Cliven Bundy

Thirty Bills Unpaid

callen said:

brianlux said:

Ask the land that is being ruined and the indigenous species that are being eliminated how they feel about all the legalese around this mess and my guess is they will respond with, "Doesn't mean shit to a tree" (thank you, Jefferson Airplane). Yes, I know it's a legal issue we are discussing here but again my guess is the land and the critters would say "Fuck that, let's get real here" to all of that.

Also- Thirty Bills, you are not on my ignore list. :-)

Well he's on my ignore list!!!!

I need to start being more agreeable!

mickeyrat

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

callen said:

brianlux said:

Ask the land that is being ruined and the indigenous species that are being eliminated how they feel about all the legalese around this mess and my guess is they will respond with, "Doesn't mean shit to a tree" (thank you, Jefferson Airplane). Yes, I know it's a legal issue we are discussing here but again my guess is the land and the critters would say "Fuck that, let's get real here" to all of that.

Also- Thirty Bills, you are not on my ignore list. :-)

Well he's on my ignore list!!!!

I need to start being more agreeable!

Yep. Canadians as a whole could be nicer. IMO.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

mickeyrat said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

callen said:

brianlux said:

Ask the land that is being ruined and the indigenous species that are being eliminated how they feel about all the legalese around this mess and my guess is they will respond with, "Doesn't mean shit to a tree" (thank you, Jefferson Airplane). Yes, I know it's a legal issue we are discussing here but again my guess is the land and the critters would say "Fuck that, let's get real here" to all of that.

Also- Thirty Bills, you are not on my ignore list. :-)

Well he's on my ignore list!!!!

I need to start being more agreeable!

Yep. Canadians as a whole could be nicer. IMO.

Seriously?

brianlux

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

mickeyrat said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

callen said:

brianlux said:

Ask the land that is being ruined and the indigenous species that are being eliminated how they feel about all the legalese around this mess and my guess is they will respond with, "Doesn't mean shit to a tree" (thank you, Jefferson Airplane). Yes, I know it's a legal issue we are discussing here but again my guess is the land and the critters would say "Fuck that, let's get real here" to all of that.

Also- Thirty Bills, you are not on my ignore list. :-)

Well he's on my ignore list!!!!

I need to start being more agreeable!

Yep. Canadians as a whole could be nicer. IMO.

Seriously?

I very much doubt he is. Come on Mickey, show Thirty some love!

Well, at least here we don't stand on opposite sides of a fence with loaded guns. :-)

mickeyrat

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

mickeyrat said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

callen said:

brianlux said:

Ask the land that is being ruined and the indigenous species that are being eliminated how they feel about all the legalese around this mess and my guess is they will respond with, "Doesn't mean shit to a tree" (thank you, Jefferson Airplane). Yes, I know it's a legal issue we are discussing here but again my guess is the land and the critters would say "Fuck that, let's get real here" to all of that.

Also- Thirty Bills, you are not on my ignore list. :-)

Well he's on my ignore list!!!!

I need to start being more agreeable!

Yep. Canadians as a whole could be nicer. IMO.

Seriously?

Cmon man. Blatant joke riffing on the stereotype that canadians are nice. They are for sure but I couldnt let the opportunity pass. No smiley was the straightface attempt.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

mickeyrat said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

mickeyrat said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

callen said:

brianlux said:

Ask the land that is being ruined and the indigenous species that are being eliminated how they feel about all the legalese around this mess and my guess is they will respond with, "Doesn't mean shit to a tree" (thank you, Jefferson Airplane). Yes, I know it's a legal issue we are discussing here but again my guess is the land and the critters would say "Fuck that, let's get real here" to all of that.

Also- Thirty Bills, you are not on my ignore list. :-)

Well he's on my ignore list!!!!

I need to start being more agreeable!

Yep. Canadians as a whole could be nicer. IMO.

Seriously?

Cmon man. Blatant joke riffing on the stereotype that canadians are nice. They are for sure but I couldnt let the opportunity pass. No smiley was the straightface attempt.

Many Canadians have been trying to change that stereotype and after reading your assessment, I thought we had done our job is all. Clearly... there's more work to be done!

Thirty Bills Unpaid

As to the Cliven Bundy issue... it's been quiet in this thread ever since the spirit behind it has been resoundingly squashed.

brianlux

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

As to the Cliven Bundy issue... it's been quiet in this thread ever since the spirit behind it has been resoundingly squashed.

Here's an article that certainly contains a lot of fire:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/19/cliven-bundy-nevada-blm-libertarian

A rancher's armed battle against the US government is standard libertarian fare

"Perhaps the most remarkable feature of American democracy is the magnificent estate of public land that it reserved from the very beginning for the use of all citizens, rich or poor. There is nothing like it in the democracies of Europe, which came into being with nations already carved up into private fiefdoms. The Great Idea that hundreds of millions of acres of forests, deserts, rivers and prairies should be owned by, and managed for, the public interest has had a profound and lasting influence on American culture.

But not everyone has accepted it.

Cliven Bundy’s armed standoff with the National Park Service and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is the latest flare-up in a long, ongoing, often-paranoid revolt against federal ownership public lands, even the idea of a public interest at all.

He's part of a small group of extreme libertarians, corporate profiteers, armed militia members and livestock ranchers who have tried before to seize control of public lands, who nurture an intense hatred of the federal government, and who have a long history of violent eruptions going back to the failed “sagebrush rebellions” of the 20th century and before.

Threats of violence are de rigeur and actual violence too common in the modern sagebrush rebellion: pipe bombs planted on wilderness trails, sent to environmental groups, exploded in US Forest Service and BLM offices."

Gee, what a sweet bunch of folks huh?

Thirty Bills Unpaid

brianlux said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

As to the Cliven Bundy issue... it's been quiet in this thread ever since the spirit behind it has been resoundingly squashed.

Here's an article that certainly contains a lot of fire:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/19/cliven-bundy-nevada-blm-libertarian

A rancher's armed battle against the US government is standard libertarian fare

"Perhaps the most remarkable feature of American democracy is the magnificent estate of public land that it reserved from the very beginning for the use of all citizens, rich or poor. There is nothing like it in the democracies of Europe, which came into being with nations already carved up into private fiefdoms. The Great Idea that hundreds of millions of acres of forests, deserts, rivers and prairies should be owned by, and managed for, the public interest has had a profound and lasting influence on American culture.

But not everyone has accepted it.

Cliven Bundy’s armed standoff with the National Park Service and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is the latest flare-up in a long, ongoing, often-paranoid revolt against federal ownership public lands, even the idea of a public interest at all.

He's part of a small group of extreme libertarians, corporate profiteers, armed militia members and livestock ranchers who have tried before to seize control of public lands, who nurture an intense hatred of the federal government, and who have a long history of violent eruptions going back to the failed “sagebrush rebellions” of the 20th century and before.

Threats of violence are de rigeur and actual violence too common in the modern sagebrush rebellion: pipe bombs planted on wilderness trails, sent to environmental groups, exploded in US Forest Service and BLM offices."

Gee, what a sweet bunch of folks huh?

A solid perspective.

This behaviour is insolent and hardly heroic. To be brutally honest, I'm simply stunned that so many people might get in such a corner to support it.

unsung

This entire thing reinforces my belief that we are nothing but slaves.

Don't pay a bill? Armed men show up to collect.

Don't pay your tax? Armed men drag you away and throw you in a cage.

A lot of criticism on putting women on the front; where's the criticism over federal agents targeting their snipers on these women?

This isn't about rule of law, this is about keeping the machine fed.

goingtoverona

the feds are gonna "target" the people they can see, which is usually the people in the front, not the guy behind the guy behind the guy. I think it's super low to put your women in front to get mowed down just to make some irrational point. what I find strange about the whole thing is that if a brown man across the ocean did that...there would be this huge outcry of look how savage these terrorists are. that's why we gotta fight them because they use women and children as human shields. only subhuman people do that. but some redneck shitkicker does it and now he's a local hero? fucking bizarre.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

unsung said:

This entire thing reinforces my belief that we are nothing but slaves.

Don't pay a bill? Armed men show up to collect.

Don't pay your tax? Armed men drag you away and throw you in a cage.

A lot of criticism on putting women on the front; where's the criticism over federal agents targeting their snipers on these women?

This isn't about rule of law, this is about keeping the machine fed.

You are being silly. Don't persist in belaboring this case. It took 20 years before the government intervened. To my way of thinking... the government was extremely patient in this situation. So much so that the thread should have been: why did the federal government drag their feet and not deal with this law breaker sooner than 20 years? They need to become more efficient.

And I agree completely with Verona. Wanna-Be-Tough-Shitkicking-Yokels placing their women at the front of their lines- let alone even bringing them to their 'fight' (if that's what you want to call it)- speaks volumes about their levels of cowardice or stupidity. Either trait is pathetic.

While I'm at it... they remind me of the skinny little wimpy guys in the bars that- never truly wishing to start anything- used to lip bigger people off to look tough... thinking that because they're so much bigger... they won't do anything about it. Kind of like Pomeranians 'barking' at Rottweilers from their master's arms.

These tough guys are all sitting on their dirt patches, chewing on their toe nails and telling each other how tough they are. Given there was no real incident to speak of... I tend to think they are Pomeranians. Good on the federal agents for being well-trained and not dealing with the annoying squeaky barking that could have easily prompted a good man to open up a can of whoopass.

unsung

You can believe what you want, but don't even try to tell me it's about the rule of law. It's about the money.

If rule of law mattered, if trespassing were the issue, then those agents would be deployed on the southern border. But it's not about that, it's about $ and control.

So you call those people what you want, in the end we both know that the government will again get what they want, and they will obtain it by force.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

unsung said:

You can believe what you want, but don't even try to tell me it's about the rule of law. It's about the money.

If rule of law mattered, if trespassing were the issue, then those agents would be deployed on the southern border. But it's not about that, it's about $ and control.

So you call those people what you want, in the end we both know that the government will again get what they want, and they will obtain it by force.

Well... can you imagine the anarchy that would reign if your government wasn't capable of handling situations such as these? Do you really desire for a toothless government that can be shit on anytime someone wishes to shit on it? In other words... a government that will not enforce any of your land's laws?

I'd almost guarantee you that, say in year 10 of his defiance and becoming confident that he had bested the feds, Bundy never anxiously wondered when the government was going to take a course of action. I'd almost guarantee that Bundy loudly boasted to his pardners how he was bigger than the government by refusing to comply with regulations. You say its about '$ and control'... I say it's about insolence and pride. He got called on his criminal behaviour when he though he never would.

You never address the fact that they gave this guy 20 years to comply before finally moving to action. You can cite unfounded theories as to the motivation for doing so... but at face value... it's pretty cut and dry.

unsung

I've already addressed what you are asking, and since my time here is spent on a cell phone I really don't want to type it all out again.

If the BLM were really helping then why did the other 52 ranchers already close up shop? Maybe because they could not find success with the restrictions and fees in place.

Let's see, BLM wants land for solar array, so BLM forces everyone out the achieve that. Except one guy decided not to play along, so the result is armed agents show up to get the result that they need.

Surely anyone here can see the real issue, stop for one second and see the big picture. Stop telling me it's about rule of law and that the courts decided. The Feds want the land, so they create laws in their favor, force all but one guy out, then say the one guy owes X amount of money, and armed agents show up and confiscate his herd.

The people that defend him are called terrorists for the media story to justify the future use of govt force to TAKE whatever they want.

It's about control and money. It has jack shit to do with turtles.

unsung

And please, please, don't insult me with the bs of the anarchy that would ensure if the Feds stayed out of this. We are both smarter than that.

Remember when everything sucked and the government solved all of our problems? Me neither.

brianlux

"It has jack shit to do with turtles. "

On this, we agree. And that is true for both sides of the discussion. The ranchers particularly don't give two cow pies for the health of the land. Which is why I continually bring into the discussion the concern for the environmental side of the issue.

unsung

And that's a whole different topic that has it's own validity, it's not the reason that the armed forces are there.

brianlux

True.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

unsung said:

And please, please, don't insult me with the bs of the anarchy that would ensure if the Feds stayed out of this. We are both smarter than that.

Remember when everything sucked and the government solved all of our problems? Me neither.

You don't think that there are inherent problems with people being 'selective' with regards to which laws they think they should comply with and which laws they shouldn't?

You give people way too much credit.