Cliven Bundy is a craven thief and right wing terrorist

Sunday, April 13, 2014

Good morning:

Cliven Bundy is a thief and a right-wing domestic terrorist who belongs in prison. For more than 20 years he has grazed his cattle on our land without our permission and without paying us any fees. Neighboring ranchers paid their fees and have grazed their cattle with our permission.

Yesterday, the federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM) that manages our lands surrendered without a fight to Cliven Bundy and his followers who threatened to use deadly force in resisting the BLM’s effort to enforce a federal court order to seize his trespassing cattle and sell them at auction to satisfy the debt he owes for trespassing on our lands and refusing to pay the grazing fees.

April 12, 2014 is a dark day in U.S. history because it is the day that our government surrendered to the right wing hate machine.

I do not doubt that neighboring ranchers will follow his example and refuse to pay their fees.

I do not doubt that Cliven Bundy’s victory will embolden other right wing wackos to take similar action.

Contrast how law enforcement authorities have reacted with violent aggression against peaceful people protesting against the tyranny of the criminal banksters and the richest 1% of our people who, as majority shareholders, own control and profit from their acts of financial terrorism.

Contrast Bundy’s victory with what is happening to Cecily McMillan.

She is a 25-year-old student and activist who was arrested two years ago during an Occupy Wall Street demonstration in Manhattan. Without any provocation, police attacked and beat her until she went into a seizure. When she felt someone grab her right breast from behind during the attack, she threw her elbow catching a cop under the eye. She is being prosecuted for assaulting a police officer, a class D felony with a possible seven-year prison term. Her trial began this week.

Contrast Cliven Bundy’s victory with our government’s focus on prosecuting whistleblowers whose only “crime” is informing us what our government is doing to us and to other innocent people all over the world.

Contrast our government’s treatment of the poor cutting food stamps and heating assistance during a depression.

Our government has become another face of the right wing hate machine and you and I are its enemy.

If you doubt what I say, tune in to what is happening on twitter where an orgy of hatred has been unleashed.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

If you appreciate what we do, please make a donation today.

Fred

48 Responses to Cliven Bundy is a craven thief and right wing terrorist

  1. lurker says:

    Sorry to be about three days late with this, but in looking into this one, it would appear that it was not only pretty volatile (hundreds of armed militia members showed up where the cattle were penned), but there were rogue (my term) legislators and possibly sheriffs in support of Bundy. This thing had powder keg written all over it.

    The good news is that the feds are saying it ain’t over ’til it’s over. And one might suppose that when dealing with things as flagrant as an armed militia interfering with the legitimate aims of the US government there would be reason to arrest some of these folks. And they (and their gun-totin’ friends and neighbors) may find themselves out of commission long enough for the feds to get the cattle out of there. Or, I suppose the feds could bring in armored tanks or a greater show of force.

    Overall, I find this kind of terrorism to be greatly concerning.

  2. KimmyK says:

    I AM SO SO SORRY!!!! PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE delete my last post, (and this one, please). I thought my first post was deleted, and it upset me, as I always looked up to you as a defender of truth AND the Constitution, and when I thought it was deleted, I was super angry, thinking you deleted the story of the 52 other ranchers that the BLM forced out of their businesses. Again, I am truly sorry…

  3. KimmyK says:

    REALLY??? Delete my post since it doesn’t go with your narrative? I thought you stood for the Constitution and TRUTH!!! Apparently not, good day Fred….
    That’s fine, I won’t be back, as much as I enjoyed your posts on the Zimmerman trial, you are nothing but a FRAUD!!!!

