• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Those Terrorists in Nevada

Listening to a video clip of Bundy demanding that all Park Rangers be disarmed (what happened to the right to bear arms?) I am wondering if Bundy would defend (with his gun-toting army) the rights of drug cartels to use federal lands to grow pot?

I still cannot believe that anyone is defending Bundy and his militia supporters. These people went out onto public highways and public lands, endangering innocent people, to confront BLM who were collecting cows. Law enforcement did not go after Bundy or any of these other idiots... exactly the opposite.

I am the first person to censure law enforcement when they are being violent bullies, but this is not even close to an example of that. I also find it stomach-turning that many of the very same people calling the BLM "jack booted thugs" here also defended the killing of a black man suffering head injuries after a car accident because his unarmed presence stumbling towards armed police officers was so threatening that one of the policemen opened fire and shot the guy multiple times.

But apparently, white men with assault rifles and para-military clothing calling themselves an "army" and threatening a "war" who purposely attack law enforcement... well that's completely different, and the police were wrong for... What? They didn't even shoot any of these assholes yet, inspite of being very directly threatening with actual violence.
 
maxparrish said:
Well, let those fellows pronounce their 'exception' to both, to illegal Bundy and America's illegal border crashers... I wouldn't leave anything in the oven while waiting tho...
Click to expand...

I think you're under the misconception that we actually care enough to try and dispel any odd notions you have in your head about leftists.
 
RavenSky said:
perhaps in your own zeal to be contrarian (as you wrong accuse me of being) you need to notice that I was not confining my response to Zucotti park. I clearly stated ANY park - public or private... until OWS has been continuously occupying it for 20 years, it isn't an analogy for what Bundy has been doing.
Click to expand...
Actually, I’d say you kind of blurred the two together (quote provided below), right after I clearly pointed out that I wasn’t talking about Zuccotti Park at all. Your clear “or/ANY” was about what defines a stealing of resources, which I wasn’t going to bother quibbling about. You then you go on to point out that the protesters in Zuccotti Park (w/o inference regarding public parks) had a 20 year protest requirement (or at least some vague long time period), to be comparable to the ranchers situation. Which is a comparison I wasn't making. You then went on about how how nauseating this guy is, almost as if you were continuing to argue with me, since it was also after your quote of me...color me a bit baffled by your response to me...

Your previous statement:
RavenSky said:
OWS was not a matter of stealing resources from others (government or private) - it was a protest. Moreover, when the protestors have been hanging out in Zuccotti Park for 20 years, then we might have a slim comparison.

This guy isn't protesting anything, regardless his wackadoodle claims of him not recognizing the existence of the federal government. :rolleyesa: He is either crazy or a thief.
Click to expand...

RavenSky said:
I don't think you and I really disagree on this point.
Click to expand...
I’m not even quite sure which point you are saying we don’t disagree about…so assuming: I actually do disagree with your idea that Bundy’s civil issue with the BLM is all that different than the OWS protesters illegal campgrounds created in many city public parks. Cities tolerated these illegal OWS activity for weeks to a couple months, but then finally moved to end them, which I generally found to be a reasonable response. I don’t see some special barrier on illegal activity whether it spans weeks or years. Protests can be done both legally and illegally. When they are done illegally, I don’t have much sympathy for the whining about being arrested and eventually de-camped; just as I don’t have any sympathy for a rancher who refuse to comply with Federal land rules and has his cattle confiscated. Both activities violate reasonable laws, one is city codes regarding use of public parks, the other Federal codes on the use of Federal land. Those public park protests costs cities tons of money dealing with security issues and park repairs, and the occupations deprived the general public the general use of those parks during those weeks to months of camping. Bundy’s cost the Feds lots of money and was damaging the environment.
 
Dismal said:
Not nearly so many as defended the OWs occupations of public lands.
Click to expand...
OWS had permission from the landowner and abided by the landowner's wishes.
Other Occupy Movement groups were peacefully assembling on public lands to engage their right to free speech. They also had to abide by the law or get fined/kicked out/arrested which many of them were.

Bundy is using public lands for financial gain. Most use of public lands for financial gains requires a permit and to abide by the laws and rules of the organization that oversees the land. (Don't believe me, try selling cookies in the middle of Target Field). Bundy did not seek out a permit or abide the rules of use. He ignored court orders to cease his actions. Bundy bulldozed reservoirs on public land that he had no permission to do and required public funds to undue. Bundy was not exercising his right to free speech.

There is no comparison.
 
funinspace said:
Cities tolerated these illegal OWS activity for weeks to a couple months, but then finally moved to end them, which I generally found to be a reasonable response. I don’t see some special barrier on illegal activity whether it spans weeks or years. Protests can be done both legally and illegally. When they are done illegally, I don’t have much sympathy for the whining about being arrested and eventually de-camped; just as I don’t have any sympathy for a rancher who refuse to comply with Federal land rules and has his cattle confiscated. Both activities violate reasonable laws, one is city codes regarding use of public parks, the other Federal codes on the use of Federal land. Those public park protests costs cities tons of money dealing with security issues and park repairs, and the occupations deprived the general public the general use of those parks during those weeks to months of camping. Bundy’s cost the Feds lots of money and was damaging the environment.
Click to expand...
This.
 
