This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Cliven Bundy Responds To Racism Accusations
In response to the verbal attacks pitched at him over thelast few days, Cliven Bundy has held a brief press conference to explain his perspective on 'slavery' and allegations of racism. Much as the world seems 'happy' to live a life of debt serfdom, Bundy notably remarked that he wonders if any of us are better off now "as slaves to charity and government subsided homes."
»
- 65103 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Oh, republicans don't like him either? +1
Some brave black men have figured out that government dependency and pressure to conform is the new plantation, and that Democrats put them there. They call themselves runaway slaves.
“None are more hopelessly enslaved then those that believe they are free.” - Johan Wolfgang Von Goethe
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
"The New Colossus"
-Emma Lazarus
Guess he didn't get the STFU memo. He is now doubling down on stupid.
pods
what did you expect from a guy who makes his living grazing cows in the desert?
I expected that he might go about, I don't know, raising cattle?
pods
i could get excited if bundy was curing cancer with the ether or working on free energy machines. but this guy is running cows where there is no water or grass. i think i'll watch some moon landing reruns on youtube.
Congratulations on entirely missing the point. Back in 1775 none of those guys on Lexington Green cured any cancer either.
Congratulations on entirely missing the point. This isn't Lexington Green either. And Cliven bundy is certainly no Captain John Parker.
Is anyone else hearing Eddie Murphy doing his BBQ skit in their heads?
"and if ya don't like it, ya can get the fuck out!"
pods
You know who seems not to think Bundy is racist?
The black guy in this picture.
Bundy needs more written interviews, tough to understand him speaking on mic and he seems nervous. Want more comedy gold like this:
And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.
Can't beat it when a 'libertarian' talks all about dear freedom blah blah blah and then explains the 'better times for the negro' of slavery. Please dear gawd more interviews with Bundy.
Also, worth pointing out that as this nonsense (the racial stuff) seems to dominate the airwaves the FCC semi-quietly moved to change net neutrality - one of the worst afronts to US consumers in ages. Where's the coverage on that?
why do some insist on doubling down on -
not getting it....
does missing the point confer some advantage???
Gotta love a bunch of internet toughboys who sit around and talk about their rights slipping away while bashing a man who actually defends his.
Not to mention the other boys who hate being ruled by elites while bashing the pedigree a man who they percieve to be below them due to his occupation and/or level of education.
when the time comes for the state to take the property of my neighbor (with clear title to his property) for non payment of taxes, i'll take that bullet for him. bundy is a freak show. a useful idiot playing a bit part. a poster boy for agenda 21.
A poster boy for Agenda 21 by raising cattle? By providing C02 emitting fart machines for the plebes to enjoy on their dinner plates instead of reserving them just for the aristocrats? By standing up to the paramilitary police thugs sent to snuff out his livelyhood for daring to poach the kings deer?
Anyone who resists the borg is a friend in my book.
If you support big Government over him, then no way in hell will you take a bullet for your neighbor. You're just another coward.
Speaking of taking a bullet, watch this...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/04/25/black_bundy_bodyguard_hes_not_a_racist_id_take_a_bullet_for_that_man.html
DaddyO
And I guess some 'round these parts missed the UNEDITED transcript of what Mr. Bundy said: http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/unedited-tape-bundy-emerges-sheds-light-racist-remarks
Thanks for posting this Ms. Erable.
Turns out it was as I suspected from the NYT's all along. Moar out of context, selective editing by the Gray Lady, carrying the water for Harry Reid.
I eagerly await the retraction from HuffPo ;-)
Don't hold your breath waiting for the retraction...
Remember George Zimmerman?
He still has pending litigation against NBC and will most likely settle without going to trial.
Do you think Bundy will sue NYT, methinks not.
DaddyO
Libel and liability went out for drinks and never came back.
Somewhere out there, Dave Chappelle is laughing his butt off......
I think they carefully lined up their womenfolk to take the first incoming federal rounds......Home of the brave.
"Take a bullet"? You, sir, are full of shit.
Slaves with no courage to stand up to their masters, so they rather tear down another slave who is and hopefully gain favor.
I think it was Alex Jones who commented on "Don't taze me bro" incident, saying that just a few decades ago students would've swarmed the power-tripping officers to protect one of their own. There'd be riots in the streets the next day. Now all the kids do is take pictures to post on twitter and facebook. Living proof that the government has done it's job indoctrinating the minds.
Well said, N20Joe.
So, you're OK with some guy who steals from us (by not paying his federal fees) and, then, defends his 20 years of mooching as a right? He's just as corrupt as any on Wall Street.
Steals from us? His family had been ranching that land for 150 years before the feds siezed it and demanded cash to "allow" him to continue using it.
Every other rancher in the county was driven out of business by the feds and Bundy said Fuck You I'm staying!
Yeah . . .a lot of people calling Bundy a 'moocher' or 'freeloader' don't know what they are talking about.
They know nothing about cattle, grazing & use rights, the US Constitution (limits on central fed govt 'ownership' of land which actually is land of the states and of the people), Agenda 21, etc, etc)
They just ape what they hear on 'the news'.
If they did their homework . . . they would come to different conclusions.
So, I take it, you all refuse to pay federal income taxes because 100 years ago your families weren't required to.
And, I imagine, you favor the return of the native inhabitants of the land to push old Cliven off. They occupied it for thousands of years before his family showed up.
Finally, if the federal govt had not put the original inhabitants on reservations, where would Cliven's cows get free food?
So_I_take_it_I_can_come_to_your_house, declare_it_my_own_simply_because_I_have
friends_with_guns, and_charge_you_rent_if_you_wish_to_stay? That's how it works in war nowhere else. Even Eminent Domain requires the gov to have a use for the land, not rent it back to the deposed owners.
Second, the natives were kicked off their land by a foreign invasion force(war), not their own government. Are you saying my hypothetical invasion force above has the same rights/powers as your own gov?
As far your tax comment; starve the beast and it would shrivel tomorrow.
1) Property taxes are just that. You "own" the land, but the govt still wants sumpin. Don't pay for long enough and they take the land back.
2) I'm saying the US govt WAS that invasion force, clearing the way for Cliven's ancestors to use the land.
3) Starve the beast and you'll find your new corporate masters far harsher than any representative govt.
You didn't have to change it, you could have called me out. Don't bother me.
If I am not getting it, maybe those sending out the messages might choose some better terminology before they try to get their point across to the unwashed masses?
pods
Maybe those "sending out the messages" didn't ask to be targeted for destruction and have an example made of them. Maybe simple, ordinary, (read: not polished to perfection politician) people try to make due when the MSM hitmen come looking for a narrative to protect their overlords.
I know all that. And so should they.
"So what are your opinions on X,Y,Z?"
"They don't pertain to what we are fighting for."
Is that so hard?
pods
Good points all around Pods. My issue is simply this; let's assume for a moment that Bundy is a bigoted, racist card carrying KKK member and all that. Does THAT justify the actions of the FEDs? No it does not, but I am amazed at the number of people in this country who are so blinded and divided by the politics and rewards of Racism who do believe exactly that......
MSM, Divide and Conquer bitchez!
Pods, you flunked!! Tell me, what do you see that we are fighting for?? your quote is meaningless. Milestones
Nothing can get across to the unwashed masses. If they aren't awake now, the only thing that will wake them is when the bread and circuses (cheezipoofs and Idol) dry up.
The American Revolution had only a fraction of the populace fighting.
I believe it was the three percent ... want to join?
If you were poor and black would you rather live in 2014 Chicago or 1840 Virginia? You can look up and and maybe prove me wrong but I'll bet 100X more blacks will die in Chicago this year than died in 1840 Virginia.
Is it possible to support him without expecting him to run for public office?
[aside] Net-neutrality is soon to be dead because that is what 'they" wish.....R.I.P.
What we have here is a failure to communicate. Effectively.
Effective communication is determined more by the listener/reader than by the speaker/writer. That's why PR people get paid the 'big bucks': They know how to frame an argument, so that it's understood by the target audience, and so it resonates with them.
Whatever Bundy is, a "communicator" he is NOT. His family and lawyer could and should have told him that he has only ONE chance to make the right impression and to define himself and his message. Otherwise, others will happilty do it for him - but not the way he wants them to.
At this point, Clive, if you don't want jive... Better call Saul. ;-)
"That's why PR people get paid the 'big bucks'"
Psycholinguistics
He was on a roll. I'm surprised he didn't explain about Asian or Jew philosophy. "Now let me tell you about them Orientals, they done stold all our manufacturing secrets". "Don't get me started on them Jews. They killed my lawd Jesus. Fortunately, he came back as a Zombie, so I reckon we alright."
that's preacher talk there
.
"Ya' dam Japs go back to China"
Most small herds (less than 100) in texas are owned for the sole purpose own lots of land and pay very little tax, Ag Exemption.
So the republican (little "r") ranchers that scream about subsidies to the poor well.....................
I can see it now......"Bundy/Palin in 2016."
You are a rather stupid man aren't you?
He was contrasting the plight of slaves to, well, slaves. Judging by the rampant drug use, violence and murder, and prison sentences, the slaves of old just might have had it better than the slaves of today. Oh, and make no mistake. You are a slave too but you are one of the cooperative ones who helps keep the other down by ignoring what is going on. Soon enough it will be your turn at the wheel.
"Yeah, and it's against God's will for all those lesbians gettin' free govt abortions."
"As for The Gays gettin married. Well, that's just like me marryin' my best cow, Gerty, over there. Don't she have the most soulful eyes? You know I love you, Gerty."
Don't be an ass. Bundy stood up to the federal tyrants-- that is the real act of courage, whether or not any gunfire actually ensued.
As far as Captain Parker is concerned, I'm sure he would get along just fine with Mr. Bundy.
Bundy is no more courageous than the occupiers who refused to leave the public land they were excercising their first amendment rights on.
Were you and your up-voters verbally supporting them or do their rights and deeds not matter?
That's an interesting point (I think what you were geting at anyway). Why can't OWS and the Bundy supporters get together on some of this stuff? As far as I can tell there's a lot of cross-over in viewpoints. And seems like it doesn't hurt to have a few guys with giant guns on your team at a protest lol
It's the pesky social issues that the media likes to play up (tis' entertaining after all) which divide the two camps.
Many occupiers are Bundy supporters including myself. I saw several Ron Paul and coiled snake stickers/posters at occupy events.
Only sheep think OWS was a "liberal" movement.
Unfortunately it isn't just social issues that divide the camps though.
Scientific literacy is one huge disconnect.
It is a fact that the atmosphere has a thermal capacity which changes as the concentrations of greenhouse gasses change. That fact and the functioning of internal combustion engines both rely on some of the same physics that is verified every time you start a car.
Mention this to a typical Bundy supporter and you'll be called a communist or some other conservative snarl word made popular by Glenn Beck.
It is also a fact that oil is a finite resource and the amount of that resource that we can extract will one day peak and decline.
Again, mention this in front of a typical Bundy supporter and you'll get the same reaction as the previously mentioned fact.
Again, mention this in front of a typical Bundy supporter and you'll get the same reaction as the previously mentioned fact.
Yeah there are certain things that provoke knee-jerk responses. I (increasingly) think that's too narrow a way to look at it though. People can come to to the same ground using different paths.
For some people the hard science is most important, other people things like local / state control over resources is important. A lot of people that don't buy the scientific argument actually live more green than 'limousine liberals.' In a perfect world to my mind everyone would have a foundation in some basic science, but I actually don't think it's critical to many of these issues. Common ground seems most important.
The problem is slippery politicans with $$$ from big corps exploiting all angles and pitting people who would normally be more aligned against each other.
IIRC, Zucotti Park was private property that stipulated public access. One of the more revealing events at OWS was when the owners of Zuccotti decided that the park needed to be vacated "for maintenance", so the occupiers organized a clean up crew and thereby forced "the owners" to capitulate when the police were on the verge of moving in.
That said, the NYCGA's failure to voluntarily abandon the park made them look like checker players, not chess players. They had the publics attention but all it took was one "they took babies out of incubators" type story (the feces on the police car) to give the state manufactured justification for moving in. Furthermore, the NYCGA's failure doomed the boots on the ground supporters to a miserable road with winter approaching. This is akin to the regime in Kiev expecting the people to support them by suffering for the cause as if there was no other choice...
OWS/NYCGA had an option, a very powerful one that would have shown that OWS and TTP were fighting the same fight, not fighting each other.
The NYCGA should have cleaned up the park and disassembled on 11/11/11 at 11am, announcing their intention to reassemble in Philadelphia. OWS should have spent that winter preparing for the National General Assembly in Philadelphia the following July 4th. The space for this "continental congress" was already booked. The democratically elected delegates (876) were meeting to draft THE PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES.
Is Bundy's strategy smart or does he have options, and the courage/support to take the fight to the next level? Difficult situation to be sure : (
I didn't really mind one way or the other about OWS but I thought (and still do) that they were ignorant and mislead.
It's all fun and games until OWS shows up and craps all over the place, breaks everyone's windows, and generally destroys the place. But hey, that's speech right?
Either protest or fight. Stop acting like retarded monkeys that have to crap on everything. Stop calling for more of what caused the problem (Big Gov will fix Wall Street and make everyone equal... yay). Grow up if you want people to support you. Learn some history if you want people to support you.
The fact is, you were not the 99%. You were like .0001% or some ridiculously low percentage. There is a reason people did not buy into that act.
You thought (and still do) exactly what the MSM wanted you to think. Congrats for using the word "crap" twice in one comment about OWS. By all means, reply with more MSM talking points. You forgot the rapists one...
So, a guy who steals from you and refuses to pay you damages is your new hero? <thud>
How is it courageous to stand up to an entity that Cliven doesn't even believe exists (the US Govt)?
I defy the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus to evict me from my home.....
There. Full of courage.
You're right, he is no John Parker. But this really is sad that out of a nation of 350million people, the closest you can get to a John Parker is this old man. It's an indication of how low the US has sunk.
Cliven Bundy has my vote and I live in Australia. He has inspired people around the world.
Sad but true .... where's our Ned Kelly ? We can't even muster an old man with a beard and a sense of freedom :(
Wasn't Australia colonized by people who couldn't pay their debts?
John Hancock was a egomaniac, tax doger, turncoat. The Otis family insane, Sam Adams a saloon keep. Washington a land speculator.....
When you get your crew of Angels, let us know.
No, but one they shot was about to.
it's one big script we're reading. as far as bundy is concerned, i'm short libraries.
How can someone who has been on ZH for 2 years +, can come out with something so stupid as to belive that there is no free energy and no cure for cancer .
I believed for a long time ... not so sure anymore with the advent of open-sourse and crowd funding the excuses are running out. The recent release of "Uber" here which overnight threatens to bust one of the most entrenched and corrupt government backed monopolies there seems to be little standing in the way of these technologies "breaking out" if they actually existed ?
300 mpg automobile?
Feel free to stop eating as a show of how insignificant ranchers are.
Lol, after yesterday I was waiting for you to drop a bomb on this thing.
hopefully, the cows have more genetic diversity.
Not the black ones......
Cliven is a stupid, racist redneck, of that there is no doubt. Gives a bad name to all of us rednecks.
But O.K., there's this guy that thinks the U.S. government doesn't exist, is $1 million in arrears because he thinks he should graze his cows for free, how is that the Republican Party and its mouthpiece, Fox News, didn't realize in advance that maybe this guy had a few screws loose?
This is what comes from being owned by Rupert Murdoch and the Koch Bros.
And you imagine that Republicans can take control of the Senate?
There may be a few states where they can still aspire to statewide office, Utah, WY, Mississippi. But wherever reality is part of the discourse, the Republican Party is toast.
Only a man who has experienced true liberty can understand the deceitful shackles of tyranny. The entitled masses have no clue.
Woo hoo the Patriot Act protecting us from terrorism because surely our government would never use it to label Americans as terrorists.
Back to the subject at hand I've asked people what has destroyed more lives, slavery or welfare? Don't get me wrong I despise slavery but welfare has also stripped millions of people of their self worth. I usually get a blank stare but hey what do you expect anymore?
R N I N O
Something funny going on here.
I reply to posts and they show up in some random out-of-place in the thread.
I did dis ZH here lately, so ........ hmmmm
I certainly don't see the Republican Party as any sort of saviors for the current economic and sociologic mess we're in, but am curious as to whether your diatribe means that you think the Democrats are somehow the champions of "reality discourse"?
The Democrats, after all, are also the champions of a "Constitutional Right" to deliberately, often brutally kill tens of millions of innocent human beings at any time, for any reason up and until their heads are completely out of their mothers' wombs.
We're currently deliberately killing more innocent human beings in the United States every day than were killed in all of the attacks on 9-11. In fact, not only would we have to have a 9-11 series of attacks on every day of the year, including Christmas, Easter & Mother's Day, but would have to have some 8 or 9 additional ones on New Year's Eve just to catch up to the carnage from the Democrat's sacred cow, abortion on demand, before we could continue on with the slaughter on New Years Day to start the next year...
Or is the Democrat's 2nd favorite campaign, to equate homosexuality with marriage as a bond for healthy families a true measure of "reality"?
Fwiw, I think they're even worse than the Republicans.
Yeah, but dem demorats be filling my EBT every fideen dayz. Shut yo cracker mouth mudderfuker.
Not a fan of Democrats either, but I do appreciate reality and history.
Abortion, which you have such a problem with, has been around a lot longer than medicine. Once accomplished by repeated blows to the abdomen. Of course, the death of the mother was a frequent side-effect, but that's what comes of not reading the fine print.
As for gay marriage, well, as far as I can tell, there has always been gay people. If you've got a problem with that, you have another problem with reality. What the fuck do I care who fucks whom, or who is married to whom?
So you think if gays were prevented from being married they would what? Be available to marry your daughter? Would that make you happier?
What a feeble attempt to defend abortion and the gays. What's you're point? Murder has been around since time began, but that don't make it right. Gays have likely been around since time began, but that don't make their "unions" marriage. Try again.
Funny thing this, but in SE Asia ladyboys ARE available to marry Redneck's daughter. At age 30-40 odd, they decide it's time to get real about life, give up the bath-house scene, get married, have kids. It's almost as though it's a ... lifestyle choice?
I know this in part through one of my brother-in-laws, who did it.
Our president apparently went the other way.
And congratulations on seeing child murder as something to be defended, Redneck. Some things are better swept under the rug.
"So you think if gays were prevented from being married they would what? Be available to marry your daughter? Would that make you happier?"
There's no real reason for 2 men to "marry" each other, nor for two or more women to do so. If the state feels there are legitimate interests served by allowing tax breaks for two or more people living together or for passing on belongings at death, or for medical power of attorney or whatever they can do so without the need for some contrived and artificial redefinition of marriage. In fact it can bring about other unjust discrimination. In one case, two good friends who were both male asked for some of the benefits that were given to same sex couples. They were best of buds and had lived together for many years. But they were denied because they weren't homosexual. It went to court and the court ruled against them. The court decreed that they MUST engage in homosexual sex with each other in order to qualify. What silliness. What public interest is served by these types of absurdities?
Well known author, Robert George opines in his new book, Conscience and Its Enemies: Confronting the Dogmas of Liberal Secularism: From What Marriage Is... and What It Isn't
"So, strictly speaking, we are talking not so much about a redefinition as an abolition of marriage."
Not so long ago some homosexual activists came out and admitted that their real goal was not homosexual marriage, but the destruction of marriage as we know it.
That actually makes logical sense. Why do we have laws against people wearing police uniforms, or pretending to be doctors? Because if there are no boundaries, people become confused and it denegrates and could indeed destroy the occupations of those who are infiltrated by many imposters. In Texas it is a felony to use those fake diplomas from diploma mills. People have paid $1,600 and done a little bit of class work and get "advanced degrees", but if they try and use them to get professorships they can be thrown in prison... and rightfully so.
We've already seen the beginnings of additional stupidity, such as a man applying to marry his dog. Another tried to marry himself. Next up, of course, will be multiple wives, even though the Bible clearly says "No man can serve two masters." (side note, that was a joke), and multiple husbands, and so on.
Of course, we'd be better off if the state stayed out of it completely and let marriage return to the religious realm, if it can't refrain from trying to destroy it.
Making Gay OK - Trailer
"Not so long ago some homosexual activists came out and admitted that their real goal was not homosexual marriage, but the destruction of marriage as we know it."
the proper emphasis should be put on some
there are millions of gays. some of them are homosexual activists, and some homosexual activists might have a pet hate on conservative marriage, and way more counter-activists put the emphasis of their narrative on conservative values being under attack, and so love to expose a fringe of haters of conservative values
in short, get real: imho gay marriage was a request by homosexual gals, mostly. girls love marriages, and momma's boys like to be able to say momma: you always wanted me to marry, I am now with Gary and we'll adopt grandchildren for you
having said that, I am very suspicious of other aspects of this culture war around homosexuality and 4th gen feminism. imho too much money is being funneled into special interest organizations with a very narrow focus, worldwide
remember how Big Gay was heralding a Great Russia Bashing in Sochi? I don't think that they gave a damn of possible international consequences
I mostly agree, Ghordius.
There's also probably a subset that just want the additional attention and debate to the issue, which they feel, probably rightly so, will "normalize" their lifestyle to a large extent in the public mind.
I've read that many aren't really interested in getting "married" anyway, particularly among the men, who tend to be far more promiscuous than the lesbians, and even than heterosexual males. The whole "monogamous" idea, which is really part and parcel of marriage is at odds with the lifestyles they want to lead. That's undoubtedly a significant reason for the much higher rates of breakups and "divorces" in these so called "gay marriages".
The number of homosexuals who have taken advantage of the new laws and "get married" is also very low, a tiny percentage really, which backs up the idea that it wasn't really a burning grass roots issue for most, but more of an organized agenda pushed by a few, that many then took up as a civil rights issue, even though it didn't appeal to them personally.
"The court decreed that they MUST engage in homosexual sex with each other in order to qualify."
bull....all they had to do was get the marriage certificate. there is no law requiring 'consummation' or proof of that having happened. just as it is not required to demonstrate that if the license being sought was from a man and a woman.
:)
This case had nothing to do with marriage certificates. It was a company giving "domestic partner" benefits. Homosexuals living together sans a "marriage" certificate were given benefits, non homosexuals living together under almost identical situations could not get those benefits.
The litmus test was whether they engaged in sex with each other.
If one of them would stick his penis in his roommates mouth or anus, they could get special benefits. Refuse and "No benefits for you!"
Voting for Republicans isn’t the answer. They’re only pretending to be Libertarian so we’ll stand down and put the same people, the same mafia, into the driver’s seat.
Assuming, of course, that elections are legit.
I think most agree there are too many simultaneous inhabitants for the world to sustain in the manner we would like to be sustained - more is even worse. Saving everybody is also condemning everybody.
The jury is still out on when a bunch of cells becomes an individual. Given the fact the fetus is contained within the woman's body the argument that she should have complete control over it is consistent with "individual" rights over "societal" rights. At the very least individual women making decisions on the potential quality of life / suffering of her potential child is far more palpable than governments deciding who lives or dies and actively killing fully grown and independent adult individuals.
While the analogy is tenuous ... we remove cancers, organs, limbs etc without any moral objection ?
Reality is in colour ... not black and white.
"The jury is still out on when a bunch of cells becomes an individual."
Actually, when human beings begin is a scientific question, and it's been definitively answered more than half a century ago.
http://prolifepages.wordpress.com/2012/09/19/when-does-human-life-begin/
Of course, we can see for ourselves that a tiny human being is involved if we listen to the testimony of an abortionist, who certainly seems to believe that he's killing a human being as he describes the process under oath in court:
http://prolifepages.wordpress.com/the-carhart-testimony-partial-birth-dc...
Or you could watch an abortion via ultrasound, courtesy of co-founder of NARAL, Dr. Bernard Nathanson:
Silent Scream
That little baby trying desperately, but futilely to dodge that instrument of death doesn't look like "a batch of cells" to me. Apparently it didn't to the technician who was videoing it. When he personally witnessed that baby's silent scream of agony when he was finally caught and dismembered, he walked out and never participated in another abortion again.
designating the beginning of cell formation of a human embryo as the trump card over how and when a woman deals with her body is utter and complete nonsense.
:)
Your description of the undeniable conception of a unique human being as "the beginning of cell formation" is inaccurate, of course, in a manner not unlike a Nazi description of the deformed, aged and ill as life not worthy of living.
When the specialized sperm cell with 23 chromosomes unites with the oocyte, aka "egg cell", which also has 23 chromosomes, a new unicellular human being with 46 chromosomes comes into being. This isn't a religious opinion, and has been the unremitting scientific consensus of the embryologists, the scientists who specialize in the study of humans at these very early stages of their lives.
A U.S. Senate subcommittee convened in April, 1981 to study the question of "When Does Human Life Begin?" and assembled the top experts in the field from around the world. At those hearings, the unanimous testimony of these top experts was that human life begins at conception:
http://prolifepages.wordpress.com/when-does-life-begin-senate-judiciary-...
* In 1981 (April 23-24) a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee held hearings on the very question before us here: When does human life begin? Appearing to speak on behalf of the scientific community was a group of internationally-known geneticists and biologists who had the same story to tell, namely, that human life begins at conception – and they told their story with a profound absence of opposing testimony.
Dr. Micheline M. Mathews-Roth, Harvard medical School, gave confirming testimony, supported by references from over 20 embryology and other medical textbooks that human life began at conception.
* “Father of Modern Genetics” Dr. Jerome Lejeune told the lawmakers: “To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place a new human has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion … it is plain experimental evidence.”
* Dr. Hymie Gordon, Chairman, Department of Genetics at the Mayo Clinic, added: “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”
* Dr. McCarthy de Mere, medical doctor and law professor, University of Tennessee, testified: “The exact moment of the beginning of personhood and of the human body is at the moment of conception.”
* Dr. Alfred Bongiovanni, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, concluded, “I am no more prepared to say that these early stages represent an incomplete human being than I would be to say that the child prior to the dramatic effects of puberty … is not a human being.”
* Dr. Richard V. Jaynes: “To say that the beginning of human life cannot be determined scientifically is utterly ridiculous.”
* Dr. Landrum Shettles, sometimes called the “Father of In Vitro Fertilization” notes, “Conception confers life and makes that life one of a kind.” And on the Supreme Court ruling _Roe v. Wade_, “To deny a truth [about when life begins] should not be made a basis for legalizing abortion.”
* Professor Eugene Diamond: “…either the justices were fed a backwoods biology or they were pretending ignorance about a scientific certainty.”
---
The issue ultimately boils down to whether a doctor &/or mother has the right to deliberately kill an innocent human being. We wouldn't say that a mother has a right to kill her children on the premise that it is her home and she has a right to do whatever she wants in it. Nor could she kill neighbor children who are playing in her garden on the premise that she has a right to do whatever she wants to someone that is in *her* garden. I submit that no one has the right to deliberately kill any innocent human being, regardless of where they live.
A U
"Cliven is a stupid, racist redneck, of that there is no doubt"
Are you sure about that? How well do you actually know him?
Yes. And not at all.
He may not be a racist. He just plays one on TV.
So Harry Reid is right?
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said that Harry is “dirty and unethical.” That’s a start…
@ Redneck Hippy
They revoked his permit without explanation and he stopped paying as a result. There was never an issue befire that.
I believe few will call him "welfare cowboy" if this is accurate http://www.tsln.com/news/11160796-113/blm-bundy-ammon-cattle
Bundy’s a cowboy. And cowboys know if you get thrown from your horse you get right back on.
The American people, unfortunately, are so afraid of being called racists that blacks and Hispanics and Jews can roll them; case in point, Obama working with the international bankers to redistribute middle America’s wealth to the opposite ends of the income spectrum -- to the non-producers.
The NY Times’ attack on Bundy, encouaging him to express his opinion and then twisting it upside down, underlines the growing fear the socialist media has of a coming middle class backlash. The Times is so worried about a rebellion it has to target people. The Bundy interview was a targeted interview.
The NY Times is a Statist paper; she is still able to deliver when the State needs her. Google may be today’s Bride of the American Empire. But the old “Grey Lady” can still make the hearts of the rulers flutter.
Ironically, it’s Ukraine again that brings the scarlet sins of the New York Times to mind.
Google can spy on Americans for the government…but the New York Times was an actual partner of Josef Stalin, covering up his mass murder of 7,500,000 Ukrainians in 1932-33.
Right. A white man can't point out how he is being victimized by blacks jews and hispanics without being called racist. It's such a harsh world.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are totally ignorant, rather than just plain stupid.
I'm assuming that you have never been a commercial landlord, otherwise you would know a little bit more. So I will endevour to enlighten you, and those who share your distorted views of reality.
Commercial agreements are much more complicated than simple home rental agreements. Cliven's family had a commercial agreement with the Federal Government. As part of a commercial agreement both the landlord and the tenant have certain rights and responsibilities. One of the responsibilities of the landlord is to maintain the property so as to ensure that the tenant can carry on their business unimpeded. It is a very serious offense for the landlord to neglect this duty, and the tenant has every right to sue for damages.
Imagine if you were Cliven's landlord. Say you didn't maintain certain watering points and Cliven lost 500 head of cattle because he was operating under the assumption that his landlord was being resposible. Well Cliven would have recourse to sue for damages. Ofcourse, any cattleman worth his salt will not let that happen, and will maintain the watering points with his own money, which is what Cliven did. But now Cliven is doing your job. And therefore, why should Cliven continue to pay rent to you?
If you as the landlord, allow the tenant to assume resonsibilities of the landlord, then you are foreiting your rights as the landlord. In a sense, you are transferring those rights to the tenant. This is why there are laws against absentee landholders in certain countries.
So if this commercial agreement was between you and Cliven, both citizens of equal power, ask yourself who would be in the right. The only difference is that Cliven is dealing with a tyrannical power structure that believes it is a law unto itself.
yeah, and all the courts did was uphold the tyrant's side of the contract.
:)
You know, I think Bundy is getting a lot of bad press supposedly for what he said about slaves. He has taken the bully pulpit and, as so many of us would, tries to get some points across by speaking plainly. I'm pretty good at spotting racism (too bad for me), and when I read that transcript, using only the true and accepted laws of grammar and syntax, I fail to see anything racist in Bundy's rant. Poorly expressed, perhaps. A bit off topic. But all he did was to state plainly what nobody will talk about. Too uncomfortable to mention "blacks," "slavery" and "better off" in the same paragraph. We will never in this land make true progress until both sides (whatever pair of colors they are) can admit their own bias and speak of the ills they have endured as a result of the bias of others. The red man used to "bury the hatchet" when an argument had been settled, and move on.
People who wrangle one-ton beasts for a living do not generally have the time or predisposition to pre-script or hire speechwriters to frame their thoughts for them. My take on Bundy's message is that we had better get together, allow our differences to inform our planning, and allow others that right which so many ZH'ers clearly treasure-the right to be themselves and live prosperously. If there is one message from science, history and Jesus Christ, it is that diversity is a major key to survival. The minute we are all the same, whether forced or by choice, we are vulnerable to an epidemic of death.
Whether Bundy has a screw loose, caught a big head from all this sudden attention, or whatever is not the point. His response (as well as that of his supporters) to criminal and unlawful acts by a central government is an act of immense courage-and is the first time a group of citizens has won a battle against DC in a very long time.
Honest living. That's an unheard of concept to the banksters and their paper-soldiers (corp lawyers).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agXns-W60MI
No he isn't. He may not be the best speaker out there, but what he says is not racist.
All I am saying is context is important.
Why the obsession with "racism"? That's Marxist thought control. I'd like to see everyone laugh at those commies, not fear being labelled by them. Let us free ourselves from their mind control. Let their magic words no longer have any effect on us. We are once again free to love or hate anyone for any reason.
Who is obsessed? I personally don't care if he is a racist. From his statements he doesn't appear to be though. He may be bigoted, and ignorant to the common PC vernacular, I just don't like the message getting lost in all the PC/liberal bullshit. The message he sends is actually important and it is sad that the people he wants to defend in the name of liberty cannot be bothered to even understand what he is saying before yelling "RACIST!".
Yeah. We're all "racists" anyway, whatever the fuck that is. It's just a matter of degree.
I also don't like bakers much. Umm, bankers I meant. But fuck bakers too.
Catholic church, government, leftists...other religions.. always put you in a box thry ideologically make and demand you waste your life getting out of. If you do, its wack a mole, they have unlimited boxes you are guilty, have sinned, are a enemy of the people.
Assume Bundy is a racist. He doesn't have rights?
We are all criminal now, some way, some thought, something you might of done for a short period of you life and are forever stripped of any real and effective rights. Yessum.
If you belive in the existance of race, you are a racist. After that it is degree.
Forget Bundy. The good most important thing was the spontaneous assembly of people assembling freely on PUBLIC land to witness.
No non free government can accept this. It brings down empires. Harry Reid called these citizens of which he knew not one, terrorists. That is dog whistle to the internal security forces to kill next time.
con text without context
Granted, his words are poorly chosen. I don't think he's ever had a mission to be a public speaker. Try some Bill Cosby instead.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itWCvkK44lE
This is the reason I'm not much of a joiner or follower of movements. I've seen many examples like this where a 'leader" or "icon" steps out in front of everyone and eats a shits sandwich. That always sucks for the followers with any sense of self esteem or intelligence.
Well, IMO he probably was just about forced to make a follow-up statement given all the media turmoil.
He kept it short, that's good. His linking slavery with the limiting of people's choices was good.
I'd guess that he'll stick to his main objectives now.
And who knows what might happen next. A story could come out about the other side that's so bad & so outrageous that it blows this particular story on Bundy off the radar. Things have seemed to be rather crazy lately.
nothing that a good teleprompter can't fix. bundy for president?
bundy is as big a freeloader as anyone...
And here I was thinking this was Al Bundy
Indeed. It's kind of funny and kind of pathetic watching citizens of the world's most freeloading nation fight among themselves about who freeloads the most, when as a group they've outclassed the majority of the world's population by orders of magnitude as concerns freeloading.
But in the end I am more sympathetic to a rural redneck rancher who does some measure of labor and participates in a market and to my knowledge doesn't engage in coercion to do it. What everyone needs to remember however is that unfair comparative and absolute advantages are the norms, not exceptions.
The elimination of village commons in and after the late middle ages provides some useful color.
Oh yes, I guess it's the federal gov that has been working the land, building its infrastructure and creating food to feed your ass.
Well you certainly didn't build that.
Now a days, In the peoples amerkn republic, we are all ungrateful freeloaders against sainted government.
Forward!
I wouldn't assume he can sight read any better than he spoke in the video. Maybe the militia folks need to move on to the next guru.
Could arrogant Goethe look into the minds of others? Factually he already had great difficulty with his own mind given his statements. Overly intellectual people are just like people suffering from obesitas.
Sharpton would be all over this except it's happening west of NYC
With the latest comments from the Mormon sacred cow rancher Cliven Bundy from Clark County, Nevada now entered and well imbedded into the public record, we are yet once again witness to the ancient and unfailing Roman policy of "Divide et Impera". Whether the context for the Bundy's apparent public relations blunder concerning them cotton pickin' Negroes was simply the inadvertent gaffe borne out of a growing hubris of the "great patriot victory" over combined Federal forces at Bunkerville or more of a planned provocation, the net effect is to anathematize the Bundy bunch and their pater familias as a pack of cracker racists not far removed from the KKK itself, and thus further polarize the ever growing divide between the the races and fuel the fires of racial division set in high gear ever since the election of the illuminati mulatto puppet Obama.
Well we can agree on that. Race war is definitely on the menu for 2015.
What BB? Are you and Tony going hunting?
The only difference between Democrats and Republicans, is most Republicans are dum enough to think they are different.
Voting and protest dont matter, the extermination of the scourge is this countries only hope.
The world fought to defeat Nazism only to be enslaved by Zionism.
The brave black men who call themselves runaway slaves think it was the Democrats who put them on the new plantation, but apparently you understand their situation better than they do ...
(I did not down vote you.)
Who the hell is Ray and why do people keep talking about his sister?
Ray's sister is by now big big business with a market that can never be satisfied and where plush well-paid sinecures are available to the 'right' people.
Perfect case in point being the current First Lady
Let me rephrase that.
I don't vote for Democrats or Republicans either. However, the brave black men who call themselves runaway slaves have substantiated why it was the Democrats who put them on the new plantation, and I don't claim to understand their situation better than they do ...
That documentary is worth watching just to see him make Al Sharpton his bitch at the Jefferson Memorial.
Love the name, Chief.
Thank you.
More like enslaved by the Banksters and they aren't jewish. They believe they are gods.
It seems that Americans are always hanging their hopes on to the next media messiah only to later find the MSM annoited one is deeply flawed. It is a very long list.
1) John Jones - Messiah turned mass murderer
2) Rodney King - Felt sorry that he got the sh*t kicked out of him, but turns our he had a substanial substance abuse problem and perhaps deserved to have the sh*t kicked out of him.
3) George Zimmerman - should this guy menatlly stable enought to be allowed to own a hand gun
4) Jesse Jackson, Gloria Alred, Al Sharpton - Will make guest appearances anywhere there is a Camera and Microphone
5) George Bush - A compassionate conservative - This went over big with the Iraq citizens
6) Obama - Hope and Change - rebranded as Despair and Status Quo
7) Michele Bachmann - A beaming role model to everyone that is incredible stupid and possibly mentally ill - there are always job opportunites for you in the US House of Representatives.
8) Cliven Bundy - A cantakerous old man who has been out on in the Nevada desert sun too long - doesn't recognize US Government but rides his horse carrying the Stars and Stripes - WTF. Reminds me of a character in Willies Nelson's " My Heroes Have Always Been Cowboys"
9) Dick Cheney - Deficits don't matter, so how about another no bid defense contract for Halliburton
Why do we Americans even listen to these ass clowns for a minute. Perhaps we deserve to be financially raped and have the police boot on our necks.
"...turns our he had a substanial substance abuse problem and perhaps deserved to have the sh*t kicked out of him."
Really, so every drug addict and alcoholic deserves to be severely beaten?
rotf... yeah, that was a killer. Latex keyboard cover to the rescue. Translation; he smoked weed.
And John Jones...? I'm guessing you really meant "Jim Jones" of Jonestown fame. So your 'analysis' starts off with a real winner and descends exponentially.
-1/0 (I'm sure that went 'whoosh')
You mess with the police and you take your chances. Some cops are downright mean SOBs. They are not paid to lose fights
But you said deserved. Don't deflect from it now Dirtbag. It wasn't a fight; it was a beatdown. 51 wacks to the dome (and other parts) to a human being cowered on the ground.
But yeah, go ahead and clean it up. Clean up the other 10 on that random, nonsensical list if you can. Or better yet, find a new hobby other than posting comments.
Actually I said "perhaps deserved" but I mostly agree with you that King's treatment was harsh and over the top.
Anyone with half a brain that lived in Los Angeles during the Gates police chief era understood that the LAPD was more like an occupying militia than a conventional police department. When you got pulled over by the LAPD it was "yes sir" -" no sir" and keep hands on steering wheel in plain sight. The LAPD was quick to use the baton and the gun and most understood you better mind your P's and Q's. in their presence.
In all fairness to Gates he had the smallest police force in proportion to population of any major city. The LAPD also had very large geographic area to patrol. To keep reasonable semblence of law and order Gates used a number of tactics that let potential lawbreakers know it was a really bad idea to mess with his police force. The LA County Sheriff's mostly hated Gates, because it tarred all the police departments as quick to use violence and it made the Sheriff's programs of community policing more difficult and dangerous. We interfaced with the Sheriff department often, as our factory was located in a rough neighborhood in East LA. We preferred the county sheriff over the LAPD 10 to 1.
King's beating was not an isolated case but it since it got filmed, the LA Black community chose him as their representative against police violence. Once it became obviously apparent that Rodney had some major personal issues he was unceremoniously dumped as their icon a few months later.