  4. KimmyK says:

    Hage Family Saga Continued…

    Wayne Hage was out of business, but not
    intimidated. He filed for a taking of his water
    and private property rights in the U.S. Court
    of Federal Claims in Washington, D.C., on
    Sept. 26, 1991. This was the first time a feder-
    al agency had been taken to that court on the
    grazing and water right issue. Before this,
    injured property owners had gone to federal
    district court, which only decides if the feder-
    al agents were following the administrative
    law rather than constitutional civil liberty
    issues. Suddenly the tables were turned.
    “Hage v. United States is about more than just property rights,” says Byfield. “It is also
    about government accountability. The land-
    management agencies have gone virtually
    untouched even though they violate laws
    daily. The employees know that before a
    landowner can file any substantive action
    against the agency, they will most likely be
    transferred to another area and never be
    affected by the outcome. However, one of the
    advantages of filing in the Claims Court is
    the ability to depose, under oath, the
    individuals involved in the action. And as we found
    in our case, once this happens it becomes a
    feeding frenzy as bureaucrats scurry for cover
    pointing at someone lower on the food
    chain, which for once was not us.”
    The ability to depose witnesses under oath proved the FS singled out Wayne Hage as an example to intimidate other ranchers.
    During his deposition, Jim Nelson, Toiyabe
    National Forest supervisor, surprised everyone by admitting that Wayne Hage was targeted because he had written “Storm Over Rangelands.” That book provides strong historical and legal evidence that ranchers have “valid private property rights…in federal
    lands.” Since its publication in 1989, judges
    and lawyers have used arguments from the
    book in court cases. The Forest Service decid-
    ed Hage needed to be taught a lesson.
    As with all people who challenge federal
    power, Hage was demonized and punished.
    The government filed countersuits and lev-
    eled felony charges against him for cleaning out debris in his own ditches. The suits and
    charges were made in Federal District Court to
    sidestep the Claims Court. The government
    won on some charges, but those were later re-
    versed by the 9th Circuit Court on appeal. The
    death in 1996 of Wayne’s wife Jean from a
    stroke dulled the victory, however. Doctors at-
    tributed an earlier stroke and heart attack to
    the stress created by the harassment.
    The federal government continued filing
    summary judgment motions and failed each
    time. The trial on the Hage property rights fi-
    nally came before the Claims Court in October
    1998. Ten years after they had initially filed the
    suit, the court finally issued its preliminary de-
    cisions on Jan. 29, 2002—in favor of the Hages.
    The court found in Hage v. United States that
    property rights owned by Hage were preexist-
    ing to the permit system by the Act of 1866,
    and “the court is not of the opinion that lack
    of a grazing permit that prevents access to fed-
    eral lands can eliminate Plaintiff’s vested water
    rights and ditch rights.”
    The Hages owned the water rights and all
    their improvements. This precedent is signifi-
    cant. Even though the government eliminates
    a landowner’s grazing permit, it cannot pre-
    vent the landowner from pursuing a takings
    claim for the property the government has
    kept them from accessing.
    “This is a tremendous victory for Ameri-
    can landowners, and a staggering defeat for the
    environmentalists’ agenda,” says Byfield.
    “These organizations have understood for a
    long time that control of the water in the West
    brings with it control of the land. They have
    recognized that to enforce their agenda, and
    eliminate ranching and the natural-resource
    industries on the federal lands, they would
    have to win control of the water. The govern-
    ment has been their tool in trying to gain this
    control. And now they have lost this pivotal
    battle.”
    This is a serious blow to the Forest Service
    and BLM. They cannot control, let alone de-
    stroy, ranchers if they don’t control the water
    rights. It would be eight more years before the
    Claims Court would award damages to the
    Hages. Jean Hage’s death didn’t even stop the
    feds from continuing their hellish attack on the
    family, using the same tactics as they had in the
    past. Tragically, Wayne also died of cancer be-
    fore the Circuit Court rendered a decision on
    damages. Even so, the case continued.
    On Aug. 2, 2010, 18 years after it started,
    Claims Court Judge Loren Smith awarded the
    Hage estate $14,240,853.92 and ruled that the
    federal agencies must pay all legal fees. Unfor-
    tunately, it is still not over. On Oct. 1, 2010, the
    federal government appealed the decision.
    “The government had too much at stake to let
    the Court of Claims decision stand,” says By-
    field. “The government has to win at any cost
    and will likely take it to the Supreme Court.”
    How many families would put up with this
    agony for more than 18 years (likely 25 years
    before it is truly over)? Not many. How many
    could afford it? Very few. That’s what these
    agencies depend on. They have all the time in
    the world and dozens of attorneys with access
    to unlimited taxpayer dollars to try any tactic
    to take private property away from owners.
    The Hages provided the determination. Hun-
    dreds of donors provided the funding. Wayne
    would be proud of the result so far.
    The root problem is still not addressed,
    however. The federal government has no con-
    stitutional right to own this land. It retained
    these public lands by using blackmail and ig-
    noring a hundred years of established law. It is
    time to give the land back to the states as prom-
    ised when they entered the Union. Utah is the
    first state so far to attempt this. Other states
    must be encouraged to do the same.
    http://www.rangemagazine.com
    Much more history at link