Yep. The guy is just a typical asshole out for himself. I wonder how many locals actually "support" him.
 
maxparrish said:
It seems that you and the Paul were less than impressed with my little screed in post 61. In fact it did not convince anyone, not even myself. You see, it was a thought experiment in testing ideological screening and appeals to emotion (based on identity groups). 90 percent of it was, word for word, taken from a NYTimes opinion column defending illegals - I merely changed the 'names' and lightly altered the circumstances of the trepass.

Hence, once recast in favor of native born ranchers it is dismissed. Curious...very curious.
Click to expand...

Well, then.

You posted a semi-coherent rant against something nobody else was talking about and, considering it's source, nobody seemed to think anything was out of place.

I'm not sure what's curious about that.
 
Yep nothing like a white cowboy with a white cowboy hat stealing from America in the name of freedom I always like to say

All this jack ass is doing is making money off the Feds and the citizens of America.
What is amazing is the same very people who profess standing up to the letter of the
law and the Constitution concerning illegals code for Mexicans have no problem
deeming good ole boy Bundy getting rich off of the federal lands as some kind of
patriot. Yet I guess this desert strongman is the new poster child of Freedom reg TM.

And just imagine. In American when you are a law breaking white cowboy cheating and
stealing you are a patriot fighting the tyrany of big government. But when you do this
in Afghanistan you are a terrorist and or war lord!

The asshole is going to get his. "F" cowards putting women and their daughters in harms way.
"F" cowards hiding under the skirts of their women and Lady Justice! And slant heads like Shaun
Klanity hoping for a gun fight makes me even think even lower of their right wing 24/7
hate media scum as more scum. Good ole Cliven Bundy is even pissing off the Nevada Cattleman's
association as they all pay their grazing fees! What an asshole.

Peace

Pegasus
 
Ideally what you'd do in a situation like this is just say "Okay, you win, we won't confiscate those cattle." and just let everything diffuse for a while, like BLM did...

Then in a couple weeks or a couple months you arrest a bunch of the more noteworthy "protestors", because hey, it turns out if you engage in armed robbery there's no rule that says the feds can only arrest you during the robbery itself.

Lather rinse repeat until helping Bundy rob the federal government at gunpoint becomes a not-so-fun idea.
 
maxparrish said:
I'm sure you were making that argument! :wink:
Click to expand...

You certainly aren't. Its politics to say the law is demonic which is what is being said when one says 'the agencies are always right'. Agencies have the law after rulings are either legislatively or judicially affirmed. Where was Bundy when everything was being determined? Oh, yes, he was already a scofflaw and above the process. Not contrived pity deserved.

When you can say something like Jeb did about illegal immigration '....they committed an act of love....' about those who sought to protect endangered species I'll hold my point.
 
Ford said:
There's no "jack booted" about it, really. Yes, they showed up armed (law enforcement in this country usually is), but also showed an amazing amount of restraint.

Generally speaking, when you point a weapon at police ("militarized" or otherwise) it is the last thing you. These "protestors" showed up looking for a showdown with federal law enforcement, announced their preparedness to die to defend the right of this man's cows to shit on federal land, and even claimed they'd use human shields so that the first casualties would be women and children.

There were thugs in this scenario, and they weren't the ones sporting badges.
Click to expand...

Ok, bad term on my part.

I meant you have to go with the heavy-handed approach when dealing with the sovereign citizens. They were criticized for bringing so much force and it turns out they didn't bring anywhere near enough.
 
RavenSky said:
But apparently, white men with assault rifles and para-military clothing calling themselves an "army" and threatening a "war" who purposely attack law enforcement... well that's completely different, and the police were wrong for... What? They didn't even shoot any of these assholes yet, inspite of being very directly threatening with actual violence.
Click to expand...

Many people basically automatically assume the little guy is right in any confrontation.
 
The Paul said:
Ideally what you'd do in a situation like this is just say "Okay, you win, we won't confiscate those cattle." and just let everything diffuse for a while, like BLM did...

Then in a couple weeks or a couple months you arrest a bunch of the more noteworthy "protestors", because hey, it turns out if you engage in armed robbery there's no rule that says the feds can only arrest you during the robbery itself.

Lather rinse repeat until helping Bundy rob the federal government at gunpoint becomes a not-so-fun idea.
Click to expand...

If they have solid identities on the people involved, yes, arrest them.
 
The Paul said:
Ideally what you'd do in a situation like this is just say "Okay, you win, we won't confiscate those cattle." and just let everything diffuse for a while, like BLM did...

Then in a couple weeks or a couple months you arrest a bunch of the more noteworthy "protestors", because hey, it turns out if you engage in armed robbery there's no rule that says the feds can only arrest you during the robbery itself.

Lather rinse repeat until helping Bundy rob the federal government at gunpoint becomes a not-so-fun idea.
Click to expand...

I think they should just garnish all of his accounts and place liens against all of his property... every time he sells a cow, the money gets turned over to the government to pay his judgements.
 
RavenSky said:
I think they should just garnish all of his accounts and place liens against all of his property... every time he sells a cow, the money gets turned over to the government to pay his judgements.
Click to expand...

He'll sell them for cash on the barrelhead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom