then spent in public healthcare. They pay an arm off in taxes, because they spend tons in infrastructure. That is called "redistribution", and according to some theories, that's the only function of a government.
The taking away of kids in spurious grounds and Brave New World-like brainwashing sounds a lot like an urban legend. Do you have any reputable source on that? Like a worldwide study or something? (please refrain from posting sensationalist rags)
"Without oil, Norway is nothing and would have degenerated into just-another-socialist-mush-state. It's virtually done that anyway."
Well, goddamn of course! The big difference between Norway and Britain (for example), is that Norway had a responsible management of the public riches, which was then reinvested in the people. While Britain just blew it away. And while Northern oil is dwindling, Norway's sovereign fund ain't going anywhere.
Compare that, for example, to what you might call a default in socialism (even though it isn't); Venezuela. They're also awash in oil. The story there is so much different though.
No, his definition most certainly is the definition of socialist. It is you, the ignorant, that has not understood is true meaning. There's lots of de-centralized socialist worker co-ops all around the world.
"State" socialism is no more socialist than North Korea is the "Democratic" People's "Republic" of Korea.
most people would be surprised how copious political/crony capitalist heads on stacks can change things.
All I have to say to these statists is that they are defending a government born of people who "broke the law" by pointing their guns at the kings men. Why don't they understand that one simple point.
Liberty movement is a strange name for as bunch of white guys who want their freedom to anything they want but who would most likely restrict the freedom of folks they dislike. Such is the nature of most all right-leaning "movements". Which is strange in itself since folks on the right are usually the stragglers with anything moving forward.
I don't trust them, but I am sure I am in the minority here.
Who are folks they dislike? The FED who allows their money to earn almost nothing?
The IRS which bills children for parents' debts decades later.
The Congress which sends their children to distant wars but keeps their own at home?
The HFT traders, the JP Morgans etc etc
Pray do tell.
They dislike minorities. Specially those whose skin pantone code reaches certain not permissible levels, to them. They dislike people who defend the Res Publica... you know, the fucking PUBLIC THING from where REPUBLIC comes from. They dislike those who put their time and energy in helping those fucked up by a game rigged from the start. They dislike those who fought against corpocracy and made em shit in their pants to the point where they released the hounds of militarized police, etc...
The Liberty Movement are a bunch of puppets. They think they're for liberty, but they're short minded and only are for license. And in fact they do nothing but do the game of the rich and powerful. Puppets, nothing else.
They are minorities.
White men with guns and a lust for license are minorities now... That's a primer...
Who decides what anime avatar you trolls are going to use? Is it a 'collective' decision from 'central planning'?
If you get whose character I'm using sir, then I'll respond to you more than gladly. That'd be a feat.
Sorry but my kids watch anime. I'll ask one of them. They're about your age probably.
Mister maturity speaking... while posting at ZH on one of the most idiotic news items you'll find here (well, most of Brandon's and the Mises Institute bullshit are). I could tell you I know people in their 50's and 60's who are avid animu fans, but guess that fact won't fly through your thick skull, right? During different ages, curmudgeons regarded anything new as infantile. Novels, fiction, poetry, theatre, drawing, painting, music, cinema, series, anime, manga, etc... until history proved their sorry asses wrong over and over again.
Agreed. Next time, I won't even bother to read Brandon's whiny 8th grade rhetoric and the knee-jerk guns-as-an-extension-of-my-penis crowd who post eye-rolling commentary. Sometimes I do find the Mises stuff interesting, but not often.
And the Oaf Keepers put their women in the line of fire, just like the Taliban.
Fuck Off, Obot.
Didn't vote for the guy. But I understand. Like many, you have no ability to think beyond the little ideology bouncing around in your head. Please, stay in your comfort zone of thinking as I doubt you've ever been outside of it, nor do you likely have to capability to expand outside of it. Enjoy the story in your head.
hahahahahahahahhaha, moron.
All you did was type Democrat talking points and you have the audacity (stupidity?) to say other people "have no ability to think beyond the little ideology bouncing around in your head"?
I have no words...
"I have no words..."
This is incorrect. I am sure you have plenty of words. Their effectiveness in a debate beyond "you type democratic talking points...." is the real question. None of what I typed came from a democratic platform, website, or anything on that nature. It all came from my own observations. If those are democratic talking points, then I give them credit for observing reality far beyond the ability of tea party types to observe or comprehend reality.
You are a victim of mass dis-information as I was. To many people today live in nice neat packaged neighborhoods and never get their hands dirty trying to eke out a living though manual labor in the dirt. It does make a difference if you only buy your food at a slick modern super market that you walk down a city street to or drive a car to a big parking lot store.
At one time this country was mostly agrarian and now is mostly city. Most people that live in cities or large towns are only educated by government schools. People in more rural areas aside from government schools are also educated by nature and the daily struggles which need strength,f reason and ingenuity based on personal observation of how to deal with the natural perils they cope with. They just live differently than the masses. Their way of life should be respected. They should be left alone to live their lives with dignity. They shouldn't have to cope with big government planners who think they know what is best for everyone while sitting in an office chair in DC.
The regulators need to stand down. We have too many regulations as is and it is destroying this country. The little guy gets regulated while the big guys get to do what they want. The little guys pay for their own regulation while the criminal class gets a pass. Its called an Oligarchy.
"You are a victim of mass dis-information as I was."
No offense but that's a projection. I have been an outcast my whole life because I don't buy into the crap everyone is selling, right, left, center, or any part of the spectrum. If it's bullshit I'm going to call it bullshit.
"Its called an Oligarchy."
I've been calling it that since most folks on here were voting for Bush.
"They just live differently than the masses."
I can relate to this. Just because I'm not a rancher, or a tea party conservative doesn't mean I am the usual strawman liberal you all need to fabricate in your heads.
Regardless, it looks like I found a sore spot considering all of the down votes on the original post above. Still, I grew up around conservatives and still have a pile of them in the family and I know how they operate. Good folks, but they are hierarchical, have convenient memories that exclude their role in crappy outcomes, and they especially seem to love a good laugh at someone else's expense. My apologies if I don't see these as positive traits for folks espousing liberty.
Oh really? Try telling that to Will Grigg, racist stereotyper breath:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/04/william-norman-grigg/wounded-knee-ii/
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/04/william-norman-grigg/the-regime-doesn...
"but who would most likely restrict the freedom of folks they dislike." This is a strawman kids, poorly constructed and wholly of Georges fevered imagination. I suppose I would be wasting my time to ask for proof but there it is...
You are making gross overgeneralizations about a group of people who have no idea about although most probably are white. If anything, there is no little coherent idealogy let alone institutionalized operating structure.
Is there possibly a sleeper cell of liberty minded people within the military waiting for the right moment?
There are certainly patriots in the military, or should I say were. Obama fired a bunch of them over the past few years.
Ya think?
Ex .mil in spades.
7 or 11. Snake eyes watching you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iwC2QljLn4
Harry and that kid of his need to go to jail.
Mussolini was not so lucky.
Funny - the libertarian professors and student movement leaders I know say the Bundy incident is dangerous to liberty...
Oh really! Then permit me to introduce you to Dr. Tom Wood, Dr. Thomas DiLorenzo, Dr. Walter Block and perhaps you've also read some of the delightful Dr. Walter Williams.
If by liberty you mean the liberty to suckle on the teat of the public thing without paying a dime? Then of course they're wrong!
From Whatreallyhappened...one of the webmasters provides a concise summing up of the issues, written up as a comment knocking an article that said the whole thing was about the tortoises
"
The Bundy family purchased all of that land back in 1887, and lived on and maintained it continuously since. Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution, known as the Enclave Clause, limits Federal Ownership of land only to land underneath Federal Buildings and military facilities. Back in the 1930s, the BLM simply confiscated most of the Bundy land, a violation not only of the Enclave Clause but of the Fifth Amendment, which states that the government cannot take private property without just compensation, and of the Homestead Act, which says the land belongs to those who live on it and maintain it. The BLM then charged the Bundy family grazing fees to graze their cattle on what had been their land.
Then in 1993, the BLM changed the deal, demanding the grazing fees but severely restricting the number of cattle the Bundys could graze on the land, officially to protect that turtle. But we know that was a ruse, as the BLM itself has been killing those same turtles due to lack of conservation funding. It was at that point that Cliven Bundy took the case to court, where it has languished for decades.
The severe restrictions on cattle grazing would have driven the Bundys out of business and forced them off of their ranch, which appears to be the real agenda here, as all of the Bundy neighbors have already been driven off of their ranches by BLM "tinkering" and Bundy is the last one left.
There are several motives at work here.
First there is the BLM itself, which wants to lease out fracking contracts and not share the money with the land's rightful owners.
There is also gold on that land and Glencore Xstrata, the company founded by financier Marc Rich (who was strangely pardoned by President Bill Clinton before he went to trial for illegal financial dealings), is already in negotiations for the mining rights, not with the Bundy family. but with the cash-strapped US Government.
One of Harry Reid's top (illegal) donors, Harry Whittemore, has plans to commercially develop that land, and the US Government has already announced a new exit from the nearby highway to serve that project.
And yet another finger in the Bundy's stolen pie is Rory Reid, Harry Reid's son, who is representing ENN Energy Group to obtain some of that land for a solar power project.
And this guy thinks it is all about turtles?!?"
The land does NOT belong to the BLM.
End of Story.
There's no proof, no real proof, he actually owns the land. Everyone's paying to use that land for grazing, but this guy was too good for that I guess. I he was poor and needy, well, there can be exceptions. Proportionality. But this guy has hundreds of heads of cattle. He's just a greedy son of a bitch. And a robber too. You like being robbed? Go and support this asshole.
The real atrosity is that they delibertly shot 2 prize bulls. They seperated the Mother Cows from their reciently born Calves so they would starve to death. They ran the Cattle in 90 degree weather with helicopters so over 130 of the Cattle died from heat exhaustion from running from the helicopters. They had bacos diging mass graves for the dead Cattle. They destroyed the Water infrastructure.
Totally inhumaine.
"Totally inhumaine."
Your spelling's worse mate. There's a spell-checker on the posting box. On the 6th day God created it and saw it was good and rejoiced.
Soe saeth teh divissive awf topprick retarrd.
AchtungAffen,
It is true that I never have been very good at spelling but I make up for it with a very astute ability in critical thinking.
As for spell check, knowing my problem with spelling I usually try to spell check but sometimes it dosn't work.
Plus, many times we are just so anxious to get our message out that we make clerical mistakes.
Sorry if my spelling offends you but I do think you got the point I was trying to make.
It also appears that you down voted me because of my spelling and not the content of my message as who could possibly agree with the way they treated that cattle.
market value for that amount of beef on the hoof can be up to $150,000
who is paying Bundy compensation of $150gs???????????????
The Court Order was to remove the Cattle from the Land.
In my opinion this should have meant that they should have hearded the Cattle back onto the Bundys Ranch and then fenced in the area. The Buydys would have then had to feed the Cattle with purchased hay.
They did not remove the Cattle from the Land per the Court Order. They consficated and killed the Cattle. They had no right to take the Cattle. Certainly not in a maner that was so inflamatory.
Plus, with Snipers, Helicopters, Attack Dogs set on the Family and Stun Guns. All of this just to heard a bunch of Cattle back onto the Bundy Ranch? No Folks this was pure and unadulterated Bullying.
If the Government wanted to enforce their so called back fees then there were other legal means to acomplish this. Before being able to enforce the so called fine they would have had to have a Hearing to establish that the fine was valid. If the Court found the fine valid then they could have filed to attach Bundys Cattle but he would have had a hearing and could have found other ways to pay the fine without having he Cattle confiscated. He if nothing else he was denied the Due Process of Law.
Hasn't Bundy been to court 3 or 4 times already? He's had due process of law.
Bundy doesn't want due process of law. Bundy doesn't acknowledge the legitimacy of the Federal Government in this matter, or any other. That's the problem with invoking Constitutional arguments in this situation. You can't reject the notion of a Federal Government and then inovke the Constitution. Yes, I understand that today's Federal Government doesn't have much to do with the Constitution of 1789. But they do, and you have to go into their court to argue with them about it. Guess how that goes.
Idiot, the Constitution clearly says with no ambiguity the States, not the Federal Government, have top-level say-so on this land.
Yes, and the Court ordered that they remove the Cattle from the Land. Not confisicate them and then corral them on the Land. The BLM intended to take the Cattle and auction them off.
The Court order was only to remove them. It did not say they could confisicate and sell the Cattle for their own profit. Only reason they could not sell the Cattle was that no one would auction them because of the Ownership issue.
So did runaway slaves. They should have shut the fuck up and gone back to work. The courts said so.
If you are so concerned about "being humane" (and I think that is a GREAT thing to care about),why don't you read up on what these ranchers do to the wild horses who threaten "their" grazing land?
1. We do not care what "they" think.
2. Be afraid, Very Afraid, of a Righteous Man who will die for Freedom.
3. Once you have nothing to lose, make the Bad Guy lose it. Then take his stuff.
The terminals are comming.
It's nice to see the state put in its place, but the state wasn't afraid of this 'Liberty Movement,' it was more afraid of the bad publicity it generated. After all, the state can't function well unless its message is properly presented. The propaganda moments were lost on the BLM. In reality, the government could have 'dispatched' this crowd in moments with the tools it has at its ready.
What was disappointing about the author's response, is he quick to defend his 'movement' against those who think it rather one dimensional and of little use to any threat beyond gun toting for white ranchers in the desert. Instead of explaining that it would be there for a blacks, browns or other un-whites, he disregards those who question its motives. Instead of saying they would be there for injustices to others, he stays the course and shows the same lack of depth as those he criticizes at Slate and SPLC. It's not attractive from either side.
Where were these 'Liberty' types when the security state was being mobilized after 9/11? Where were they when GWB was taking the country to war over fake WMDs? Were these guys out supporting Edward Snowden after he showed America just how corrupt and dangerous the security state is to Americans? No. Where were they when OWS was demanding Wall Street pay a price for its economic crimes? Occupying public parks is done by evil layabouts who want to destroy capitalism, but occupying public grazing lands is worthy of a fight to the death. Although Ron Paul did show his support, the 'Liberty' movement was not there on guard. Where are they as people fight the corporate takeover of America? Seems corporations can drive pipelines and place drill rigs anywhere, and destroy forests and remove mountaintops and pollute rivers with coal ash and radioactive fracking waste. Yet I have not seen the ‘Liberty’ movement standing strong against that corporate theft. Corporations can contaminate a WVA city’s drinking water and walk away with no responsibility and the ‘Liberty’ movement is silent. Where they there to support those who don't want the Keystone pipeline going through their properties? Are they there for people who don’t want fracking in their backyard destroying their groundwater and property values? No. If this movement wants others to respect them as much as they apparently respect themselves, then they need to be a bit more responsive to realities outside the deserts. Until that time arries, the ‘Liberty’ movement is a hypocritical one trick pony.
Great Post.
It's a Powder River post, a mile wide but only an inch deep.
Well, ya gotta start somewhere and sometime. When the women started marching to the Bastille, it was over the price of bread that they couldn't afford. That was the end of aristocracy and privileged life in France as the Royals knew it. Here's a rancher who gives a care and who is old enough to potentially die tryin'. The propaganda by .gov is losing its touch on people.
Perhaps you would know where they were if you were listening to something besides MSM. Get the shit out of you ears! Ron Paul has been out there for the better part of 40 years screaming bloody murder. Did you work to elect him in 2008 and 2012? I've been following Lew Rockwell's website for years. It's out there, but you had to look for alternatives for good information back then and support it when you found it. Who do you think got Randy Weaver out alive?
Don't kid yourself. The "Liberty Movement" wasn't there when it counted. Specially not with OWS... too "lefty" for those tastes...
Oh wait, I seem to remember a hoard of Liberty Movements folks protesting the war on Iraq? Oh, hold on, no... those weren't LM's but hippie libruls...
Yeah, the Liberty Movement wasn't there when it counted. And now they're defending a greedy thief. Way to go, serfs.
So sayest the divisive hominid scat thrower.
So, being independent in what I think and having critical thinking is being "divisive" and "scat thrower"? Rather be that than someone who can't think for himself.
"someone who can't think for himself"
That's describes you and your colleagues to a tee since you're all reading from a script you got from your orientation classes.
Independent as in not following the herd here. But I wish you could put me in the same bag as your prejudices. But I'm afraid you can't. As I'm not American (not even Gerry!) and my "orientation" was something very much alien to most Americans.
Key word: Divisive.
It's obvious to all but the sociopath within you.
Divisive: creating disunity or dissension
So, not to be a sociopath and divisive I have to genuflect in front of the herd mentality?
You're following the largest herd of them all: the US gov't herd.
You're not acting like any kind of individual or independent thinker whatsoever.
Correct, Cliven Bundy is a nut case (as his neighbors will testify) and a moocher BUT he’s a very useful propaganda tool for the oligarchs who pull the strings of so-called “liberty” or “freedom” movements. He, and his 14 children, represent the type of dangerous fascist cult that seems to spring up in America from time to time. In particular, Utah and Nevada are full of small towns dominated by Mormon sect families (often mooching off the welfare system) but continually ranting about government intrusion. They are incapable of seeing their own hypocrisy.
Paranoid gun nut serfs love this stuff since they seem to think that this aligns them with the “founding fathers” and the constitution. In reality, the founding fathers would have hung them. See the Whiskey Rebellion.
Ultimately, this is about privatization of public land and removal of all development & environmental restrictions. Ask yourself the question… who is trying to benefit from this propaganda exercise?
"Ask yourself the question… who is trying to benefit from this propaganda exercise?"
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Anytime you see phrases like "dangerous fascist cult" and "paranoid gun nut serfs", you can rest assured that the Feds are wasting more money on incompetent trolls that don't have enough experience to know that most reputable posters on ZH don't write like this (except maybe on Friday nights when a lot of us are wasted).
SOME of the Founders might have hung them, but others would have pardoned them immediately after getting everybody pacified and others would have encouraged them.
Bet you can't name any such neighbour who's had anything negative at all to say about Bundy. Not one.
Please recall that NYC has the delightful Sullivan Law in place and is therefore a gun free zone. Please feel free to organize your own militia there. You can drill in the commons known as Central Park. Perhaps a skateboard cavalry militia in that setting.
Seriously though, it does take time to mobilize and the ORB have a lot of advantages and assets in that environment and they must be reckoned with. It is best to proceed cautiously there IMHO.
Occupy was co-opted (quickly) and "Team Liberty" smelled the rats.
It's usually a good clue when they are wearing communist party accoutrement and yelling "KOCH BROS!"
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend" will have a hard time breaking through the great divide of ignorance.
Too many statists, too little time.
I remember one of the unifying themes of OWS was "no more private property"....
....yeah....
I think a lot of people here forgot that part. It was pretty fucking communist.
There was a reason Foodstamp pretended to like the movement...most of them were his voters.
Never was there such a unifying theme. The only unifying theme was that people were being abused & robbed and had enough. Ironically Bundy is trying to Occupy land, with himself & his cattle, so technically that's all one needs to do to be a part of Occupy in one manner or another.
Occupy can't be co-opted: it has no central meeting place or leades or even a singular message to co-opt. None of it. Immune.
Occupy split into different vantages of attack like Occupy the SEC, Occupy the Fed, that outfit which is forgiving debt after buying it (lots of details about pro & con on that one) etc.
Get ready for
Agent provocateursThat is definitely the thing to watch for at this stage.
Woe unto him that is a provocateur and to be found out I would imagine.
This is a good illustration of Cops as Provocateurs and were found out and had their masks taken off and they scrambled over the police line...
Aug 21, 2007
Peaceful protesters stop police provocateurs from starting a riot...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=St1-WTc1kow
i.e.: AchtungAffen
or "attention monkey"
by another name.
Affen is the plural for monkey.
I don't get Bundy's position or why people are backing him. He doesn't own the land. Who cares if he was using it without interference until 1993? He's not the owner, so he has no legal right to the land. I don't dispute that Harry Reid is a scumbag, but why does Bundy think he has any right to use this land without paying grazing fees which go to the government and thus (theoretically) all of us.
What the fuck don't you get about it?
There isn't a shred of eveidence that the Mormon Polygamist Bundy clan even spent time in Bunkerville in the 1870's and they sure didn't stay there. They high tailed it to Mexico where they could diddle their 12 year old cousins in peace.
There isn't a shred of eveidence (sic) that you know anything about this. Shouldn't you be calling your mom to come pick you up? Your shift at the Federal Trolling and Infiltration Center is ending soon.
Do you FUCKING GET that federal bureaucrats had sniper rifles trained on unarmed Americans (over cattle) at the beginning of this?
Where is Jon Corzine?
For fucks sake.
And just when did the gov't ever give you or me a share of the grazing fees that Bundy and other ranchers paid in prior years? You are falling victim to the gov't Jedi-mind trick of making you think that Bundy is somehow cheating you. Unless you are on the gov't payroll, it is illogical.
Bundy is using public land to convert grass (which people can't eat) into beef (which people can eat). If Bundy pays the gov't fees, his costs go up, and he has to pass that on to us by charging more for beef. Essentially, the gov't fees are a tax on us, the public, hidden away in the higher cost of beef. It's even worse when the gov't uses that money to push all the cattle ranchers out of business. How much will beef cost when nobody is grazing that land anymore?
Personally, I'd like to eat a nice steak for dinner once in a while. As such, I fully support Bundy grazing grass that naturally grows on our public land to make that happen. If he and his militia can get the gov't to stop pushing ranchers out of business and taxing our beef, all the better.
Right to access the grass on the land and the water is a right that exists no matter who the owner is, as per the law, and right to DENY him access is unlawful: no one has that right.
You get YOUR discount from HIS grazing cattle when beef is under $30/pound but if you take the drought + global warming + money-printing AND deny his cattle the grazing you should expect $50 per pound from here on. Will you gladly pay it? What will you say to the poor who will not be able to afford food?
Liberty movement with Bundy? Don't kid me. More than liberty movement, that's the Freebie Movement. The movement of those who don't want to pay to use the public thing. In shorter words: robbers. What a milestone, right?
Why pay a thief? It is OK to rob your property back from a robber.
"Robber who robs robber has a 100 years of forgiveness", they say. But regrettably this time you're not stealing the "Feds", but your neighbors. While the public thing might be "your property", it's actually everyone's property, nobody in particular as the owner. So you pay the public to use what's public. If not, you're just a petty thief. And someone who has hundreds of heads of cattle, ain't "poor". He's just a greedy SoaB, who suckles on the teat of the public.
There's a perfect begining .... some where.
If it aint perfect, then let's .... kill it .... kill it .... kill it .... kill it .... kill it .... kill it
Yeah, there's a perfect beginning for a faux movement and ideology. It begins with supporting a greedy robber.
Only greedy robber in the story is the BLM. They're stealing land & cattle and own neither.
The feds are the thieves cloaked in the mantle of acting in the name of the people, yet most fair-minded people are revulsed when they are informed of what is being done in their name.
I won't tell you the Feds ain't thieves. They are. And none of you Mrikuns are free from guily I should add. As the saying goes "You get the government you deserve". Don't participate in politics, disengage from the public sphere, and this is what you get.
Nevertheless, the public thing is just that which is owned by anyone but nobody in particular. When this Bundy asshole went commando grazing, he shat on all his neighbors by expropriating the public thing for himself without any retribution. While he might argue this all was against the thieving feds, he was also robbing from his neighbors and community. And from the public as a whole.
What the fuck is this "public thing" you speak of? Isn't it time for you to go take a "shat"? Your thinking is constipated. LOL!
Someone needs to get back to class. The Res Publica, the public thing. That's where Republic comes from.
Robbing from his neighbors, community, and the public as a whole? Give me a break. I'm a member of the public as a whole and I doubt Bundy has robbed me of anything. Let me check my stack... Yep, all still there! YOU however, a gov't shill, bought and paid for using the proceeds of all these gov't fees and taxes, are the one robbing me and the public as a whole.
Bundy is using public land to convert grass (which people can't eat) into beef (which people can eat). If Bundy pays the gov't fees, his costs go up, and he has to pass that on to us (the public) by charging more for beef. Essentially, the gov't fees are a tax on us, the public, hidden inside the higher cost of beef. It's even worse when the gov't uses that money to push all the cattle ranchers using public land out of business. How much will beef cost when nobody is allowed to graze public land anymore?
Of course he didn't touch your private stash. He did touch you part of the public stash though.
"YOU however, a gov't shill, bought and paid for using the proceeds of all these gov't fees and taxes, are the one robbing me and the public as a whole."
Damn I wish your govt would pay me to post stuff here. USD are a priced commodity were I live. Or do you actually think anyone who has an opinion different from the herd mentality here is a paid govt shill? That's bordering paranoia dude. I do recommend you get your head checked before it's too late, you silly Desperado.
Yeah, Bundy's using grass to convert it to beef. But he's using PUBLIC grass to convert to his PRIVATE beef which he will then sell. Other ranchers also use the public grass to create their private beef to sell, but they compensate for their use of what's everyone's property but nobody's in particular. Bundy doesn't. So he steals from his neighbors, community and the public as a whole.
Public lands are not a free for all. You can use them, but you have to compensate for their use for your private purposes. If not, you're just stealing from the public thing. And you know what that means, right? Public Thing = Res Publica = REPUBLIC.
One has to wonder why someone who says they aren't from the US is so passionate about all this. You have every right to post whatever you want here but this isn't really your fight. You didn't grow up in the states so you can't comprehend why we are so riled up about what happens, in your view, to some old rancher who won't obey "the rules". When you call him a thief when we know differently, it only generates heat and no light. Neither is somebody from the UK going to be taken seriously about our 2nd amendment rights. Most of the UK is happy with gun confiscation which is fine. It's your country after all, but I assume you saw what happened to Piers Morgan when he spouted off.
We know there are people who are paid to assume identities and post to high visibility websites like ZH. There have been many posts in this thread that effectively shoot down your arguments but still you persist. When you don't act like a troll, you don't get downvoted and nobody jumps in your shit. This is why it's a bit disingenuous on your part to think we're being paranoid.
"One has to wonder why someone who says they aren't from the US is so passionate about all this."
Because one thing recent history has taught me, is that trends in the US tend to permeate to other countries. And by permeate I mean being "sold" into other countries. I have a neo-nazi family member who was in a like minded political party, and you know where they went to learn how to "spread the message"? So, better being aware of the current trends and arguments in the US, lest one day they'll pop up here and catch me with my pants down.
That's one reason. And the other is, well, reason. I bet not all born and bred Americans think the same you do. Also, I keep seeing here a lot of emotional, rather than rational, responses. So, well, I try to reason (until I'm so riled up my reason goes foggy too) with them and put my arguments. See their responses and take mental notes of how such like minded people think. Helps me hone my arguments too.
"When you call him a thief when we know differently, it only generates heat and no light."
There shouldn't be any heat in that. The guy used public lands and didn't compensate for their extraction. All others did, complying with the law. There are laws, and if you don't like 'em, there are institutional ways to deal with that. Anomia, the lack of the rule of law, benefits only the powerful, as they then decree their own private law (privi - legos = privilege) which the non-powerful are forced to obey.
" It's your country after all, but I assume you saw what happened to Piers Morgan when he spouted off."
Yeah, irrationality at its best. Of course, as a foreigner, I've been bred in a different environment. Alien enough to be able to see sentimental rather than rational attitudes in other countries. And, most probably for the rest of the world, the gun issue in the US sounds to us, aliens, as some crazy shit.
"There have been many posts in this thread that effectively shoot down your arguments but still you persist."
Gee, I wonder which ones? The argument that if you don't like a law you do whatever you want? Doesn't sound to reasonable to me. The argument that if a guy extracts from the public domain but doesn't pay for that, he's right as if there was no such thing as a public thing? That doesn't seem compatible with the idea of a Republic...
"When you don't act like a troll, you don't get downvoted and nobody jumps in your shit."
That's not true. If you post stuff that the herd mentality here doesn't appreciate, you get downvoted. It doesn't matter where reason stands there. It's as simple as that. Sometimes being downvoted is more of a medal than up votes, specially on "certain issues"
"This is why it's a bit disingenuous on your part to think we're being paranoid."
Well, people accusing me, a foreigner who's been almost 4 years here of being a govt paid sockpuppet over and over; rather than replying with reasonable arguments seems kinda pathological to me. Ain't it?
Perhaps you should leave this country and return to your paradise.
I don't live in your country.
If I am not mistaken didn't you just post "Well, people accusing me, a foreigner who's been almost 4 years here". Then you turn around and say you do not live in our Country.
Maybe you should get your facts right you are constantly contradicting yourself.
By four years here I meant this:
Seems to me you're pathologically making up your online persona as you go along and the story isn't consistent between words, actions, views & biases.
Very certainly you are an American and very certainly a fan of how government is run. Period.
If the rest of your story is to believed you're also the character played by Edward Furlong in American History X.
Come on, you think you're fooling people?
Ralph Spoilsport,
You point is well made. Anyone that did not grow up in America and who has not become aware of its customs and History really does not have a right to try to argue against its customs and traditions. Much less its complex Laws.
The examples you have given show that anyone that is not American just does not understand our principals and what our Country stands for.
It is really hard to listen to someone from another Country try and lecture us on what we should do or not do and what they perceive as what is right. When the basic principles we grew up with and perceive to be unalienable are being over run by an oppressive Government.
My wise Grandfather used to say you cannot argue with a fool. I think that applies to some of the posters here.
"The examples you have given show that anyone that is not American just does not understand our principals and what our Country stands for."
Oh yeah. Was expecting that. The good ole "American Exceptionalism". "Nobody not American can undestand us". Damn shit I had to study your history at college. And I had more than enough of your customs and traditions through over 11 years of political discussion with Americans.
EDIT 2: You should know that in college here, for example, the Federalist Papers and the Constitution were mandatory reading.
You should always, at least, try to hear what someone who sees something different because of a different background has to say about your society. Because he will most probably not have the biases which all those surrounding you have. I don't mean that everything I say has to be the absolute truth. But I can see your society and some of your issues from a perspective completely alien from yours. It might prove useful at some point. After all, there's the saying: "The true wise man can find the silver linings in all things".
achtung, your self love of your own intellect and ideas becomes very tiresome. we welcome all on ZH(sorry Francis) so post away, but watch out falling from your high horse, it's a long way down..and I maintain, you have no idea what most post here, as your views are so EU centric - you are almost blind to what freedom is for us here in the USSA, time to clean a few weapons and prepare food for my family get to gether. alors.
EU centric? Told it before, I'm not European. Why is it that anytime I put on an argument people can't respond with reason here I get either the "european" or "you don't understand the US", or "you're divisive" or "you're a paid govt shill". All ad-hominem attacks from people who just can't respond to an argument with reason.
It's not exceptionalism.
You don't want Americans writing YOUR laws & enforcing them and lying to YOU about what your laws actually are.
It's mutual.
I'm Canadian and I don't want American laws running my country. Americans are mostly crazy from what I can see. Bundy's one of the sane ones.
Damn right. I'm Canadian but I take a stand on something anyone anywhere in the world should agree on: stealing land from people is wrong, stealing food from people is wrong, and that's what they're doing to Bundy. As it pertains to all of us, we'll all pay super-sky-high prices for food when they do this, every last one of us, as Futures Contracts trade globally.
Why is it that you Govt paid fucking trolls always travel in pairs and appear in the middle of a thread ? Eat out of a dumpster your piece of shit.
My man DickDigger. Sorry to pee on your ponch, but I'm not American. Damn I wish I could have some of those greenbacks just to piss idiots like you off. But regrettably, I don't. Maybe I should contact some of your Govt officials for a job doing exactly that. And USD are a priced commodity where I live, for good or evil.
georgehayduke: Liberty movement is a strange name for as bunch of white guys who want their freedom to anything they want but who would most likely restrict the freedom of folks they dislike.
Proof?
Sigh. This is a meme cropping up in other countries - older white guys automatically being labelled and blamed for everything from enviro, sexism, racism....the list never ends.
Some how these old white guys like my Dad - encouraged their sons and daughters to get ahead in life as decent folk; didn't bat an eye when the kids dated foreigners; donated to projects to protect key enviro habitats; objected when they saw the property rights of others being fucked with; objected to the overt sexualisation of our daily lives; went to work everyday and paid their taxes and mortgage and health insurance etc.
Now they're classed as a 'group' on the receiving end of popularised vilification. Its an engineered trap to divide and deride our culture - its fine to encourage tolerance but it must be practiced both ways or its obvious there is a bigger agenda to obliterate a culture that does not serve the interests of TPTB.
Shit even clued up women get Rockefellers finger was waggling Greer and redirecting our values to produce more tax paying human resource units. Subverted and hijacked social change.
Native Title rights obliterate private property rights by assigning community property rights. Subverted and hijacked social change.
“Well, it’s not over. We can’t have an American people that violate the law and then just walk away from it. So it’s not over...”
Oh Harry... just to be clear, we *can* have a Mexican people that violate the law (illegal entry) and then just walk away from it (amnesty), right?
Hankwil74:I don't get Bundy's position or why people are backing him. He doesn't own the land. Who cares if he was using it without interference until 1993? He's not the owner, so he has no legal right to the land. I don't dispute that Harry Reid is a scumbag, but why does Bundy think he has any right to use this land without paying grazing fees which go to the government and thus (theoretically) all of us.
His family purchased it. BLM took it.
Proof? Link? Why hasn't a court recognized his rights? Is every judge on every appeals court in on this conspiracy?
I have no opinion on this issue; I've just been unable to find any legitimate claim that Bundy has to be able to use land that isn't his without paying for it.
"Proof? Link? Why hasn't a court recognized his rights? Is every judge on every appeals court in on this conspiracy?"
Let me explain this to you. You don't need a court, or a hyperlink.
You need to learn to READ and to THINK FOR YOURSELF.
Read the Constitution. Think about what it says an why.
Do you really need a hyperlink to a collection of html in cyberspace to tell you the dfference between right and wrong?
Jesus fucking Christ we are fucked.
BLM manages public land... it cannot take private property....
Rules for grazing rights on Public land came into play in 1934 and have been modified over the years... The BLM was tasked with managing this. Most ranches in Nev (80% of Nev is public land), uses public land for grazing.
I suspect what has Bundy's underware in a bunch are the changes in the rules regarding grazing rights...
Don't knock the desert turtle -- once upon a time it was thought that the Earth was carried on the back of a giant turtle.
As for Harry and Rory Reid and the Chinese backed solar panel farm -- see the Chinese technicians, also known as spies, that will work at the plant/farm. And what is up the road a piece? A base that does not exist known as Area 51 and the "folks" that run the base noticed the proximity to the proposed solar farm/factory. The odds are they will take care of business. By the way -- When did Harry Reid quit the Communist party? Does that sound like Joe McCarthy circa early 1950s?
As for County Commissioner Tom Collins who said the Bundy defenders should make their funeral plans the best that can be said for him is that he is an admitted alcoholic
Down the road a piece is Lake Mead and the good folks at the Bureau of Land Management granted fracking leases within spitting distance of Lake Mead. There goes the water for the Southwest.
Some years back the Korean shopkeepers in Los Angeles were desperately trying to protect their businesses in South Central Los Angeles during the Rodney King riots.Sadly their confidence in the LAPD to protect them was woefully misplaced.Not only had the LAPD senior command done a houdini impersonation,but the patrol units on the ground were confiscating weapons from the shopowners,and generally in a state of analysis paralysis,waiting for the Governor to call out the National Guard,something that Sacramento,nor the LA political hierarchy were willing to do ("ACCOUNTABILITY").I have known some Koreans,and they struck me as hard working,industrious citizens who embrace the American philosophy of improving ones' life and ones' family thru hard work and education for their kids.I don't think their perception of America and LAPD's emergency policies was improved by their experience during this period.
Most businesses have fine print in their Arson insurance policies,specifically during riot or urban insurrection the coverage is terminated.To summarize: You cannot defend yourself or business legally.The LAPD won't be there when you most need them.Your insurance coverage will be denied.Good luck with that lawsuit....
I am an American, a citizen of the country of America. I was not created or bought by the DC US nation and I am not their property or subject—I belong to America and America to me.
The various states of the American country created the United States nation to serve them and the American people. The DC US was created when that Constitution was ignored and criminally abrogated. I therefore do not recognize the DC US as anything more than criminal interlopers and occupiers of the American country.
The criminals of the DC US have Unconstitutionally bargained away and sold the American people and their land. They have treasonously harmed and wagged war against us. They have taken us to, without a Constitutional declaration, harm, rob and war against foreigners. They have rendered our labor and product heavy with Unconstitutional destructions and levies. Levies and destructions that they subvert for themselves and friends with exports of our capital or importation of labor.
They have, without Constitutional authority, given over the power to counterfeit away our savings and capital to the banks. They have treasonously colluded with these same banks to forcibly enslave the American people to them with those of the DC US their slave drivers.
The American people are done with their lies and violence. The time has come for the Restoration of the American people. The Restoration of the American country starts with the American people standing up and saying NO!
No, you are a criminal with no authority over me. No, you may not have anymore of mine. No, you must go—The DC US and its assorted criminals must go.
The Restoration of the American people ends with the Restoration of the Constitution.
Stand and say NO and GO!
Rolling eyes..... deep sigh
It might be enlightening for you to read about the Articles of Confederation... SHAYS REBELLION and the drafting of the Constitution.....
A little teaser...
" Proponents of constitutional reform at the national level cited the rebellion as justification for revision or replacement of the Articles of Confederation, and Shays’ Rebellion figured prominently in the debates over the framing and ratification of the Constitution."
You see the Articles of Confederation did not have provisions for a standing army and TPTB realized that to effectively deal with the "unwashed masses" they needed a strong central government with a STANDING ARMY to put down rebellions like Shays....
And what was Shay's Rebellion about....
"financial difficulties brought about by a post-war economic depression, a credit squeeze caused by a lack of hard currency, and fiscally harsh government policies instituted in 1785 to solve the state's debt problems. Protesters, including many war veterans, shut down county courts in the later months of 1786 to stop the judicial hearings for tax and debt collection. The protesters became radicalized against the state government following the arrests of some of their leaders, and began to organize an armed force"
The constitution was set up with the intent of effectively dealing with armed militias and upraising... (that is you bud!!!)
"The constitution was set up with the intent of effectively dealing with armed militias and upraising... (that is you bud!!!) "
Uh, no it's not dickface. The Constitution was set up with the intent of maintaining a government of the people, by the people that was strong enough to withstand the vagaries of regional divisions but weak enough to be controlled by the people.
It's a difficult task to accomplish. We cannot have anarchy and we cannot have dictatorship. The answe lies somewhere in the middle.
The BLM is nowhere near the middle. Neither are you.