  5. This is right wing bullshit.

  6. Judge George’s order is the law of the case. His legal reasoning is sound.

  7. Just a quick fyi: It appears that a commenter has recently attempted to join this discussion. Withholding the name, I can only say the person uses a term that is popular at a radio show.

    Anyway, the reason we banned this person outright is that, while the first comment looked reasonable, although some may disagree with the view, the second was a double post of the first- no big deal- but then, the third and fourth were insults directed personally to readers here.

    For future reference to those wishing to comment, please do not make things personal. It is all right to disagree, even strongly, but it is not okay to attack, by assuming that someone belongs to a set of beliefs…and going from there.

    Thank you.

    • gblock says:

      It looks as though you or Fred has deleted some comments from this person. Unfortunately, this makes it look as though Fred responded to my post (which was originally a response to this person) by calling me a right-wing wacko and banning me. I’ve been making comments on this blog for some time now, so I hope that regular readers realize that I am not a right-wing wacko.

  8. a2nite says:

    FYI:http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/13/1291642/-Cliven-Bundy-is-a-Big-Fat-Million-Dollar-Welfare-Dead-Beat

    Now I know why we don’t have nice things, evil rich white guys don’t pay their fair share. This “man” has been stiffing us for decades.
    “We the people & rule of law are myths.

    • gblock says:

      They seem to be willing to use a bunch of paranoid imaginings as excuses for why someone shouldn’t have to pay money owed for grazing rights.

    • MDH says:

      This land is your land is your land

      This land is my land

      from California to the New York Highlands

      This land is made for you and me

      If you are a black man

      you are not part of the land plan

      from gated Sanford to the streets of Brooklyn

      this land is not for you to be

  9. bettykath says:

    I don’t have time right now to read up on this but will later. There are undoubtedly 2 sides (at least) to this story. Grazing fees are common and extremely reasonable, but the government has been know to lie. I’ll keep an open mind.

    In the meantime, I did view the video of the standoff with the BLM retreating. They were greatly outnumbered and had no choice but to retreat or to cause serious bloodshed. They made the right choice. If it was a government boondoggle, let’s hope the retreat is permanent. If not, they will be back with enough force to arrest any who object.

  10. gblock says:

    Cecelia, the article that you provide the link to below is right wing BS paranoia. The idea that all of this is personally controlled by President Obama is totally ridiculous. And in what way did the BLM misappropriate the funds, and why would the county accept the payment if it is owed to the BLM? I don’t know, possibly they might do this and then forward the money, as a service to all concerned, but it is not THEIR money to keep if the bill came from the feds.

  11. Soulcatcher says:

    I watched a program this week about a rancher in NV who has been threatened about cattle grazing on federal property. I have to wonder if this is the same ranch because nothing was said about grazing fees. Their family had been farming on that land for generations. They have been cited for having to many cattle grazing on the land, stating one cow needs so many acres to gaze, which seems ridiculous to me as we own 22 acres of land in Northern Calif that we allow ranchers use for grazing their cattle, and I have seen fifty to a hundred at any given time. BTY, we charge them nothing, as we feel they are doing us a favor by keeping it down.

    As for other ranchers, from what I understand, the government has taken over the land, and there are no other ranchers in that area. This has got to be the same ranchers as he talks about the feds seizing his cattle, bur from what I saw, they were allowed in to take them with no violence. He talked how the feds have been harassing him for many years, blocking off water sources for his cattle and showing up daily to find any means to cite him. They offered to buy his ranch and became angry when he refused to sell. I May be wrong, but it seems the feds have another motive for wanting that land other than the fact he was not paying grazing fees or for protecting the turtles. It looks as though there are no other ranches around, therefore no one pays grazing fees.

    • KimmyK says:

      There were 52 other ranchers at one time along with the Bundy’s, but they have since been run out of business. He’s the only one left. This has nothing to do with an endangered turtle either, since the BLM killed many of those. This is about a land grab, lots of money, a dirty politican, and energy plants with the Chinese in the USA. Look it up, they own hundreds of THOUSANDS of acres in this country. I guess our country is so in debt to them that we are selling out our lands, resources, and power companies to them, and pretty soon they will own us…LITERALLY

      The Wall Street Journal recently compiled a state-by-state list of the $17 billion in oil and natural gas equity interests CNOOC and Sinopec have acquired in the U.S. and Canada since 2010.

      Colorado: CNOOC gained a one-third stake in 800,000 acres in northeast Colorado and southwest Wyoming in a $1.27 billion pact with Chesapeake Energy Corporation.
      Louisiana: Sinopec has a one-third interest in 265,000 acres in the Tuscaloosa Marine Shale after a broader $2.5 billion deal with Devon Energy.
      Michigan: Sinopec gained a one-third interest in 350,000 acres in a larger $2.5 billion deal with Devon Energy.
      Ohio: Sinopec acquired a one-third interest in Devon Energy’s 235,000 Utica Shale acres in a larger $2.5 billion deal.
      Oklahoma: Sinopec has a one-third interest in 215,000 acres in a broader $2.5 billion deal with Devon Energy.
      Texas: CNOOC acquired a one-third interest in Chesapeake Energy’s 600,000 acres in the Eagle Ford Shale in a $2.16-billion deal.
      Wyoming: CNOOC has a one-third stake in northeast Colorado and southeast Wyoming after a $1.27 billion pact with Chesapeake Energy. Sinopec gained a one-third interest in Devon Energy’s 320,000 acres as part of a larger $2.5 billion deal.

      The Wall Street Journal reported China’s strategy – implemented since 2010 by Fu Chengyu, who has served as chairman of both CNOOC and Sniopec – is to “seek minority stakes, play a passive role, and, in a nod to U.S. regulators, keep Chinese personnel at arm’s length from advanced U.S. technology.”

  12. Matt Pearce of the LA Times is reporting:

    At least three people were killed and a 15-year-old boy was in critical condition after shootings at two Jewish community facilities in the Kansas City area on Sunday, officials told the Los Angeles Times.

    Over scanner traffic, Johnson County, Kan., officials reported taking a suspect into custody shortly after the shootings. A reporter for KSHB-TV reported that a man shouted “Heil Hitler!” at a TV crew as police arrested him in the parking lot of an elementary school in the area.

    Passover, a major Jewish holiday, begins Monday.

  13. I think it is good that you share your opinion, A healthy debate must see all sides in any conflict. I would submit to you, that for Americans, this is about saying, enough is enough. Our Government has become a police state that imposes itself on all of us,The people are looking for a reason to oppose a Tyrannical Government. That is why this became an issue. This American opposes the existence of a Militarized Police State.

    • Their outrage would have been far more intelligently and effectively expressed by supporting the occupy protests instead of attacking the left and blaming liberals for all of their problems.

      Their loud and proud racism, support for politicians and policies that are contrary to their own interests and their endless supply of hatred for all things liberal only succeeds in marking them as willfully ignorant and stupid.

      Which is no way to go through life.

      Fortunately, it’s not for me to decide if they are beyond redemption.

    • crazy1946 says:

      AntiTerrorJewAtheist: Your little speech could have fit in quite well in the 1930’s in Germany. Some people then felt that they were above the law of the land as well, especially after they had been feed propaganda from the political leadership that desired to dominate the working class of the nation… Sorry to disappoint you, but this nation does have laws that need to apply to all people not just to those you dislike… the bottom line on this incident is money and control of the less affluent. This man is renting land at a ridiculously low price and yet still is so greedy he does not want to pay his fair share… This is just another attempt by a political party to destroy their opponents, using any means they can…

      • I am not sure what your point was. The turnout of support was not because every one loves Mr> Bundy, The American people are fed up with the blatant disregard that the police state has for American Citizens. I know that there are some people in this world who would like to turn America into GAZA, but it will not happen anytime soon. Dis Arming the Goyim, is a task easier said than done.

        • crazy1946 says:

          Some how you and many of the supporters of this individual have turned a simple case of theft from the rest of the citizens of this nation by Mr. Bundy into a gun rights cause… Face it, the man is simply a thief and a con artist who the right wing terrorists are attempting to use for political benefit. I really think many members of the right wing terrorist groups will not be happy until they destroy this country and replace it with a pure white hate filled entity… Thankfully that will never happen, if for no other reason the right wing hate machine does not have the numbers behind them to do it… Perhaps if they continue to chip away at the very core of this nation they will succeed, but that has yet to happen…. So you and the other folks who wish to make this a gun issue won’t accomplish this quite as easy as you thought…

          • I believe the Bundy family are Christians. I hope you are not suggesting that the Bundys are Terrorist’s . I never claimed that this was a gun issue. I was pleased to see Americans exercising their right to bear arms though. My comment was more about the fact that Americans are weary of supporting an oppressive and unconstitutional police state. The Gun Issue is one that stands on its own merits, and events that are ongoing in this world, will not affect the Second Amendment. Thank fully , we do have a Constitution and it is very much like a anchor. No person, or group will ever be allowed to subvert it. I dont even know what a right wing terrorist is. Perhaps you could enlighten us, as to whom is regarded as a right wing extremist. As for your comments accusing Mr.Bundy of being a thief, Well I believe that he deserves a day in court, with a jury of his pears. Also, I might add, that you seem to have some pretty extreme views concerning white people. I would like to tender to you, that even though I am not religious, I have met some wonderful White Christians who were very kind to me, even though I aman Irish Palestinian Jew who converted to Atheism. I have seen all kinds of hate, believe me, and I just don’t see a hate thing coming from Mr.Bundy, or his supporters. I see freedom loving people from all walks of life, who came to the aid of an American, who like many others” have lost many of their rights and are concerned about the imbalance of justice in this Nation. The people covering this issue, are declaring also that some sort of Corporate Issue is at play here. Time will tell, Best Regards, and I sincerely hope that you are able to overcome your fears of White Christians. American White Christians are largely supportive of Israel, and are always happy to help anyone in need. P.S. I think the Bundys are actually Latter Day Saints, or Mormons. I am not aware of any LDS Right Wing Terrorist’s either.

          • lurker says:

            Crazy–ATJA appears to be of the same mind as the fella who has been trespassing his cattle on government property for the last 20 years. Soverign staters, I believe. Don’t recognize government, period. These are some dangerous folks who have talked themselves into a divne right to do as they please. There have been a number of cases where traffic stops–often for no license, cuz they don’t believe in it–have ended in attacks on law enforcement.

            I would advise against attemptng rational conversation.

          • crazy1946 says:

            Lurker, I am/was very aware of how futile it would be to have a rational discussion with ATJA, and actually would not waste my time attempting to do so… One can only remember that their thought is that laws do not apply to them, but only to other people. He can argue all he wants about Bundy being a Christian, but Bundy is/was violating one of the basic Christian principals, and that being “Thou Shalt Not Steal”… The “not” being aware of any right wing terrorist groups is amusing, at best.. Oh well, hate groups come out of the background any time there is an anti-government cause brought up to use in their propaganda campaign…

  14. Bruce says:

    It’s the same reason our nation’s waters aren’t clean, over a Quarter CENTURY after the water pollution ELIMINATION DEADLINE! :
    1972 Clean Water Act (33 U.S. Code § 1251 – Congressional declaration of goals and policy) –
    (a) Restoration and maintenance of chemical, physical and biological integrity of Nation’s waters; national goals for achievement of objective
    The objective of this chapter is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters. In order to achieve this objective it is hereby declared that, consistent with the provisions of this chapter—
    (1) it is the national goal that the discharge of pollutants into the navigable waters be eliminated by 1985.
    The halfascist ‘feds’ set-up a situation To LOSE (on purpose); Back OFF, setting the stage for Why REGULATE? Then, there’s less regulation; more ineffectuality, etc; in ever-reciprocating dereliction to the Syndicate 1%! WI$E U$E UEBER ALLE$!
    Next up violating the law, this time with OUR WATERS (of the United States):
    http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/man-vs-epa-uinta-county-man-faces-k-in-daily/article_f7312717-3d3c-555b-8c15-fc48fbfe0073.html

  15. Trained Observer says:

    I was unaware of this situation until last week when a Nevada relative whose son is a law enforcement officer with the BLM brought it to my attention. If you’re pressed for time and don’t have hours for research, this headline sez it all: Cliven Bundy is a craven thief and rightwing terrorist.

    As taxpayers, we’s done been robbed, and it needs to stop.Those law-abiding ranchers who have paid their fees must be madder than hell.

    • Yeah, If I were one of them, I’d call for a meeting of all the ranchers who have paid the fees and propose that all of us withhold our payments until the BLM enforces their judgment against Bundy.

      • KimmyK says:

        Here’s the first part of the above article, so everyone has the full story of the Hages…(the whole article is quite interesting, which includes a lot more history)

        PART III
        The Hage Saga:
        Attempted federal destruction
        of one Nevada ranch family

        Wayne and Jean Hage, along with their five
        children, purchased the Pine Creek Ranch in
        northern Nye County of central Nevada in
        1978. The ranch consists of 7,000 acres of
        private fee patented land and some 1,100
        square miles of U.S. Forest Service (FS) and
        Bureau of Land Manage ment (BLM) moun-
        tain range allotments used for seasonal graz-
        ing. Based on records dating back to the Act
        of 1866, the Hages own the water, ditches and
        all improvements made on their federal allot-
        ment. The agencies have traditionally con-
        trolled Hage’s grazing through grazing
        permits.
        In the 12 years following the purchase,
        the Hage family faced relentless harassment
        from the federal agencies. The harassment
        was encouraged by several major environ-
        mental groups. Daughter Margaret Hage
        Byfield recounts the harassment: “The federal
        agents fenced off a major spring from our
        cattle and piped our water into their ranger
        station without our permission. In 1979, over
        a period of 105 days, we received 70 visits and
        40 certified letters from the Forest Service citing
        us with various violations, most of whichdid not exist or were created by the Forest Service itself. I remember how one of these accused us of not maintaining our drift fences on Table Mountain. After two days riding the fence [horseback], one of our hands found the Forest Service flag marking a single missing staple. We were also charged with trespass citations where they claimed our cattle were in locations not permitted.
        They dropped these charges once they real-
        ized we had eyewitnesses watch Forest Service employees move our cattle into these areas, and then within hours notify us of the alleged offense.”
        This kind of systematic harassment represents the consequence of employing federal employees who honesty believe that humans like the Hages are a cancer on the earth. They harass the ranchers to create extreme frustration and tension until they are out of business. Ranchers and miners report this kind of harassment by federal employees all over the
        West, and it is not exaggerated.
        The Hages filed three administrative appeals during this period and won each case. “The problem was,” says Byfield, “none of these cases stopped them from finding new ways to harass us. By 1991 they had
        cancelled, suspended and burdened the grazing
        permits to the point that we could no longer economically use ourallotments, and, therefore, our ranch.”
        Even when the Hages realized they were out of business in 1991, the federal gestapo did not let up. That’s when the story goes from outrageous to the twilight zone. As the family was rounding up the last of their cattle for sale, “the Forest Service brought in about 30 armed riders and gathered every cow they
        could find, which only amounted to 104 after
        two earlier roundups. Half the riders were
        armed with semiautomatic rifles and wearing
        bulletproof vests. Clearly unskilled at handling wild cattle, they ran a bull and cow to death. They contained the cattle on our private meadows and when finished handed my father a bill for their confiscation expense.”

        For an interesting article on Harry & Rory Reid’s involvement, see: Bundy Ranch – What You’re Not Being Told http://scgnews.com/bundy-ranch-what-youre-not-being-told

        • KimmyK says:

          Sorry about the spacing above…I tried to fix it, but it didn’t work out that way! Ugh!

        • Art says:

          from scgenws.com:

          “UPDATE:
          We took down our video on the Bundy Ranch scandal because it contains what we believe is a factual error and it would be irresponsible to leave it up in its current form. Especially in the current context. We are going to begin working on a replacement video only after completing a new investigation.”

          Oh, and the Hage family won their day in court: $4.2 million in compensation, plus 17 years of interest and attorney’s fees. That was June 2008.

      • lurker says:

        I just read a pretty long article detailing the history of this. It goes a bit deeper than just not paying grazing fees. And there are more agencies involved than BLM. Through (as I understand it) State and County efforts, the federal land in question has been set aside as a protected area for desert turtles, with all grazing rights having been bought up by the country. So–prior to that decision there were unpaid fees. Since then there have been fines for not removing the cattle.

        And apparently BLM personnel have experienced previous threats and some offices have been bombed. So, they are more than a bit gun-shy. And, while some locals are supportive of Bundy, others are supportive of either environmental efforts, or the rule of law. But–it would certainly be difficult to discern who is a friend and who is not.

        And the crazies with guns came from all over.

    • The BLM’s unconditional surrender is a terrible precedent and nothing good can come of it.

      The rule of law depends on the consent of the governed and the consent of the governed depends on their faith that the government will fairly and evenly apply the law.

      This unconditional surrender breaks that faith.

      Like Humpty Dumpty who fell off the wall, all of the king’s horses and all of his men cannot put faith in government back together again.

      The rule of law is dead.

      • crazy1946 says:

        The government agents in charge were in a predicament, continue the action and possibly cause another “Ruby Ridge or Waco” style incident or back off and regroup… This is/was simply a no win situation for the people in charge. I probably would not have backed down, but that is an awfully good reason for me not being in charge… The right wing hate groups are attempting to cause discord and hate to come to the front as we approach the elections and give them the bully pulpit they so badly need and want… Would you be willing to pay the price if you were in charge?

        • I would have expected the worst and been prepared.

          I would not have run away with my tail between my legs.

          • crazy1946 says:

            To allow a battle to take place that would allow you to win that battle, yet probably cause a loss of the war would not be good! A wise man knows how to pick his battles… Do you really want to give those people the propaganda ability that they seek? Like you, I would probably have stuck to my guns and blown their “azzes” away, but thankfully people with better sense prevailed, denying the right wing nutz the political gold mine that would have been there had we (you or I) been in charge… Think for just a moment, how much of a victory for them another Ruby Ridge or Waco style incident would have been…

        • gblock says:

          Why not sell the cattle that they had already seized – at least up to the amount of the taxes that were owed?

          • crazy1946 says:

            If my reading comprehension was correct the confrontation took place at the holding pens where the cattle were located. If that is correct, then it would have been impossible to have prevented the conflict that the right wing hate group demanded… Again the right wing terrorists had the upper hand, even if they lost they won…

  16. So…you can essentially suck from the government teat then, nonstop, and then turn around and attack welfare on twitter, all while waving an American flag around on Fox? Is that it?

  17. voiceofReason says:

    Drudge has links saying it’s senator reid of nevada’s plot to use the land for a chinese financed windfarm, here’s the link http://www.infowars.com/feds-back-down-from-bundy-siege-after-infowars-expose-of-chinese-land-grab/

  18. cielo62 says:

    What pisses me off is that the Feds RETURNED THE CATTLE THEY HAD! They should auctioned those off, as dirt if a warning shot. Instead those fucking cowards gave the cows back!!

  19. Two sides to a story says:

    I pretty much agree. Which begs the question – what the heck is happening – the right rails against government abuse as much as the left and the middle – why does the right get a hall pass for inciting violence?

    • racerrodig says:

      They have more guns, more gun nutzz and aren’t afraid of the consequences when they open fire on us.

      And of course that hate speech……can’t ignore that….oh and racism, they love to hate everyone else.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: