If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

•       •       •

4387 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Apr 2014 at 5:11 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:    more»

 Paginated (1/page) Single page Single page, reversed Normal view Change images to links Show raw HTML
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Well, they've locked up the dog demographic.

"Sure we threatened government officials with guns, but we haven't destroyed anything or been arrested..."

James!: "Sure we threatened government officials with guns, but we haven't destroyed anything or been arrested..."

Police cars undefecated on, pots going unsmoken, a conspicuous absence of tents on the public's land (though plenty of squatters) - they're not even TRYING to look like Occupy!

You didn't destroy property and weren't arrested because BLM agents assumed (probably correctly) that you would try to murder them if they didn't de-escalate the situation. Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken.

Yeah.... apparently all he does is beef

George F*cking Washington 2014.

STOP RAPING PEOPLE

Somehow I'm not picturing him frolicking about the country happily doling out beef to the masses.

Im a vegetarian and a taxpayer. I don't appreciate my taxes going to subsidize your beef.

Serious Black: You didn't destroy property and weren't arrested because BLM agents assumed (probably correctly) that you would try to murder them if they didn't de-escalate the situation. Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken.

It would have been a totally different tone of coverage too.

"Armed gunmen have taken over a protest and are now in a stand off with New York Police.  FBI and DHS agents to assess and assist NYPD, meanwhile the National Guard has been deployed to staging areas around Wall Street, should the violence spill into the city at large."

Cliven Beefyseed!

James!: George F*cking Washington 2014.

He looks like a guy I met at a gay bar last week. He is the hot bearded daddy bear type.

Plus he got the crazy eyes. Hot.

vernonFL: James!: George F*cking Washington 2014.

He looks like a guy I met at a gay bar last week. He is the hot bearded daddy bear type.

Plus he got the crazy eyes. Hot.

He looks like a robot made of ground up mannequin parts and powered by fists full of lard.

There were 32 million cattle slaughtered last year in the US for food.  I'm sure that the market can lose 900 of them without the country's beef supply suffering any.

He looks like he's questioning whether O'Reilly even lifts.

sigdiamond2000: [img.fark.net image 652x365]

He looks like he's questioning whether O'Reilly even lifts.

You're on national TV, can't you at least put on a collared shirt?

James!: [a2.img.talkingpointsmemo.com image 652x365]George F*cking Washington 2014.

Oh look.  Surprise.  Another bearded, shaved headed twit.

"Beef, just like anything else, is cheaper when you steal the raw materials needed to make it!"

I'm a useful, productive citizen! I pay my taxes! Oh wait, no I don't.

Cows go in, steaks come out. YOU CAN'T EXPLAIN THAT!!!

LandOfChocolate: sigdiamond2000: [img.fark.net image 652x365]

He looks like he's questioning whether O'Reilly even lifts.

You're on national TV, can't you at least put on a collared shirt?

I didn't know that dress shirt collars came in size fireplug.

LandOfChocolate: sigdiamond2000: [img.fark.net image 652x365]

He looks like he's questioning whether O'Reilly even lifts.

You're on national TV, can't you at least put on a collared shirt?

Hah, I saw that from a completely different perspective.  I can see this guy rummaging through flannel, camo, Duck Dynasty and hunting shirts yelling "HONEY, WHERES MY DAMN NICE BLUE SHIRT.  I GOTTA LOOK NICE, IM GOIN ON TV"

My view is if the guy is breaking the law, then put a lien on his stuff. But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese.

And Reid needs to get his foot out of his mouth that was just in his @$$and shut up about domestic terrorists because he has no idea what a domestic terrorist is. And lastly Mr Reid. If you are going to spout off about enforcing the law and some citizen can't do what he's doing then you need to enforce all laws, especially those that are here ILLEGALLY and also those in that certain government run tax agency called the IRS that owe billion in back taxes. Can't have it both ways jackass. The main difference is that the Bundy Militia didn't poop. Occupiers pooped on everything according to FOX, but these guys held it in for days. Not one of them pooped at all. While both of them had idiotic messages, at least he was able to deliver his in a clear, concise, manner. LandOfChocolate: sigdiamond2000: [img.fark.net image 652x365] He looks like he's questioning whether O'Reilly even lifts. You're on national TV, can't you at least put on a collared shirt? Are you sure there isn't a collar under there? Dusty has really let himself go.... Less rape? vernonFL: Im a vegetarian and a taxpayer. I don't appreciate my taxes going to subsidize your beef. 1) You, sir, win the Internet. 2) A new keyboard, you owe my one. (Yes, my sense of humor is warped, but that was elegant.) JC22: My view is if the guy is breaking the law, then put a lien on his stuff. But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese. And Reid needs to get his foot out of his mouth that was just in his @$$ and shut up about domestic terrorists because he has no idea what a domestic terrorist is.

And lastly Mr Reid. If you are going to spout off about enforcing the law and some citizen can't do what he's doing then you need to enforce all laws, especially those that are here ILLEGALLY and also those in that certain government run tax agency called the IRS that owe billion in back taxes.

Can't have it both ways jackass.

Please infrom us then: what is a domestic terrorist?

Moolon Labe!

/Beef?

LandOfChocolate: sigdiamond2000: [img.fark.net image 652x365]

He looks like he's questioning whether O'Reilly even lifts.

You're on national TV, can't you at least put on a collared shirt?

He has no neck.

He's a Sontaran with a beard.

JC22: My view is if the guy is breaking the law, then put a lien on his stuff. But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese.

And Reid needs to get his foot out of his mouth that was just in his @$$and shut up about domestic terrorists because he has no idea what a domestic terrorist is. And lastly Mr Reid. If you are going to spout off about enforcing the law and some citizen can't do what he's doing then you need to enforce all laws, especially those that are here ILLEGALLY and also those in that certain government run tax agency called the IRS that owe billion in back taxes. Can't have it both ways jackass. Hey, how do you enforce a lien? Oh right. By confiscating property. Hey what do you do when the person whose property you're trying to confiscate threatens to shoot you? rdu_voyager: Cows go in, steaks come out. YOU CAN'T EXPLAIN THAT!!! Yes you can... To be fair. His cow have probably done more for the US than the entirety of the Occupy movement. / what's the difference between a cow and a hippy? Cows actually have a purpose. Hell must've just froze over ... I just agreed with, and respectfully understood a cogent argument from one Bill O'Reilly? iheartscotch: To be fair. His cow have probably done more for the US than the entirety of the Occupy movement. / what's the difference between a cow and a hippy? Cows actually have a purpose. Ooooooo, is this a hospital? Because I feel like we just entered the BURN WARD LandOfChocolate: sigdiamond2000: [img.fark.net image 652x365] He looks like he's questioning whether O'Reilly even lifts. You're on national TV, can't you at least put on a collared shirt? You sound elitist. Yay! Lemme jump on the assumption bandwagon too! Occupy supporters: Have no job / provide nothing to society / are a drain on our nation Bundy: Proud self-made rancher / takes no government tax benefits** / pays for everything he uses*** * Ahem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff#Claim_of_inherited_grazin g _rights ** Double Ahem http://www.agweb.com/farm_business/tax_tips.aspx ** COUGH COUGH COUGH http://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/2014/04/22/cliven - bundy-owes-american-taxpayers-for-his-cattle-grazing demaL-demaL-yeH: LandOfChocolate: sigdiamond2000: [img.fark.net image 652x365] He looks like he's questioning whether O'Reilly even lifts. You're on national TV, can't you at least put on a collared shirt? I didn't know that dress shirt collars came in size fireplug. As a reasonably fit guy with a size 17 1/2 neck I can assure you that anything over a 17 neck is cut more like a tent than a shirt. iheartscotch: To be fair. His cow have probably done more for the US than the entirety of the Occupy movement. / what's the difference between a cow and a hippy? Cows actually have a purpose. But you can eat both still, right? Yeah but the occupiers were contributing to the economy by buying Starbucks coffee. I don't think the government needs to mess with people protesting wealth inequality and bankster frauds nor do they need to fark with some guy grazing cattle on some barren shiathole part of the country, but hey, that's just me... vernonFL: Im a vegetarian and a taxpayer. I don't appreciate my taxes going to subsidize your beef. That comment just opened the floodgates and my bag of popcorn! "Mr. Bundy is providing the country with beef." I'm sure all the other cattle ranchers, who this leech scum undercuts, have something to say about this. iheartscotch: To be fair. His cow have probably done more for the US than the entirety of the Occupy movement. / what's the difference between a cow and a hippy? Cows actually have a purpose. Cows contribute to global warming. Hippies don't taste very good, but you feel amazing for a few hours after dinner. JC22: My view is if the guy is breaking the law, then put a lien on his stuff. But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese. And Reid needs to get his foot out of his mouth that was just in his @$$ and shut up about domestic terrorists because he has no idea what a domestic terrorist is.

And lastly Mr Reid. If you are going to spout off about enforcing the law and some citizen can't do what he's doing then you need to enforce all laws, especially those that are here ILLEGALLY and also those in that certain government run tax agency called the IRS that owe billion in back taxes.

Can't have it both ways jackass.

\it's the next step in your little screed, amirite?

sigdiamond2000:

STOP RAPING PEOPLE
RAIP MOR CHIKINS

I have no clue why I thought of this after seeing the dudes pic..

They should just pepper spray the area, like dusting crops. That'll break up the protest.

I'm still mystified by the "take the battle to your baldness" cue-ball look that so many bald men in this country favor.

What is the thinking here? That you'll look less bald if you're totally bald?

I don't get it.

If I was bald, I'd rock the Friar Tuck/Hairy Horseshoe. It's both unique and timeless.

can somebody explain to me why we're even talking about this? the guy was grazing his cattle on federal lands and not paying fees, right? he then threatened federal agents with deadly force when they came to deal with him.

why is this even an issue? why isn't he in jail for threatening federal officers with firearms?

Serious Black: You didn't destroy property and weren't arrested because BLM agents assumed (probably correctly) that you would try to murder them if they didn't de-escalate the situation. Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken.

OWS was more a fan of arson and anti-semitism.

EvilEgg: They should just pepper spray the area, like dusting crops. That'll break up the protest.

"I pepper sprayed the wrong field?"

Remember, kids:

Theft is okay as long as it supports a business venture.
And/or you're white.

"Mr. Bundy is providing a service to the nation," Shaw responded. "He's a cattle rancher. He's providing the country with beef. The Occupy movement, to this day, I still don't know what they're providing the country with."

The only reasonable thing ever said by any of O'Really's guests.

Serious Black: Please infrom us then: what is a domestic terrorist?

People like "militia" member Timothy McVeigh are domestic terrorists.

This text is now purple: Serious Black: You didn't destroy property and weren't arrested because BLM agents assumed (probably correctly) that you would try to murder them if they didn't de-escalate the situation. Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken.

[assets-s3.rollingstone.com image 595x415]

OWS was more a fan of arson and anti-semitism.

Hold on now, they weren't anti-Semitic, they were just protesting against the people who control most of the money.

Some of Bundy's supporters are free room comps from Las Vegas casinos ( can't say which ones).

If those militia guys had real jobs, they wouldn't be hanging out in Bundy's commune.

sigdiamond2000: I'm still mystified by the "take the battle to your baldness" cue-ball look that so many bald men in this country favor.

What is the thinking here? That you'll look less bald if you're totally bald?

youmightberight: demaL-demaL-yeH: LandOfChocolate: sigdiamond2000: [img.fark.net image 652x365]

He looks like he's questioning whether O'Reilly even lifts.

You're on national TV, can't you at least put on a collared shirt?

I didn't know that dress shirt collars came in size fireplug.

As a reasonably fit guy with a size 17 1/2 neck I can assure you that anything over a 17 neck is cut more like a tent than a shirt.

And woe unto you if you try to tuck the damn thing in. I love it when you have to pleat and fold your shirt around your waist just so it fits in your pants.

Coelacanth: Some of Bundy's supporters are free room comps from Las Vegas casinos ( can't say which ones).

Getting free room comps...

Lets f*ck with this guy.

Declare him his own country.
Shoot his cattle when they wonder into the U.S.
Deny him a passport to the U.S.
Don't let him use roads the electric grid, water ect.
Declare his property not subject to U.S law. If someone robs him to bad.
If he doesn't respect U.S law then he doesn't get protected by it.

Make it a stupid reality show.

impaler: "Mr. Bundy is providing the country with beef."

I'm sure all the other cattle ranchers, who this leech scum undercuts, have something to say about this.

Yep, ranchers like Glenn Beck even called him out...yes, that Glenn Beck!*

*who may have killed a girl in 1990.

UberDave: Somehow I'm not picturing him frolicking about the country happily doling out beef to the masses.

His beef had better be free, since he apparently thinks the rest of us are supposed to frolick about happily doling out the country to him at no cost.

Someone say free steaks?  WHERE'S MY STEAK OR I'LL FARKING CUT YA!

JC22: But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese.

Tell me, how does bullshiat taste when you gulp it down? I've never been able to get past the smell.

Serious Black: You didn't destroy property and weren't arrested because BLM agents assumed (probably correctly) that you would try to murder them if they didn't de-escalate the situation. Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken.

No, but they raped each other some. Then the OWS clowns tried having little 'Lord of the Flies' tribunals to bring some order back into their camps without getting 'the man' involved.

freewill: UberDave: Somehow I'm not picturing him frolicking about the country happily doling out beef to the masses.

His beef had better be free, since he apparently thinks the rest of us are supposed to frolick about happily doling out the country to him at no cost.

Pretty sure he and his boys are offering their beef for free at truck stops across Nevada.

James!: [a2.img.talkingpointsmemo.com image 652x365]George F*cking Washington 2014.

They emptied new york makeup supply shops for all the shine powder that guy needed.  Yikes.

1. soap & water readily available
2. no drum circles
3. deodorant in use
5. a distinct lack of patchouli

I'd say the biggest difference is that one was a loosely organized mass gathering of apples to protest the increasing income inequality and the other is a gathering of anti-government gun toting oranges to protect a Rancher who decided he wanted to have his cattle graze on land that wasn't his despite 20 years of the courts telling him to knock it off.

While it's cute that he'd ask the guy a question like that to throw him off, the two aren't very similar at all.

Amish Tech Support: Lets f*ck with this guy.

Declare him his own country.
Shoot his cattle when they wonder into the U.S.
Deny him a passport to the U.S.
Don't let him use roads the electric grid, water ect.
Declare his property not subject to U.S law. If someone robs him to bad.
If he doesn't respect U.S law then he doesn't get protected by it.

Make it a stupid reality show.

Family Guy did it first.

/sort of
//still awesome

Both Sides Are Bad So Kill Cows???

Wesley Snipes steals from the government and he goes to jail.

Ol' Cattlehat McWhiteman steals from the government and he's some kind of hero.

vernonFL: He looks like a guy I met at a gay bar last week. He is the hot bearded daddy bear type. Plus he got the crazy eyes. Hot.

I'll be here all week, try the veal.

I'd like to comment, but I'm too busy felling free trees in Yosemite and selling the lumber.

lordjupiter: Both Sides Are Bad So Kill Cows???

IIRC you can get lots of cool stuff by killing cows.

Lumbar Puncture: iheartscotch: To be fair. His cow have probably done more for the US than the entirety of the Occupy movement.

/ what's the difference between a cow and a hippy? Cows actually have a purpose.

But you can eat both still, right?

i think there was something funny in that hippie

Same guy before he grew the beard and shaved his head.

JC22: But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese.

error 303: iheartscotch: To be fair. His cow have probably done more for the US than the entirety of the Occupy movement.

/ what's the difference between a cow and a hippy? Cows actually have a purpose.

Ooooooo, is this a hospital? Because I feel like we just entered the BURN WARD

For the record, neither of you is funny or even remotely scathing.

Shaw responded by arguing that the groups are different because the Bundy activists have not destroyed property or been arrested.

Well, it's not because you assholes didn't TRY.I really hope you don't dislocate your shoulder while patting yourself on the back.

1. Bundy sells his cows, the beef gets to market, gov. puts a lien on the proceeds, we get beef and money owed.

2.Government confiscates Bundy's cows, Govt. sells the cows, govt. keeps the money, beef gets to market, we get beef and money owed.

So, since both the above schemes end up with us getting both the beef and the money, which scheme does Bundy and his supporters advocate? Surely, they don't intend to allow Bundy to get out from paying his debt, right?

Mikey1969: Shaw responded by arguing that the groups are different because the Bundy activists have not destroyed property or been arrested.

Well, it's not because you assholes didn't TRY.I really hope you don't dislocate your shoulder while patting yourself on the back.

It also helps that they're armed to the goddamned teeth.

The steaks have been raised!

Danger Avoid Death: EvilEgg: They should just pepper spray the area, like dusting crops. That'll break up the protest.

[s3.amazonaws.com image 500x347]

"I pepper sprayed the wrong field?"

I think the feds should get together with all the other ranchers out there out there and explain how Militia McStealstuff is dicking over their legitimate businesses. Then, drop them off a couple of crates of AR15s and say, "Hey, by the way, he doesn't believe we exist. Have fun."

These clowns are a lot like OWS - and they are small shiat, and not worth spilling blood to go after in a big hurry.
I think the Feds are right to exercise patience here - time is on their side.

FlashHarry: why isn't he in jail for threatening federal officers with firearms?

Because sometimes the situation is more complicated than lawful and unlawful.

Mikey1969: Shaw responded by arguing that the groups are different because the Bundy activists have not destroyed property or been arrested.

Well, it's not because you assholes didn't TRY.I really hope you don't dislocate your shoulder while patting yourself on the back.

Especially after one of those idiots kicked a police dog.

The only reason they weren't arrested is the police realized there would be a serious situation outside of their control if they started doing that.

someonelse: JC22: But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese.

Oh, that uber-liberal Snopes website you say!

/and by "liberal", I mean, fact-checking, non-biased information

Arkanaut: The steaks have been raised!

Okay, these puns are getting udderly ridiculous.

JC22: My view is if the guy is breaking the law, then put a lien on his stuff. But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese.

And Reid needs to get his foot out of his mouth that was just in his @$$and shut up about domestic terrorists because he has no idea what a domestic terrorist is. And lastly Mr Reid. If you are going to spout off about enforcing the law and some citizen can't do what he's doing then you need to enforce all laws, especially those that are here ILLEGALLY and also those in that certain government run tax agency called the IRS that owe billion in back taxes. Can't have it both ways jackass. Yup, you're right. It has nothing to do with a rancher flouting federal law and thumbing his nose at the BLM, it's all about some dirty, conniving, lowlife DEM (who we all know can't be trusted any further than we can throw them). In fact, we should throw Mr. Reid in prison for his comments (just to be safe) and strip him of his office while we're out it. Will that make you feel better, pumpkin? sigdiamond2000: I'm still mystified by the "take the battle to your baldness" cue-ball look that so many bald men in this country favor. What is the thinking here? That you'll look less bald if you're totally bald? I don't get it. If I was bald, I'd rock the Friar Tuck/Hairy Horseshoe. It's both unique and timeless. Unresolved Oedipal issues with Patrick Stewart, I'd guess. *hubba* Hey Bill, just a few Fair and Balanced pieces of FACT: 1. It's NOT Bundy's land. 2. His family has NOT been there "since 1870". As for who was trying to "provoke a confrontation", does this asshat REALLY believe that the BLM would send people down there without some backup, and then not send more when you and your chucklehead fellow asshats stated that you were heading down there with your guns and 'itching for a fight'? And wow, O'Reilly actually gave a decent interview there, for the most part. Are we all about to be called up for the Rapture, or something? FlashHarry: can somebody explain to me why we're even talking about this? the guy was grazing his cattle on federal lands and not paying fees, right? he then threatened federal agents with deadly force when they came to deal with him. why is this even an issue? why isn't he in jail for threatening federal officers with firearms? These "patriot" militia types think they're the victim when people tell them to stop breaking the law. I don't know how someone gets their head so far up their arse, or how anyone could sympathize with them. Take John Stokes, "a member of the Constitution Party and a property rights advocate and is believed to a link between the WiseUse and Militia Movements." Link. Learned about him while reading about the "Freedom County" movement that had one of its leaders die in the Washington mudslide. These guys biatch about taxes and welfare, yet think they're entitled to everyone else's shiat. That's a real special type of scumery. Stokes' claiming that a 32-acre easement for his two radio towers gave him actual ownership over 148 surrounding acres. That led to a lawsuit with the actual owners, which Stokes lost. On his radio show, Stokes accused the land's real owners of bank fraud and lying on an affadavit. They sued for defamation and won 3.8 milion in damages. Link Meh, I have a little more respect for O'Reilly now. I think he meant tube steaks subby 😧 Bundy is a jerk. My problem is with the government's reaction. They send in waves of cops all in their best Call of Duty getups like they're about to storm a Hydra base over...an unpaid bill? Seems like there's people on both who would like a violent confrontation, and maybe next time someone flinches? Headso: I don't think the government needs to mess with people protesting wealth inequality and bankster frauds nor do they need to fark with some guy grazing cattle on some barren shiathole part of the country, but hey, that's just me... We're all painfully aware that your view on this is "claim that the BLM force was unnecessary while refusing to accept that it wasn't them that first brought weapons all in a really weird attempt to avoid saying - hey that Bundy guy seems like an ass because for some reason that's just too upsetting". There's really no need to tell us twice a day anymore. impaler: Serious Black: Please infrom us then: what is a domestic terrorist? People like "militia" member Timothy McVeigh are domestic terrorists. Blowing up BLM offices might make you a domestic terrorist too. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/04/15/everything -y ou-need-to-know-about-the-long-fight-between-cliven-bundy-and-the-fede ral-government/ impaler: Stokes accused the land's real owners of bank fraud and lying on an affadavit. They sued for defamation and won 3.8 milion in damages. Link Probably thanks to a couple of liberal activist judges no doubt. /sarc off vernonFL: Im a vegetarian and a taxpayer. I don't appreciate my taxes going to subsidize your beef. Boy, are you in for a shock. Well you don't subsidize my beef at as high a level as most, but the grain-finished feedlot crap wouldn't be grain-finished without your tax dollars subsidizing the practice. iheartscotch: To be fair. His cow have probably done more for the US than the entirety of the Occupy movement. / what's the difference between a cow and a hippy? Cows actually have a purpose. And the cows might actually fight back. kidgenius: Mikey1969: Shaw responded by arguing that the groups are different because the Bundy activists have not destroyed property or been arrested. Well, it's not because you assholes didn't TRY.I really hope you don't dislocate your shoulder while patting yourself on the back. Especially after one of those idiots kicked a police dog. The only reason they weren't arrested is the police realized there would be a serious situation outside of their control if they started doing that. Or maybe the officer in the middle realized the event had been caught on camera, and decided it was best to chill the f*ck out. I'm not sure why you think the BLM officers are cut from any finer cloth than the local bully cops we read about routinely on fark. (Not saying all cops are power tripping bullies, but we all know they're out there.) This text is now purple: FlashHarry: why isn't he in jail for threatening federal officers with firearms? [upload.wikimedia.org image 357x350] [bayareaintifada.files.wordpress.com image 755x1091] [missouritenth.files.wordpress.com image 707x825] Because sometimes the situation is more complicated than lawful and unlawful. So you're saying they should have been treated like the Black Panthers? http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/police-kill-two-members-o f- the-black-panther-party vernonFL: Im a vegetarian I could've sworn that you were a fan of meat... impaler: These "patriot" militia types think they're the victim when people tell them to stop breaking the law. I don't know how someone gets their head so far up their arse, Like this, and then they keep going. If they go far enough, they might disappear altogether. That would be nice. sigdiamond2000: [img.fark.net image 652x365] He looks like he's questioning imaging whether O'Reilly even lifts nekkid. /better BravadoGT: Bundy is a jerk. My problem is with the government's reaction. They send in waves of cops all in their best Call of Duty getups like they're about to storm a Hydra base over...an unpaid bill? No. The armored police units did not show up until after Bundy and his thugs started armed resistance. Before that it was a few guys herding cattle into pens to await transport, presumably to auction. LandOfChocolate: sigdiamond2000: [img.fark.net image 652x365] He looks like he's questioning whether O'Reilly even lifts. You're on national TV, can't you at least put on a collared shirt? He is wearing a collar. BravadoGT: Bundy is a jerk. My problem is with the government's reaction. They send in waves of cops all in their best Call of Duty getups like they're about to storm a Hydra base over...an unpaid bill? Seems like there's people on both who would like a violent confrontation, and maybe next time someone flinches? They sent in cops dressed in "combat gear" due to statements that Bundy had made in the lead up to this whole thing. BLM guys started the cattle round up, Bundy was pissed and asked for militia help. Armed citizens came for a confrontation, and the BLM sent in their own armed guys to help protect/diffuse the situation. How many other farmers provide Americans with beef without throwing a huge hissy fit over land rights? Because I'd rather give them my money... That moocher and all his cows could disappear today and it wouldn't make a dent in beef production. Traitorous, violent, freeloaders, the lot of them. ifarkthereforiam: That moocher and all his cows could disappear today and it wouldn't make a dent in beef production. Traitorous, violent, freeloaders, the lot of them. So...tea party heros? dfenstrate: kidgenius: Mikey1969: Shaw responded by arguing that the groups are different because the Bundy activists have not destroyed property or been arrested. Well, it's not because you assholes didn't TRY.I really hope you don't dislocate your shoulder while patting yourself on the back. Especially after one of those idiots kicked a police dog. [img.fark.net image 489x395] The only reason they weren't arrested is the police realized there would be a serious situation outside of their control if they started doing that. Or maybe the officer in the middle realized the event had been caught on camera, and decided it was best to chill the f*ck out. I'm not sure why you think the BLM officers are cut from any finer cloth than the local bully cops we read about routinely on fark. (Not saying all cops are power tripping bullies, but we all know they're out there.) You mean after they were attacked? Today, a BLM truck driven by a non-law enforcement civilian employee assisting with gather operations was struck by a protester on an ATV and the truck's exit from the area was blocked by a group of individuals who gathered around the vehicle. A police dog was also kicked. Wait, Bill O'Reilly gave a decent interview and asked intelligent questions that exposed far-right derping?! The world is ending, I assume. Hey Libtards, I bet you're all asking yourselves "why is it that the militia member looks so much more American and patriotic than i could ever look?". because he is. /check & crown me General Neckbeard reporting for duty. You can find me right behind this female human shield discussing our plan for a violent anti-grazing fee demonstration. That will show those sissy Feds who the real men are around here. Real Patriots kill government workers seeking to enforce court orders. These shiatbags have about as much legal standing as a "Stay back 200 feet. Not responsible for broken windshieds" bumper sticker. BravadoGT: Bundy is a jerk. My problem is with the government's reaction. They send in waves of cops all in their best Call of Duty getups like they're about to storm a Hydra base over...an unpaid bill? Seems like there's people on both who would like a violent confrontation, and maybe next time someone flinches? They didn't send waves of cops out after them. The BLM started rounding up his cattle that he had illegally grazing on government land. Him and his sons attacked the BLM workers on government land. His sons were arrested and released. This news got out and nutcases supporting Bundy came out in droves. The local police sent out officers to keep the peace and the BLM sent out armed rangers to protect the workers that were being threatened by Bundy, his family and the armed nutcases that came out to support him. The Bundy family and their supporters are the ones who started the violence by attacking government employees who were rounding up cattle that were illegally grazing, and forced the government and local police to flood the area with police and rangers to keep the peace and protect the government workers. However, the theory that Reid's putative involvement in the Bundy dispute was motivated by a desire to somehow profit from the building of a solar plant falls flat in the face of two basic facts: The site that ENN Mojave Energy was planning to buy in order to build a solar plant is nowhere near the public land Bundy has been disputing with the government, and ENN gave up the solar project and terminated its agreement to buy land to house it as far back as June 2013: Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/conspiracy/nevada.asp#T7RQI3w3hxtC6bu5 . 99 /In case anyone still buys the Harry Reid bogeyman theory Wait.... If OWS is marching because people are hungry... And Bundy is providing beef.... Hold on. I almost have something here.... JC22: My view is if the guy is breaking the law, then put a lien on his stuff. But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese. And Reid needs to get his foot out of his mouth that was just in his @$$ and shut up about domestic terrorists because he has no idea what a domestic terrorist is.

And lastly Mr Reid. If you are going to spout off about enforcing the law and some citizen can't do what he's doing then you need to enforce all laws, especially those that are here ILLEGALLY and also those in that certain government run tax agency called the IRS that owe billion in back taxes.

Can't have it both ways jackass.

Let's see, "just put a lien of his stuff", "too much force for such a little fish", "Chinese solar farm", "Harry Reid", "illegal aliens", "IRS bad!".

Yup. You got them all. Good for you. You passed this week's GOP talking points quiz with a 100%.

dfenstrate: kidgenius: Mikey1969: Shaw responded by arguing that the groups are different because the Bundy activists have not destroyed property or been arrested.

Well, it's not because you assholes didn't TRY.I really hope you don't dislocate your shoulder while patting yourself on the back.

Especially after one of those idiots kicked a police dog.

[img.fark.net image 489x395]

The only reason they weren't arrested is the police realized there would be a serious situation outside of their control if they started doing that.
Or maybe the officer in the middle realized the event had been caught on camera, and decided it was best to chill the f*ck out.

I'm not sure why you think the BLM officers are cut from any finer cloth than the local bully cops we read about routinely on fark. (Not saying all cops are power tripping bullies, but we all know they're out there.)

You mean this guy here kicking the dog with his right leg?

Sorry, but watch the damn video.

Your picture shows a handler holding his dog back and putting his arm out to create some distance between the dog and the guy.

The My Little Pony Killer: How many other farmers provide Americans with beef without throwing a huge hissy fit over land rights? Because I'd rather give them my money...

You do. Agriculture subsidies.

ifarkthereforiam: That moocher and all his cows could disappear today and it wouldn't make a dent in beef production. Traitorous, violent, freeloaders, the lot of them.

Serious Black: You didn't destroy property and weren't arrested because BLM agents assumed (probably correctly) that you would try to murder them if they didn't de-escalate the situation. Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken.

And yet they were the ones being abused and arrested.
Soft targets?

Epic Fap Session: Real Patriots kill government workers under a Democratic president seeking to enforce court orders.

FTFY.

LandOfChocolate: sigdiamond2000: [img.fark.net image 652x365]

He looks like he's questioning whether O'Reilly even lifts.

You're on national TV, can't you at least put on a collared shirt?

Hey, he didn't have time to run to Wal-Mart, and he's not shopping at that gay agenda spouting Target!

so, yes, momma ironed his nice blue shirt for him

Isitoveryet: Hey Libtards,

I bet you're all asking yourselves "why is it that the militia member looks so much more American and patriotic than i could ever look?".

because he is.

/check & crown me

Hiding behind women in case the government fires at them while they defend a man who denies the existence of the government of the USA is a level of patriotism I can never hope to match.

JC22: Can't have it both ways jackass.

You've been duped into believing a fairy tale.  Bundy is a whacko who openly admits he doesn't recognize that the federal government exists and that he doesn't owe any grazing fees.  Who the hell gets to just ignore the fact that this country is a united republic in a bizarre scheme to avoid paying his/her fair share of taxes.

Then a group of well armed nut jobs show up and talk about putting their own women out front so they'll be killed by the federal government.  Why?  So they can get it on video.  Again, the logic of unsound minds.

You're siding with a bunch of very dangerous sociopaths.  These men aren't heroes caught up in a Democratic conspiracy, they're a bunch of free loaders trying to get a free ride on the backs of the America taxpayer.  They're living in a broken fantasy of ignoring laws they don't like.  They're no different than the "Freemen" who refuse to get drivers licenses, put license plates on their cars or pay taxes.  Yet, they still want to use those roads which someone else's tax dollars bought.  Maybe they should build their own roads to the local supermarket.

Look, I'm a pro-gun guy (note my Fark handle) but these idiots are the greatest threat to gun rights as anyone, anywhere, ever.  If people start taking up arms every time they want to get out of paying a god damn tax, we will very quickly see a constitutional amendment which nullifies the second amendment.  These extremist idiots are going to completely fark things for all of us.

Then people like you, who are too dumb to think for yourself and instead parrot contrived nonsense spewed by idiots selling advertising on radio and TV shows.  Limbaugh and Hannity both work for the same company and they have 100 million dollar contracts to spin up this sort of nonsense which a gullible portion of society eagerly chokes down.

If you value your rights, tell these morons to pay their farking grazing fees and stop acting like a group of 12 year olds.

Baz744: BravadoGT: Bundy is a jerk.  My problem is with the government's reaction.  They send in waves of cops all in their best Call of Duty getups like they're about to storm a Hydra base over...an unpaid bill?

No. The armored police units did not show up until after Bundy and his thugs started armed resistance. Before that it was a few guys herding cattle into pens to await transport, presumably to auction.

I know right?

Why do conservatives have to lie about EVERYTHING.

Lenny_da_Hog: Wait....

If OWS is marching because people are hungry...

And Bundy is providing beef....

Hold on. I almost have something here....

Is it to put both groups in a really large burlap sack and then take a baseball bat to any lumps that move?  Because if so I think we might have had the same idea.

Headso: I don't think the government needs to mess with people protesting wealth inequality and bankster frauds nor do they need to fark with some guy grazing cattle on some barren shiathole part of the country, but hey, that's just me...

I don't think people need to comment on a situation when they have decided to willfully misinterpret it, but hey, that's just me...

NFA: If you value your rights, tell these morons to pay their farking grazing fees and stop acting like a group of 12 year olds.

The Nevada Cattlemen's Association wants no part of these asshats either.

"I don't got no respect for no got-damned federal gummint. You see this here flag? Well I only believe in the Nevada star. I don't cotton to those other stars, or that blue field...and I CERTAINLY ain't got no reason to believe in them commie-lookin' stripes...red AND white? Balderdash!"

No real rush to end this, hopefully right wing propaganda machine will make supporting the derp militia this a litmus test for conservative bona fides.

James!: "Sure we threatened government officials with guns, but we haven't destroyed anything or been arrested..."

It's grazing land in Nevada. What is there to destroy?

/Seriously, how do cattle survive in this desert?

The groups are different because the Bundy activists have not destroyed property or been arrested.

Everybody involved with this thing is on the wrong side.

What_do_you_want_now: Wait, Bill O'Reilly gave a decent interview and asked intelligent questions that exposed far-right derping?!

The world is ending, I assume.

Only because Jon Stuart asked the same questions the night before.

mediablitz: Same guy before he grew the beard and shaved his head.

[www.petercushing.co.uk image 320x225]

that pic of chuckie gray has been on Fark two times is as many days.  Somehow that's significant.

Fart_Machine: You mean after they were attacked?

Today, a BLM truck driven by a non-law enforcement civilian employee assisting with gather operations was struck by a protester on an ATV and the truck's exit from the area was blocked by a group of individuals who gathered around the vehicle. A police dog was also kicked.

You're concerned about an ATV striking a Freightliner (watch the video) dump body that likely weighs the better part of 30 tons?

That's like attacking my foot with your face.

This text is now purple: Fart_Machine: You mean after they were attacked?

Today, a BLM truck driven by a non-law enforcement civilian employee assisting with gather operations was struck by a protester on an ATV and the truck's exit from the area was blocked by a group of individuals who gathered around the vehicle. A police dog was also kicked.

You're concerned about an ATV striking a Freightliner (watch the video) dump body that likely weighs the better part of 30 tons?

That's like attacking my foot with your face.

Well in that case it's totally OK for them to ram it and block off the vehicle.

JC22: My view is if the guy is breaking the law, then put a lien on his stuff. But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese.

Everyone already explained about the solar power myth, but I want some clarification on what "type of force" BLM sent out there according to you? Sure Bundy's claimed there were 2,000 feds "surrounding" his ranch (which suggests a raid on his land instead of him and his supporters having to travel onto the Bunkerville Allotment in order to protest and later confront them corralling cattle that were to be be removed from the land by court order 6 months ago), but do you have evidence of a massive show of force by the Feds in this case?

The most officers I've seen in any pictures from the standoff is about 15; three dudes in camo body armor and rifles and the other dozen guys are in brown plain clothes uniforms with a holstered handgun as part of it (basically they looked like county deputies if you didn't know otherwise.) If you can show some evidence that there was this big show of force by BLM to intimidate the Bundys I'd sure appreciate the proof.

More like "took them."

Fart_Machine: This text is now purple: Fart_Machine: You mean after they were attacked?

Today, a BLM truck driven by a non-law enforcement civilian employee assisting with gather operations was struck by a protester on an ATV and the truck's exit from the area was blocked by a group of individuals who gathered around the vehicle. A police dog was also kicked.

You're concerned about an ATV striking a Freightliner (watch the video) dump body that likely weighs the better part of 30 tons?

That's like attacking my foot with your face.

Well in that case it's totally OK for them to ram it and block off the vehicle.

You tell me.

The difference is that he's a rich farmer that doesn't feel the need to pay taxes. He should just use some of that subsidy money to pay of them, greedy hick retard.

If you stop responding to all the idiots spouting Fox News and Inforwars propaganda eventually they will go away. Fascist bashing hippies is so 1970's and yet they think they are so funny.

Serious Black: You didn't destroy property and weren't arrested because BLM agents assumed (probably correctly) that you would try to murder them if they didn't de-escalate the situation. Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken.

Maybe that's where OWS went wrong... they should bring guns next time.

Bill O'Reilly asks Bundy Militia member:"How does your protest differ from Occupy Wall Street?" Bundy supporter:"Mr. Bundy is providing the country with beef." "Cuz we're stupid and trigger-happy."

FYFSubby

NFA: JC22: Can't have it both ways jackass.

You've been duped into believing a fairy tale.  Bundy is a whacko who openly admits he doesn't recognize that the federal government exists and that he doesn't owe any grazing fees.  Who the hell gets to just ignore the fact that this country is a united republic in a bizarre scheme to avoid paying his/her fair share of taxes.

Then a group of well armed nut jobs show up and talk about putting their own women out front so they'll be killed by the federal government.  Why?  So they can get it on video.  Again, the logic of unsound minds.

You're siding with a bunch of very dangerous sociopaths.  These men aren't heroes caught up in a Democratic conspiracy, they're a bunch of free loaders trying to get a free ride on the backs of the America taxpayer.  They're living in a broken fantasy of ignoring laws they don't like.  They're no different than the "Freemen" who refuse to get drivers licenses, put license plates on their cars or pay taxes.  Yet, they still want to use those roads which someone else's tax dollars bought.  Maybe they should build their own roads to the local supermarket.

Look, I'm a pro-gun guy (note my Fark handle) but these idiots are the greatest threat to gun rights as anyone, anywhere, ever.  If people start taking up arms every time they want to get out of paying a god damn tax, we will very quickly see a constitutional amendment which nullifies the second amendment.  These extremist idiots are going to completely fark things for all of us.

Then people like you, who are too dumb to think for yourself and instead parrot contrived nonsense spewed by idiots selling advertising on radio and TV shows.  Limbaugh and Hannity both work for the same company and they have 100 million dollar contracts to spin up this sort of nonsense which a gullible portion of society eagerly chokes down.

If you value your rights, tell these morons to pay their farking grazing fees and stop acting like a group of 12 year olds.

I'd "Smart" you twice if I could.

Fart_Machine: This text is now purple: Fart_Machine: You mean after they were attacked?

Today, a BLM truck driven by a non-law enforcement civilian employee assisting with gather operations was struck by a protester on an ATV and the truck's exit from the area was blocked by a group of individuals who gathered around the vehicle. A police dog was also kicked.

You're concerned about an ATV striking a Freightliner (watch the video) dump body that likely weighs the better part of 30 tons?

That's like attacking my foot with your face.

Well in that case it's totally OK for them to ram it and block off the vehicle.

In a longer response, what seems to irk you the most is that the Tea Party type has started to co-opt OWS-like tactics. They're using PR-friendly shields (women), obstructing larger government vehicles with much smaller sacrificial targets, occupying government land, playing up the PR attack on the much-better armed federal response. It never looks good when you have a photo of a dog going after someone, no matter what came before or after. This is straight out of the OWS playbook. They're daring the government to start firing first. And so long as they don't fire first, it will work.

You don't hate the game, you hate the player.

TV's Vinnie: Bill O'Reilly asks Bundy Militia member:"How does your protest differ from Occupy Wall Street?" Bundy supporter:"Mr. Bundy is providing the country with beef." "Cuz we're stupid and trigger-happy."

FYFSubby

Who did they shoot at?

James!:

George F*cking Washington 2014.

What is it with extremist rightwingers and being bald? Some sort of Aryan Skinhead thing?

LandOfChocolate: sigdiamond2000: [img.fark.net image 652x365]

He looks like he's questioning whether O'Reilly even lifts.

You're on national TV, can't you at least put on a collared shirt?

Aw, come on. You're lucky he is wearing a shirt with actual sleeves that haven't been cut off.

JC22: My view is if the guy is breaking the law, then put a lien on his stuff. But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese.

And Reid needs to get his foot out of his mouth that was just in his @$$and shut up about domestic terrorists because he has no idea what a domestic terrorist is. And lastly Mr Reid. If you are going to spout off about enforcing the law and some citizen can't do what he's doing then you need to enforce all laws, especially those that are here ILLEGALLY and also those in that certain government run tax agency called the IRS that owe billion in back taxes. Can't have it both ways jackass. Haha, holy shiat, this is crazy. WTF, so, we shouldn't bust thieves because you don't think someone else is enforcing a law you don't understand? Also, of note, Sen. Reid really doesn't enforce anything. Please explain how, outside of pot, the government is not enforcing a law? dr_blasto: LandOfChocolate: sigdiamond2000: [img.fark.net image 652x365] He looks like he's questioning whether O'Reilly even lifts. You're on national TV, can't you at least put on a collared shirt? Aw, come on. You're lucky he is wearing a shirt with actual sleeves that haven't been cut off. JC22: My view is if the guy is breaking the law, then put a lien on his stuff. But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese. And Reid needs to get his foot out of his mouth that was just in his @$$ and shut up about domestic terrorists because he has no idea what a domestic terrorist is.

And lastly Mr Reid. If you are going to spout off about enforcing the law and some citizen can't do what he's doing then you need to enforce all laws, especially those that are here ILLEGALLY and also those in that certain government run tax agency called the IRS that owe billion in back taxes.

Can't have it both ways jackass.

Haha, holy shiat, this is crazy. WTF, so, we shouldn't bust thieves because you don't think someone else is enforcing a law you don't understand? Also, of note, Sen. Reid really doesn't enforce anything. Please explain how, outside of pot, the government is not enforcing a law?

Well, you see, there are still brown people in this country, ipso facto, the government isn't enforcing immigration laws.

/study it out

dfenstrate: kidgenius: Mikey1969: Shaw responded by arguing that the groups are different because the Bundy activists have not destroyed property or been arrested.

Well, it's not because you assholes didn't TRY.I really hope you don't dislocate your shoulder while patting yourself on the back.

Especially after one of those idiots kicked a police dog.

[img.fark.net image 489x395]

The only reason they weren't arrested is the police realized there would be a serious situation outside of their control if they started doing that.
Or maybe the officer in the middle realized the event had been caught on camera, and decided it was best to chill the f*ck out.

I'm not sure why you think the BLM officers are cut from any finer cloth than the local bully cops we read about routinely on fark. (Not saying all cops are power tripping bullies, but we all know they're out there.)

That photo and its caption prove exactly 1) how dishonest is Kliven's Kowardly Klan, and 2) how gullible are his apologists.

The video clearly depicts an out of control mob of screaming Bundy thugs. Police officers are trying to obtain civil order. The mob of Bundy thugs repeatedly advance on police officers, aggressively encroaching normal personal space to shout in their faces.

The man who was bitten, we'll call him "Bundy thug #1," was one of the boldest aggressors. Finally, the police officer deploys the dog in order to obtain Bundy thug #1's compliance. At that time Bundy thug #1 criminally abused the animal by kicking it.

The officer is pointing in the picture, but the animal clearly can't see his finger. He is most likely pointing to direct Bundy thug #1 to back down.

It was an act of criminal animal abuse because under the circumstances, resisting lawfully issued instructions by police officers to back down, Bundy thug #1 had no right of self-defense.

The relevant portion of the video starts around the 51 second mark. The officer deploys the dog to protect his fellow police officer around 1:04-5.

The linked article laughably describes the rowdy protest depicted as "peaceful," demonstrating the delusional level of bias among the Bundy thug apologist set.

impaler:  [...]  Why do conservatives have to lie about EVERYTHING.

Because their values and beliefs are inconsistent with reality, so they invent their own.

LazyMedia: James!: "Sure we threatened government officials with guns, but we haven't destroyed anything or been arrested..."

It's grazing land in Nevada. What is there to destroy?

/Seriously, how do cattle survive in this desert?

[www.reviewjournal.com image 640x480]

Well, you either give them feed, buy enough acreage where the sparse grass is enough to feed your cattle, or in Bundy's case you set them out to eat all the grass they can on 145,604 acres of land you don't own (and the 145K wasn't enough; the 900+ cows had grazed past the Bunkerville Allotment and were getting into the other 650,000 acres of surrounding public land that would be subject to their own grazing licenses.)

This text is now purple: In a longer response, what seems to irk you the most is that the Tea Party type has started to co-opt OWS-like tactics. They're using PR-friendly shields (women), obstructing larger government vehicles with much smaller sacrificial targets, occupying government land, playing up the PR attack on the much-better armed federal response.

Oh yes. Adopting the most annoying-to-outsiders tactics, which end up making the protesters look bad, has everyone irked for sure.

Mikey1969: Shaw responded by arguing that the groups are different because the Bundy activists have not destroyed property or been arrested.

Well, it's not because you assholes didn't TRY.I really hope you don't dislocate your shoulder while patting yourself on the back.

Yep. Just because you haven't been arrested doesn't mean you haven't committed a crime.

/Used to be, civil disobedience meant you let yourself be arrested, so you could fix the law through the courts.

impaler: This text is now purple: In a longer response, what seems to irk you the most is that the Tea Party type has started to co-opt OWS-like tactics. They're using PR-friendly shields (women), obstructing larger government vehicles with much smaller sacrificial targets, occupying government land, playing up the PR attack on the much-better armed federal response.

Oh yes. Adopting the most annoying-to-outsiders tactics, which end up making the protesters look bad, has everyone irked for sure.

Actually, Kliven's Kowardly Klan learned to cower behind their women from Islamic terrorists, who deployed the tactic in Afghanistan.

Baz744: The man who was bitten, we'll call him "Bundy thug #1," was one of the boldest aggressors. Finally, the police officer deploys the dog in order to obtain Bundy thug #1's compliance. At that time Bundy thug #1 criminally abused the animal by kicking it.

The officer did NOT give a command for that dog to attack, because he would have eaten thug #1's hand.

Baz744: [i58.tinypic.com image 850x850]

Holy shiat, dark shirt guy has tits.

impaler: Baz744: The man who was bitten, we'll call him "Bundy thug #1," was one of the boldest aggressors. Finally, the police officer deploys the dog in order to obtain Bundy thug #1's compliance. At that time Bundy thug #1 criminally abused the animal by kicking it.

The officer did NOT give a command for that dog to attack, because he would have eaten thug #1's hand.

Even had he done so, the fact is Bundy thug #1 was aggressively advancing on officers, shouting in their faces, and refusing repeated instructions to back down. This in the context of a rowdy mob of out of control Bundy thugs storming around, yelling and screaming at police officers.

Even if he ordered the dog to attack, he would have been justified in doing so. Bundy thug #1 had no right of self-defense either way.

Mantour: [apushcanvas.pbworks.com image 850x637]

If Fox News were around back then:

"Shay's heroic stand put down by pro-government thugs"

"Brave Pennsylvania farmers silenced by the long arm of Washington's law"

For some reason, Bill O'Reilly is now interviewing Zangief.

Mantour: [apushcanvas.pbworks.com image 850x637]

...So what you're saying is that using force to get out of paying the government money is a well-known and historic part of being an American, right?

See? Cliven Bundy is just as much of a hero as Daniel Shay and generations of school children should learn about his deeds in a similar manner to how they learn about Shay.

firefly212: Serious Black: You didn't destroy property and weren't arrested because BLM agents assumed (probably correctly) that you would try to murder them if they didn't de-escalate the situation. Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken.

Maybe that's where OWS went wrong... they should bring guns next time.

And pitchforks and torches.

OWS was in the right. Wall street ripped everyone off and needed to be taken to task. And still does.

BLM is a group of guys that support a guy who has ripped everyone off. And have delusions of grandeur.

bundy is like a wall street banker in a sense, a total farking thief with no sense of perspective.

Grungehamster: Mantour: [apushcanvas.pbworks.com image 850x637]

...So what you're saying is that using force to get out of paying the government money is a well-known and historic part of being an American, right?

See? Cliven Bundy is just as much of a hero as Daniel Shays and generations of school children should learn about his deeds in a similar manner to how they learn about Shays.

FTFM, dammit.

This text is now purple: n a longer response, what seems to irk you the most is that the Tea Party type has started to co-opt OWS-like tactics. They're using PR-friendly shields (women), obstructing larger government vehicles with much smaller sacrificial targets, occupying government land, playing up the PR attack on the much-better armed federal response. It never looks good when you have a photo of a dog going after someone, no matter what came before or after. This is straight out of the OWS playbook. They're daring the government to start firing first. And so long as they don't fire first, it will work.

You don't hate the game, you hate the player.

OWS and black-bloc anarchists are not the same thing. OWS tactics involve sitting around and trying to get a consensus on whether Stan has the right to have babies, and voting by waving your fingers.

/Tea Party and militia are also not the same thing. I saw those people who went to Glenn Beck's DC rally; they were a bunch of grandparents in flag shirts, not gun-toters.

dr_blasto: Baz744: [i58.tinypic.com image 850x850]

Holy shiat, dark shirt guy has tits.

Actually, that's Cliven's wife.

Didn't destroy property?  The new rules that prompted Bundy to stop paying his fees were instituted because he was overgrazing other people's land, and digging it up to create watering holes.  That sounds pretty destructive to me.  Certainly more so than a kid shiatting on a cop car.

This text is now purple: They're using PR-friendly shields (women), obstructing larger government vehicles with much smaller sacrificial targets, occupying government land,

1. There were no shields, the difference between the klan militias and OWS is the occupy protesters had a large percentage of women. They were not asked to be shields and there was no pr to create anything of the sort

2. Zuccotti Park was not public land

So not only are you misinformed about the Bundy situation but you can't even get your facts right about OWS. Is it really a surprise people who are uneducated about a topic almost always have conservative viewpoints?

Baz744: impaler: Baz744: The man who was bitten, we'll call him "Bundy thug #1," was one of the boldest aggressors. Finally, the police officer deploys the dog in order to obtain Bundy thug #1's compliance. At that time Bundy thug #1 criminally abused the animal by kicking it.

The officer did NOT give a command for that dog to attack, because he would have eaten thug #1's hand.

Even had he done so, the fact is Bundy thug #1 was aggressively advancing on officers, shouting in their faces, and refusing repeated instructions to back down. This in the context of a rowdy mob of out of control Bundy thugs storming around, yelling and screaming at police officers.

Even if he ordered the dog to attack, he would have been justified in doing so. Bundy thug #1 had no right of self-defense either way.

Best part of that video? How smug the person recording is that everyone will freak out when they see the unwarranted police brutality they caught on film. Seriously, do they understand just how they look screaming that officers have no right to touch the guy after he rammed an ATV into their truck and failed to stop advancing on them threateningly afterwards.

Also the people found to be criminals, rapists, vandals etc were either anarchists, homeless dropped off by the police, or police plants. Some angry libertarians and conservatives also were caught trying to incite violence to discredit the ows movement.

Baz744: BravadoGT: Bundy is a jerk.  My problem is with the government's reaction.  They send in waves of cops all in their best Call of Duty getups like they're about to storm a Hydra base over...an unpaid bill?

No. The armored police units did not show up until after Bundy and his thugs started armed resistance. Before that it was a few guys herding cattle into pens to await transport, presumably to auction.

Too late.  The "inappropriate government force" is the official fall-back position of the right, after they realized Bundy was a tough sell, even for them.

LazyMedia: James!: "Sure we threatened government officials with guns, but we haven't destroyed anything or been arrested..."

It's grazing land in Nevada. What is there to destroy?

/Seriously, how do cattle survive in this desert?

[www.reviewjournal.com image 640x480]

By stealing everyone else's water. That's another thing this f*ckhole is doing. Thus, his neighbors hate him even more than they hate the BLM. That says something.

I think we should send a detachment from the NYPD to deal with this. Call it a TDY for Homeland Security, dealing with terrorists and the like. I'd suggest the LAPD, but their marksmanship is even worse.

IlGreven: /Used to be, civil disobedience meant you let yourself be arrested, so you could fix the law through the courts.

False. It means that you make unjust laws unenforceable, such as by clogging the jails to the extent that the local government risks bankruptcy if they keep you all incarcerated or even just clogs up the court system by forcing it to deal with hundreds or thousands of arrests all at once, or by blocking traffic for a more general economic effect, or humiliates the oppressing power by forcing them to arrest a large number of peaceful and innocent people for doing an innocuous activity (in front of cameras). You can win a campaign using civil disobedience and never set foot inside a courtroom or statehouse.

Mantour: [apushcanvas.pbworks.com image 850x637]

THIS THIS THISETY THIS to all those idiot gun-fondlers who think the founders put the Second Amendment in the Constitution as sort of self-destruct button. George Washington was not Heinz Doofenschmirz; the right to firearms ownership was not intended to enable armed rebellion against the government.

RanDomino: unjust laws

Do you feel these are unjust laws being used against the Bundy klan?

This text is now purple: TV's Vinnie: Bill O'Reilly asks Bundy Militia member:"How does your protest differ from Occupy Wall Street?" Bundy supporter:"Mr. Bundy is providing the country with beef." "Cuz we're stupid and trigger-happy."

FYFSubby

Who did they shoot at?

Oh, they wanted a firefight. So very much.

NFA: JC22: Can't have it both ways jackass.

You've been duped into believing a fairy tale.  Bundy is a whacko who openly admits he doesn't recognize that the federal government exists and that he doesn't owe any grazing fees.  Who the hell gets to just ignore the fact that this country is a united republic in a bizarre scheme to avoid paying his/her fair share of taxes.

Then a group of well armed nut jobs show up and talk about putting their own women out front so they'll be killed by the federal government.  Why?  So they can get it on video.  Again, the logic of unsound minds.

You're siding with a bunch of very dangerous sociopaths.  These men aren't heroes caught up in a Democratic conspiracy, they're a bunch of free loaders trying to get a free ride on the backs of the America taxpayer.  They're living in a broken fantasy of ignoring laws they don't like.  They're no different than the "Freemen" who refuse to get drivers licenses, put license plates on their cars or pay taxes.  Yet, they still want to use those roads which someone else's tax dollars bought.  Maybe they should build their own roads to the local supermarket.

Look, I'm a pro-gun guy (note my Fark handle) but these idiots are the greatest threat to gun rights as anyone, anywhere, ever.  If people start taking up arms every time they want to get out of paying a god damn tax, we will very quickly see a constitutional amendment which nullifies the second amendment.  These extremist idiots are going to completely fark things for all of us.

Then people like you, who are too dumb to think for yourself and instead parrot contrived nonsense spewed by idiots selling advertising on radio and TV shows.  Limbaugh and Hannity both work for the same company and they have 100 million dollar contracts to spin up this sort of nonsense which a gullible portion of society eagerly chokes down.

If you value your rights, tell these morons to pay their farking grazing fees and stop acting like a group of 12 year olds.

That JUST HAPPENED!

/Shake and bake!

Doctor Funkenstein: I think the feds should get together with all the other ranchers out there out there and explain how Militia McStealstuff is dicking over their legitimate businesses. Then, drop them off a couple of crates of AR15s and say, "Hey, by the way, he doesn't believe we exist. Have fun."

Well, there has been quite a bit of improved Fed/Rancher/Environmentalist relations in the past 15 years. Environmentalists are basically coming to the realization that ranchers really know these huge swaths of land the best, and everyone has a stake in doing what's best for the land.

I really recommend listening to the State of the Re:Union podcast on the southwestern ranges.

Only on Fark.

Occupy are a bunch of thug losers. Bundy family and supporters are standing up to the brown shirts. And yes, they give us steak. Occupy just creates garbage.

grow up, Moonbeams.

RanDomino: False. It means that you make unjust laws unenforceable, such as by clogging the jails to the extent that the local government risks bankruptcy if they keep you all incarcerated or even just clogs up the court system by forcing it to deal with hundreds or thousands of arrests all at once, or by blocking traffic for a more general economic effect, or humiliates the oppressing power by forcing them to arrest a large number of peaceful and innocent people for doing an innocuous activity (in front of cameras). You can win a campaign using civil disobedience and never set foot inside a courtroom or statehouse.

Um, no.

RanDomino: IlGreven: /Used to be, civil disobedience meant you let yourself be arrested, so you could fix the law through the courts.

False.

Actually, that is entirely true. At least the "let yourself be arrested" part. Maybe you want to resolve the issue in the courts. But at least as Gandhi used the term, the purpose was to arouse the conscience of the community. He specified that peacefully accepting the consequences of civil disobedience was part of civil disobedience.

Thunderpipes: Only on Fark.

Occupy are a bunch of thug losers. Bundy family and supporters are standing up to the brown shirts. And yes, they give us steak. Occupy just creates garbage.

grow up, Moonbeams.

One pump and done.

Thunderpipes: Occupy are a bunch of thug losers. Bundy family and supporters are standing up to the brown shirts. And yes, they give us steak. Occupy just creates garbage.

Call me when OWS threatens to start shooting cops.

Misch: Environmentalists are basically coming to the realization that ranchers really know these huge swaths of land the best, and everyone has a stake in doing what's best for the land.

You have it backwards. It has been ranchers who have warmed up to environmentalists after realizing the policies they supported were ruining the land they were trying to live on. So they agreed to federal oversight and environmental regulations controlling grazing, water rights, endangered species, etc.

Grungehamster: Baz744: impaler: Baz744: The man who was bitten, we'll call him "Bundy thug #1," was one of the boldest aggressors. Finally, the police officer deploys the dog in order to obtain Bundy thug #1's compliance. At that time Bundy thug #1 criminally abused the animal by kicking it.

The officer did NOT give a command for that dog to attack, because he would have eaten thug #1's hand.

Even had he done so, the fact is Bundy thug #1 was aggressively advancing on officers, shouting in their faces, and refusing repeated instructions to back down. This in the context of a rowdy mob of out of control Bundy thugs storming around, yelling and screaming at police officers.

Even if he ordered the dog to attack, he would have been justified in doing so. Bundy thug #1 had no right of self-defense either way.

Best part of that video? How smug the person recording is that everyone will freak out when they see the unwarranted police brutality they caught on film. Seriously, do they understand just how they look screaming that officers have no right to touch the guy after he rammed an ATV into their truck and failed to stop advancing on them threateningly afterwards.

I have held the opinion for some time now that there is an organized movement afoot to drive the country to civil war. And I mean more organized than a bunch of Bubbas out in the Mississippi woods "plotin' a coo day ta."

Maybe I'm crazy. But if I'm right, another benefit of this is that is has drawn out many of the treason-inclined in recorded and traceable electronic forums. They really seem/ed to think the revolution is/was afoot, and it is/was time to show their colors.

Now we know who many of them are.

Serious Black: You didn't destroy property and weren't arrested because BLM agents assumed (probably correctly) that you would try to murder them if they didn't de-escalate the situation. Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken.

OWS got thier arse kicked all over. This is why the 2nd is important.

It makes the gov think twice before jackbooting.

Grungehamster: Seriously, do they understand just how they look screaming that officers have no right to touch the guy after he rammed an ATV into their truck

Those are freedom shouts.

Grungehamster: and failed to stop advancing on them threateningly afterwards.

That's liberty marching.

Grungehamster: Mantour: [apushcanvas.pbworks.com image 850x637]

...So what you're saying is that using force to get out of paying the government money is a well-known and historic part of being an American, right?

Yes but they were better dressed back then.

firefly212: Serious Black: You didn't destroy property and weren't arrested because BLM agents assumed (probably correctly) that you would try to murder them if they didn't de-escalate the situation. Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken.

Maybe that's where OWS went wrong... they should bring guns next time.

I think I said as much at the time.
OWS was a staged event tho. They came to protest corporations, the upper class, and dozens of other things, but not to revolt. I doubt the average attendee expected the benevolent hand of government would wrap itself around their necks.

In this case the government came to Bundy, guns in hand, to dismantle his operation.
The publics objection was specific and they knew stopping this wouldn't be a sign waving affair.

/The moment you add guns to an angry mob, things have a nasty habit of escalating.
/its because they do that an armed an angry public will get more attention than a simply annoyed public who camps out on your lawn.

This free loader is welfare farmer! Handouts handouts handouts! Start paying for stuff ya lazy free loader!

Bob Robert: This text is now purple: They're using PR-friendly shields (women), obstructing larger government vehicles with much smaller sacrificial targets, occupying government land,

1. There were no shields, the difference between the klan militias and OWS is the occupy protesters had a large percentage of women. They were not asked to be shields and there was no pr to create anything of the sort

2. Zuccotti Park was not public land

So not only are you misinformed about the Bundy situation but you can't even get your facts right about OWS. Is it really a surprise people who are uneducated about a topic almost always have conservative viewpoints?

Well, except for the guy that SPECIFICALLY said that they were thinking about putting unarmed women out front as shields, that is.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/bundy-ranch-women-human-shield

Baz744: RanDomino: IlGreven: /Used to be, civil disobedience meant you let yourself be arrested, so you could fix the law through the courts.

False.

Actually, that is entirely true. At least the "let yourself be arrested" part. Maybe you want to resolve the issue in the courts. But at least as Gandhi used the term, the purpose was to arouse the conscience of the community. He specified that peacefully accepting the consequences of civil disobedience was part of civil disobedience.

I don't think the community has a conscience anymore. Ghandi style won't work here.

RedVentrue: OWS got thier arse kicked all over. This is why the 2nd is important.

So if only OWS was armed to the teeth, they would have got their way and wouldn't have been targeted even heavier by the law? In what universe?

Grungehamster: JC22: My view is if the guy is breaking the law, then put a lien on his stuff. But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese.

Everyone already explained about the solar power myth, but I want some clarification on what "type of force" BLM sent out there according to you? Sure Bundy's claimed there were 2,000 feds "surrounding" his ranch (which suggests a raid on his land instead of him and his supporters having to travel onto the Bunkerville Allotment in order to protest and later confront them corralling cattle that were to be be removed from the land by court order 6 months ago), but do you have evidence of a massive show of force by the Feds in this case?

The most officers I've seen in any pictures from the standoff is about 15; three dudes in camo body armor and rifles and the other dozen guys are in brown plain clothes uniforms with a holstered handgun as part of it (basically they looked like county deputies if you didn't know otherwise.) If you can show some evidence that there was this big show of force by BLM to intimidate the Bundys I'd sure appreciate the proof.

I'd like to see the supposed snipers, too. So far the closest thing to a sniper is the militia dude we keep re-posting.

I wonder if the Op will be able to produce one.

This text is now purple: Fart_Machine: This text is now purple: Fart_Machine: You mean after they were attacked?

Today, a BLM truck driven by a non-law enforcement civilian employee assisting with gather operations was struck by a protester on an ATV and the truck's exit from the area was blocked by a group of individuals who gathered around the vehicle. A police dog was also kicked.

You're concerned about an ATV striking a Freightliner (watch the video) dump body that likely weighs the better part of 30 tons?

That's like attacking my foot with your face.

Well in that case it's totally OK for them to ram it and block off the vehicle.

In a longer response, what seems to irk you the most is that the Tea Party type has started to co-opt OWS-like tactics. They're using PR-friendly shields (women), obstructing larger government vehicles with much smaller sacrificial targets, occupying government land, playing up the PR attack on the much-better armed federal response. It never looks good when you have a photo of a dog going after someone, no matter what came before or after. This is straight out of the OWS playbook. They're daring the government to start firing first. And so long as they don't fire first, it will work.

You don't hate the game, you hate the player.

When did OWS use human shields?

Imagine if these people were black...

RedVentrue: Baz744: RanDomino: IlGreven: /Used to be, civil disobedience meant you let yourself be arrested, so you could fix the law through the courts.

False.

Actually, that is entirely true. At least the "let yourself be arrested" part. Maybe you want to resolve the issue in the courts. But at least as Gandhi used the term, the purpose was to arouse the conscience of the community. He specified that peacefully accepting the consequences of civil disobedience was part of civil disobedience.

I don't think the community has a conscience anymore. Ghandi style won't work here.

Maybe. I think that overstates it at least some. We're a ways off from full social justice. But we're an even farther ways off from Nazi Germany if you ask me. For various reasons, including factors like media saturation and people working too many hours to pay attention, it's harder to get the community's notice now.

This text is now purple: Fart_Machine: This text is now purple: Fart_Machine: You mean after they were attacked?

Today, a BLM truck driven by a non-law enforcement civilian employee assisting with gather operations was struck by a protester on an ATV and the truck's exit from the area was blocked by a group of individuals who gathered around the vehicle. A police dog was also kicked.

You're concerned about an ATV striking a Freightliner (watch the video) dump body that likely weighs the better part of 30 tons?

That's like attacking my foot with your face.

Well in that case it's totally OK for them to ram it and block off the vehicle.

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x429]
You tell me.

So you're saying they should have run the protesters over?

RedVentrue: Serious Black: You didn't destroy property and weren't arrested because BLM agents assumed (probably correctly) that you would try to murder them if they didn't de-escalate the situation. Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken.

OWS got thier arse kicked all over. This is why the 2nd is important.

It makes the gov think twice before jackbooting.

It equally impedes the just enforcement of constitutionally permissible laws against self-entitled jackholes who think they have a unilateral right to determine usage disposition over lawfully held and administrated public land.

Like in the Bundy case, for example.

HST's Dead Carcass: Imagine if these people were black...

Imagine if the POTUS was a Republican...

Mantour: HST's Dead Carcass: Imagine if these people were black...

Imagine if the POTUS was a Republican...

Then none of this would have happened because team shiat-wizard would have nothing to bleat about.

Bob Robert: RedVentrue: OWS got thier arse kicked all over. This is why the 2nd is important.

So if only OWS was armed to the teeth, they would have got their way and wouldn't have been targeted even heavier by the law? In what universe?

I think they would have thought twice about being so heavy handed. Some sort of compromise might have been reached.

This text is now purple: Fart_Machine: This text is now purple: Fart_Machine: You mean after they were attacked?

Today, a BLM truck driven by a non-law enforcement civilian employee assisting with gather operations was struck by a protester on an ATV and the truck's exit from the area was blocked by a group of individuals who gathered around the vehicle. A police dog was also kicked.

You're concerned about an ATV striking a Freightliner (watch the video) dump body that likely weighs the better part of 30 tons?

That's like attacking my foot with your face.

Well in that case it's totally OK for them to ram it and block off the vehicle.

In a longer response, what seems to irk you the most is that the Tea Party type has started to co-opt OWS-like tactics. They're using PR-friendly shields (women), obstructing larger government vehicles with much smaller sacrificial targets, occupying government land, playing up the PR attack on the much-better armed federal response. It never looks good when you have a photo of a dog going after someone, no matter what came before or after. This is straight out of the OWS playbook. They're daring the government to start firing first. And so long as they don't fire first, it will work.

You don't hate the game, you hate the player.

Except that OWS never used women as human shields, ramming vehicles, or pointing guns and threatening Federal employees and police.  Otherwise it's totally the same thing.

/roll eyes

Bob Robert: Do you feel these are unjust laws being used against the Bundy klan?

I'm just talking about the strategy of civil disobedience. For the record I will say that Bundy and his mob are scum.

udhq: Um, no.

What specific point are you trying to get across

Baz744: Actually, that is entirely true. At least the "let yourself be arrested" part. Maybe you want to resolve the issue in the courts. But at least as Gandhi used the term, the purpose was to arouse the conscience of the community. He specified that peacefully accepting the consequences of civil disobedience was part of civil disobedience.

First, fun fact everyone: Civil Disobedience strategies existed before MLK and Gandhi. Such as the Free Speech campaigns by the IWW.

Anyway, I wasn't disputing the "let yourself be arrested" part, but merely saying that that is not the ONLY plan that falls under the umbrella of "civil disobedience". For example a plan of breaking laws in order to get beaten down on camera in order to make the police look bad is a civil disobedience strategy that doesn't necessarily involve the courts.

(to the tune of The Ballad of Irving)

He was old and fat and rode out of the West,
That welfare cowboy wailed "help, I'm oppressed!"
A parasite moocher rollin' in the dough,
Sure loved his wife (just to hide behind though).

They called him Bundy.
Fat Bundy.
Welfare Bundy.
Chickens**t Bundy.
The fattest most craven welfare cheat (two beat pause) in the West.

Fat Bundy knew what was his by right
Everything federal within his sight.
"I should have rights the little folks don't
"They pay their grazing fees but I sure won't."

Bundy.
Sponging Bundy.
Entitled Bundy.
The fattest most craven welfare cheat (two beat pause) in the West.

Then Big Bad Fed he waltzed into town
His aim was to take Fat Bundy's cows.
Fat Bundy said "I can't, I ain't got no skills!"

Bundy.
Welfare Bundy.
Chickens**t Bundy.
The fattest most craven welfare cheat (two beat pause) in the West.

Fat Bundy called some militia thugs:
"I need dumbs**ts to take some slugs,
"They say I'm a coward, but my name is Clive,
"And I'm just using folks so I'll survive!"

They called him Cliven.
Rat Cliven.
Low down Cliven.
Cowardly Cliven.
The fattest most craven welfare cheat (two beat pause) in the West.

Said Fat Bundy "now it's time to draw down,"
But once he saw Fed's gun his pants turned brown.
Said Fat Bundy when he knew he couldn't flee,
"A woman's place? It's in front of me!"

Cliven.
Craven Cliven.
Cowardly Cliven.
The fattest most craven welfare cheat (two beat pause) in the West.

"To gun down Clive's womenfolk would make me sad.
"Killing some civilians ain't worth no cows.
"I'll just choose to let this go (for now)."

Bundy.
Fat Bundy.
Welfare Bundy.
The fattest most craven welfare cheat (two beat pause) in the West.

Big Fat Bundy damn he sure is dumb
He thinks Fed's drawback means now he's won
Into the future he does not foresee
His coming life in Florence penitentiary

They'll call him Cliven.
Punk Cliven.
Inmate Cliven.
When it comes to squealing like a little pig (two beat pause) he'll be best.

RedVentrue: Bob Robert: RedVentrue: OWS got thier arse kicked all over. This is why the 2nd is important.

So if only OWS was armed to the teeth, they would have got their way and wouldn't have been targeted even heavier by the law? In what universe?

I think they would have thought twice about being so heavy handed. Some sort of compromise might have been reached.

Yes, armed protesters attacking police would totally not have escalated the situation.

HST's Dead Carcass: Imagine if these people were black...

Yes, imagine.....

From the article:  "In 1985 the group made national news when police dropped a bomb on the Osage house from a helicopter in an attempt to end an armed impasse.

RanDomino: Bob Robert: Do you feel these are unjust laws being used against the Bundy klan?

I'm just talking about the strategy of civil disobedience. For the record I will say that Bundy and his mob are scum.

udhq: Um, no.

What specific point are you trying to get across

Baz744: Actually, that is entirely true. At least the "let yourself be arrested" part. Maybe you want to resolve the issue in the courts. But at least as Gandhi used the term, the purpose was to arouse the conscience of the community. He specified that peacefully accepting the consequences of civil disobedience was part of civil disobedience.

First, fun fact everyone: Civil Disobedience strategies existed before MLK and Gandhi. Such as the Free Speech campaigns by the IWW.

Anyway, I wasn't disputing the "let yourself be arrested" part, but merely saying that that is not the ONLY plan that falls under the umbrella of "civil disobedience". For example a plan of breaking laws in order to get beaten down on camera in order to make the police look bad is a civil disobedience strategy that doesn't necessarily involve the courts.

The Wobblies were met with murder for their efforts. Had they put on an armed display of resistance, the government would have killed or imprisined all of them, their associates and sympathizers.

Bundy got a free pass. OWS would have been violently put down had they presented a single weapon. Witness the WTO riot in Seattle: clearly the cops are more than willing to start a riot so they can finish it.

RanDomino: What specific point are you trying to get across

That neither MLK nor Ghandi threatened to start shooting cops for doing their jobs.  What these people are doing isn't civil disobedience, it's armed robbery by a bunch of violent thugs.

dr_blasto: RanDomino: Bob Robert: Do you feel these are unjust laws being used against the Bundy klan?

I'm just talking about the strategy of civil disobedience. For the record I will say that Bundy and his mob are scum.

udhq: Um, no.

What specific point are you trying to get across

Baz744: Actually, that is entirely true. At least the "let yourself be arrested" part. Maybe you want to resolve the issue in the courts. But at least as Gandhi used the term, the purpose was to arouse the conscience of the community. He specified that peacefully accepting the consequences of civil disobedience was part of civil disobedience.

First, fun fact everyone: Civil Disobedience strategies existed before MLK and Gandhi. Such as the Free Speech campaigns by the IWW.

Anyway, I wasn't disputing the "let yourself be arrested" part, but merely saying that that is not the ONLY plan that falls under the umbrella of "civil disobedience". For example a plan of breaking laws in order to get beaten down on camera in order to make the police look bad is a civil disobedience strategy that doesn't necessarily involve the courts.

The Wobblies were met with murder for their efforts. Had they put on an armed display of resistance, the government would have killed or imprisined all of them, their associates and sympathizers.

Bundy got a free pass. OWS would have been violently put down had they presented a single weapon. Witness the WTO riot in Seattle: clearly the cops are more than willing to start a riot so they can finish it.

Pretend I put the letter "o" in imprisoned. It's just easier that way.

Fat white bearded men with a second amendment obsession who feel threatened by minorities are the biggest problem in America. Period.

Fart_Machine: RedVentrue: Bob Robert: RedVentrue: OWS got thier arse kicked all over. This is why the 2nd is important.

So if only OWS was armed to the teeth, they would have got their way and wouldn't have been targeted even heavier by the law? In what universe?

I think they would have thought twice about being so heavy handed. Some sort of compromise might have been reached.

Yes, armed protesters attacking police would totally not have escalated the situation.

The alternative is armed police killing protesters. Is that better?

"I don't recognize the United States government as even existing."

Funny how his Passionate Defenders are desperately trying to extract some reason or philosophy from this idiot's actions. He just doesn't want to pay his bills. All there is to it.

RanDomino: First, fun fact everyone: Civil Disobedience strategies existed before MLK and Gandhi. Such as the Free Speech campaigns by the IWW.

The earliest use of the term that I know of was by Henry David Thoreau. He too indicated that peacefully accepting the penalty is part of it. Even in your "police beatdown" situation, it wouldn't be effective to make the police look bad if you fought back. You have to let them beat you down in order to demonstrate the injustice of it.

f one thousand, if one hundred, if ten men whom I could name - if ten honest men only - ay, if one HONEST man, in this State of Massachusetts, ceasing to hold slaves, were actually to withdraw from this copartnership, and be locked up in the county jail therefor, it would be the abolition of slavery in America.

Anyway, I wasn't disputing the "let yourself be arrested" part, but merely saying that that is not the ONLY plan that falls under the umbrella of "civil disobedience".

Well, it kind of looked like you were saying that being arrested isn't part of civil disobedience. Because that's what the post you answered asserted--that being arrested is part of civil disobedience. And you began your response to that post with the word "false." So I took that "false" to mean "your assertion that accepting the consequences of civil disobedience is part of civil disobedience is false."

impaler: "Mr. Bundy is providing the country with beef."

I'm sure all the other cattle ranchers, who this leech scum undercuts, have something to say about this.

Not a single one of his neighbor ranchers showed up for his little protest march.
They all think he's a thieving shiat and making things most likely turn out bad for their "legal" operations.

/Beef?

I'd rope his steer and ride it, if you know what I mean and I think you do.
He may not be straight but I have a decent visual. TYSVM.

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: "I don't recognize the United States government as even existing."

[images.dailykos.com image 550x367]

Funny how his Passionate Defenders are desperately trying to extract some reason or philosophy from this idiot's actions. He just doesn't want to pay his bills. All there is to it.

You have to remember: that's the flag of Real America. These people are Real Americans. It's United Statesians they can't abide by and want to secede from.

Baz744: RedVentrue: Serious Black: You didn't destroy property and weren't arrested because BLM agents assumed (probably correctly) that you would try to murder them if they didn't de-escalate the situation. Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken.

OWS got thier arse kicked all over. This is why the 2nd is important.

It makes the gov think twice before jackbooting.

It equally impedes the just enforcement of constitutionally permissible laws against self-entitled jackholes who think they have a unilateral right to determine usage disposition over lawfully held and administrated public land.

Like in the Bundy case, for example.

I'm not saying Bundy was right, or even justified. I'm saying he was effective.

RedVentrue: Fart_Machine: RedVentrue: Bob Robert: RedVentrue: OWS got thier arse kicked all over. This is why the 2nd is important.

So if only OWS was armed to the teeth, they would have got their way and wouldn't have been targeted even heavier by the law? In what universe?

I think they would have thought twice about being so heavy handed. Some sort of compromise might have been reached.

Yes, armed protesters attacking police would totally not have escalated the situation.

The alternative is armed police killing protesters. Is that better?

Where did armed police kill protesters?

HawgWild: I love these Bundy threads.

So do I. But 238+ comments in and NOBODY has posted this yet?:

C'mon, Farkers.

RedVentrue: Baz744: RedVentrue: Serious Black: You didn't destroy property and weren't arrested because BLM agents assumed (probably correctly) that you would try to murder them if they didn't de-escalate the situation. Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken.

OWS got thier arse kicked all over. This is why the 2nd is important.

It makes the gov think twice before jackbooting.

It equally impedes the just enforcement of constitutionally permissible laws against self-entitled jackholes who think they have a unilateral right to determine usage disposition over lawfully held and administrated public land.

Like in the Bundy case, for example.

I'm not saying Bundy was right, or even justified. I'm saying he was effective.

Maybe in a 'win the battle, lose the war' kind of way. No long-term outlook for him is positive.

dr_blasto: The Wobblies were met with murder for their efforts. Had they put on an armed display of resistance, the government would have killed or imprisined all of them, their associates and sympathizers.

Bundy got a free pass. OWS would have been violently put down had they presented a single weapon. Witness the WTO riot in Seattle: clearly the cops are more than willing to start a riot so they can finish it.

Yeah, not all cities pre represented by assholes. It's Ironic that Seattle with it's hippie vibe responded exactly opposite to Salt Lake,  considering how Red Utah is.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home2/53155068-183/burbank-chief-lake-s al t.html.csp

Grungehamster: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: "I don't recognize the United States government as even existing."

[images.dailykos.com image 550x367]

Funny how his Passionate Defenders are desperately trying to extract some reason or philosophy from this idiot's actions. He just doesn't want to pay his bills. All there is to it.

You have to remember: that's the flag of Real America. These people are Real Americans. It's United Statesians they can't abide by and want to secede from.

Has that flag got gold fringe on it?

Why are they even bothering to interview people like this? Was he expecting a well thought out and reasoned answer? I bet when this guy burps it smells like bud light and bologna sandwiches.

Mikey1969: dr_blasto: The Wobblies were met with murder for their efforts. Had they put on an armed display of resistance, the government would have killed or imprisined all of them, their associates and sympathizers.

Bundy got a free pass. OWS would have been violently put down had they presented a single weapon. Witness the WTO riot in Seattle: clearly the cops are more than willing to start a riot so they can finish it.

Yeah, not all cities pre represented by assholes. It's Ironic that Seattle with it's hippie vibe responded exactly opposite to Salt Lake,  considering how Red Utah is.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home2/53155068-183/burbank-chief-lake-s al t.html.csp

Oh, certainly. But seattle's cop shop already had notoriety. They were clearly pissed that people had the hall to protest the WTO meeting their city government had worked hard to land. Clinton was in town, it was a big deal.

They tried to blame it on black-flag from Eugene. Video showed the cops starting the violence.

I think we've learned two things from this episode.

1.  These ranchers are Grade-A assholes and local authorities should be working to separate them from the pack and arresting them over the standoff.

2.  Harry Ried is (still) a grandstanding shiatbag.

udhq: That neither MLK nor Ghandi threatened to start shooting cops for doing their jobs.  What these people are doing isn't civil disobedience, it's armed robbery by a bunch of violent thugs.

The claim was that civil disobedience = get arrested and then challenge the laws through courts. I said that that is not true. I did not say that what these people are doing is civil disobedience.

Baz744: Well, it kind of looked like you were saying that being arrested isn't part of civil disobedience. Because that's what the post you answered asserted--that being arrested is part of civil disobedience. And you began your response to that post with the word "false." So I took that "false" to mean "your assertion that accepting the consequences of civil disobedience is part of civil disobedience is false."

Okay, I could have been more clear then. Yes, if you're under arrest and you're doing a civil disobedience strategy, then peacefully accept that arrest or else it's no longer "civil" disobedience. However, not every civil disobedience strategy necessarily includes a section that looks like "Step 4: Everyone gets arrested".
Civil disobedience nearly always means an extremely high chance of getting arrested, but not necessarily. For example, if you've determined that the police will only be able to bring in enough arrestee transport buses to carry 300 people, but you've got 3000 people in an arrestable situation, it's likely that a lot of those people won't be getting arrested.

And, again, sometimes the point of civil disobedience is social rather than legal, such as to humiliate the powers that be in order to compel them to back off (and/or to induce an Emperor Has No Clothes moment); or indirectly economic such as costing a city a fortune in police overtime. Imagine if half of the population would have refused to pay taxes as a protest against the invasion of Mexico- then it would have gone from being a purely moralistic stance to being a real strategy to end the war.

The only reason I'm making a big fuss about this is that I hate it when people make arguments that imply that the only way that change happens is that people ask nicely for politicians or bureaucrats to do something. Particularly in a thread about a guy who is getting his way by not playing by the rules.

GoldSpider: I think we've learned two things from this episode.

1.  These ranchers are Grade-A assholes and local authorities should be working to separate them from the pack and arresting them over the standoff.

2.  Harry Ried is (still) a grandstanding shiatbag.

Militia guys should be up on felony charges as well.

Fine...just keep confiscated the cattle from his ranch that's on BLM land. Eventually the dude will die off and his family will pay the grazing fee that EVERYONE else pays in the BLM system near his ranch.

If you don't want your cattle taken---then keep the damn things off federal land unless you pay a fee for using that land....heck even people that Camp on federal land pay a camping fee.

dr_blasto: Militia guys should be up on felony charges as well.

At least felony obstruction.

Cryoteck: Your dog wants Bill O'Reilly?

Chopper, sic balls.

GoldSpider: 1. These ranchers are Grade-A assholes morons and local authorities should be working to separate them from the pack and arresting them over the standoff.

FTFM.

youmightberight: As a reasonably fit guy with a size 17 1/2 neck I can assure you that anything over a 17 neck is cut more like a tent than a shirt.

Never heard of a tailor? Costs like $30 or less to have the shirt pulled in. Danger Avoid Death: sigdiamond2000: I'm still mystified by the "take the battle to your baldness" cue-ball look that so many bald men in this country favor. What is the thinking here? That you'll look less bald if you're totally bald? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder but most folk actually prefer totally bald to the unkempt-looking mange of partial baldness. I'm reminded of this storyline from girls with slingshots. Bundy Militia? I thought they called it NO MA'AM. Do you suppose serial killer Ted Bundy would be embarrassed by his namesake if he were alive today? Speaking of serial killers, what odds are you giving that Burning Man's prank on the Bundy Farm will result in half of the hipsters in Hollywood and TV being massacred? Is it too soon to send Ted McGinty in to kill Fox and Friends? How about a CIA-style hit on Rush Limbaugh? Ted Nugent? optikeye: Fine...just keep confiscated the cattle from his ranch that's on BLM land. Eventually the dude will die off and his family will pay the grazing fee that EVERYONE else pays in the BLM system near his ranch. If you don't want your cattle taken---then keep the damn things off federal land unless you pay a fee for using that land....heck even people that Camp on federal land pay a camping fee. That's exactly what BLM was doing: they corralled about 400 of the 900+ head of cattle he was grazing on the land, Bundy raised a militia, and then stormed the portion of the Bunkerville Allotment where the corralled cattle were being kept and made the BLM surrender them by gunpoint. Apparently this is a great victory for people like Sean Hannity who see this as the little guy successfully fending off an attack on his home by jackbooted thugs from the federal government. This would be reat news for the burning man people, but I think most of them are vegies. sigdiamond2000: He looks like he's questioning whether O'Reilly even lifts. You know, sometimes posting a comment that funny is a real distraction to the people trying to read a thread. /lol GoldSpider: Harry Ried is (still) a grandstanding shiatbag. The blaming of both sides and pretending they are on equal footing is a requirement for your brain to function isn't it? stonelotus: 1. soap & water readily available 2. no drum circles 3. deodorant in use 4. no dreadlocks 5. a distinct lack of patchouli Availability of soap does not necessarily mean the use of such. I also wouldn't bank on #3. Canton: iheartscotch: To be fair. His cow have probably done more for the US than the entirety of the Occupy movement. / what's the difference between a cow and a hippy? Cows actually have a purpose. And the cows might actually fight back. Cows with guns? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQMbXvn2RNI&feature=kp HawgWild: I love these Bundy threads. So do I. I don't know if I can think of a single issue on the planet that is as perfect of a litmus test for moron/non moron as this. Bundy is simply indefensible, and anyone even attempting to defend his/the militia's actions can pretty safely be ignored and ridiculed. It's not even really a matter of opinion, this one is truly black and white. Bob Robert: GoldSpider: Harry Ried is (still) a grandstanding shiatbag. The blaming of both sides and pretending they are on equal footing is a requirement for your brain to function isn't it? I neither blamed both sides nor equated them. Your reading comprehension skills are below average even by Fark standards. From what I read so far, Subby is gonna need a bigger boat... vernonFL: James!: George F*cking Washington 2014. He looks like a guy I met at a gay bar last week. He is the hot bearded daddy bear type. Plus he got the crazy eyes. Hot. I'll bet he serves up a mean cock-meat sandwich. GoldSpider: Bob Robert: GoldSpider: Harry Ried is (still) a grandstanding shiatbag. The blaming of both sides and pretending they are on equal footing is a requirement for your brain to function isn't it? I neither blamed both sides nor equated them. Your reading comprehension skills are below average even by Fark standards. So he's a shait bag for calling domestic terrorists domestic terrorists? Fart_Machine: GoldSpider: Bob Robert: GoldSpider: Harry Ried is (still) a grandstanding shiatbag. The blaming of both sides and pretending they are on equal footing is a requirement for your brain to function isn't it? I neither blamed both sides nor equated them. Your reading comprehension skills are below average even by Fark standards. So he's a shait bag for calling domestic terrorists domestic terrorists? Just the grandstanding variety. GoldSpider: I neither blamed both sides nor equated them. Your reading comprehension skills are below average even by Fark standards. Yes you did. You tried comparing the actions of the militias and the Bundy's to the action of Reid. But since you cannot prove what Reid said is wrong, you have to cry that he is grandstanding. Bob Robert: You tried comparing the actions of the militias and the Bundy's to the action of Reid. If you say so, despite the actual words I posted... Bob Robert: But since you cannot prove what Reid said is wrong, you have to cry that he is grandstanding. What's there to prove or disprove? He said what he said. He's voiced a personal opinion, using (in my opinion) emotionally charged rhetoric that adds zero substance to the discussion of how incidents like the Bundy ranchers should be handled in the future. Account created: 2014-04-18 15:02:55 (5 days ago) Oh, I see. Carry on. Fart_Machine: RedVentrue: Fart_Machine: RedVentrue: Bob Robert: RedVentrue: OWS got thier arse kicked all over. This is why the 2nd is important. So if only OWS was armed to the teeth, they would have got their way and wouldn't have been targeted even heavier by the law? In what universe? I think they would have thought twice about being so heavy handed. Some sort of compromise might have been reached. Yes, armed protesters attacking police would totally not have escalated the situation. The alternative is armed police killing protesters. Is that better? Where did armed police kill protesters? I seem to remember one strapping youg hero that was aiming tear gas canisters at protesters heads during OWS. At least one of them died dr_blasto: RedVentrue: Baz744: RedVentrue: Serious Black: You didn't destroy property and weren't arrested because BLM agents assumed (probably correctly) that you would try to murder them if they didn't de-escalate the situation. Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken. OWS got thier arse kicked all over. This is why the 2nd is important. It makes the gov think twice before jackbooting. It equally impedes the just enforcement of constitutionally permissible laws against self-entitled jackholes who think they have a unilateral right to determine usage disposition over lawfully held and administrated public land. Like in the Bundy case, for example. I'm not saying Bundy was right, or even justified. I'm saying he was effective. Maybe in a 'win the battle, lose the war' kind of way. No long-term outlook for him is positive. Quite true. If he's alone. He probably will be. dr_blasto: RedVentrue: Baz744: RedVentrue: Serious Black: You didn't destroy property and weren't arrested because BLM agents assumed (probably correctly) that you would try to murder them if they didn't de-escalate the situation. Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken. OWS got thier arse kicked all over. This is why the 2nd is important. It makes the gov think twice before jackbooting. It equally impedes the just enforcement of constitutionally permissible laws against self-entitled jackholes who think they have a unilateral right to determine usage disposition over lawfully held and administrated public land. Like in the Bundy case, for example. I'm not saying Bundy was right, or even justified. I'm saying he was effective. Maybe in a 'win the battle, lose the war' kind of way. No long-term outlook for him is positive. By resisting, Bundy multiplied his woes. He has turned a civil matter into a criminal matter at least; a national security matter at worst. I mean, I suppose you can say the 2nd Amendment helped him in the immediate present. But it's going to destroy him in the long term. In their public statements, the Bundy's keep stressing that they'll give Nevada any money they ask for. I seriously think they harbor the delusion that this is going to be resolved with some compromise where they pay their grazing fees to Nevada, which in turn pays them to the federal government. All will be forgiven, and they'll have made their "point" about state sovereignty. That might have been a possibility before they assembled a gang of thugs to fight the federal government. Now, it just isn't. People by the name "Bundy" will be going to prison. There will be no settled compromise. Ultimately, they're going to come out from behind their women, surrender and face criminal prosecution. Or they're going to be dragged out from behind their women, tazed, and hauled off for criminal prosecution. Or they're going to be killed, putting their women in danger as they cower behind them for protection. Also, I'm not sure if I mentioned this. But did you know Bundy's militia thugs boasted about their plans to cower behind women in the event of violence? EJ25T: youmightberight: demaL-demaL-yeH: LandOfChocolate: sigdiamond2000: [img.fark.net image 652x365] He looks like he's questioning whether O'Reilly even lifts. You're on national TV, can't you at least put on a collared shirt? I didn't know that dress shirt collars came in size fireplug. As a reasonably fit guy with a size 17 1/2 neck I can assure you that anything over a 17 neck is cut more like a tent than a shirt. And woe unto you if you try to tuck the damn thing in. I love it when you have to pleat and fold your shirt around your waist just so it fits in your pants. I'm interested in finding some cheap tailoring to try and get rid of the "Muffin top" (not fat but shirt - same effect though) - It's insane that even fitted shirts with a 17in neck are like this. Bundy's defenders protested the fact that the Federal Government was stealing his property and interfering with his right to produce and sell a product people want, namely beef. The Occupy Wall Street people protested the fact that the Federal Government was not stealing the property of other people to provide them with what they want in exchange for the product they produce, which is namely nothing. \\\ Well, at least not to the degree they thought proper. There is a part of me that wants to see these militia asshats start something-- REALLY start something-- So we can all enjoy the tale of how a bunch of overweight toughguys armed with rifles, handguns, and shotguns thought they could take on the United States right up until the moment they were surrounded by tanks and blasted to Kingdom Come while they ineffectually fired thousands of rounds at the Nevada National Guard who stayed snug and safe in their armored vehicles. And if not that story, then I'll take the story of how a ranch and a gaggle of bald, limp-dicked conservative idiots armed to the teeth with guns and questionably-female human shields were turned into a deep crater thanks to the non-nuke ICBM fired from by a crew on the other side of the country. Seriously, it makes me laugh to know that these chucklef#cks believe they can fight the United States military armed with a bunch of guns they bought at some redneck gun show or firing range. Unless they have access to satellites, tanks, ICBMs, fighter jets, bombers, and other weapons of real war, they're about as threatening to the military as a militant branch of the Ringling Bros. clowns. darkman2000: [img.fark.net image 850x1206] You're a douchecanoe and that picture is obviously of someone who has never held a pistol in any serious manner. Serious Black: Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken. Where were people waving guns around, and where they waving in them the faces of federal agents? seadoo2006: Hell must've just froze over ... I just agreed with, and respectfully understood a cogent argument from one Bill O'Reilly? [media.giphy.com image 500x500] Well to be fair, as right leaning as Bill is, he's more then willing to call shenanigans on nut-jobs even if they on the "right" side of the political spectrum. FlashHarry: why isn't he in jail for threatening federal officers with firearms? because he didn't. olddinosaur: Bundy's defenders protested the fact that the Federal Government was stealing his property and interfering with his right to produce and sell a product people want, namely beef. Only after he technically stole Federal Government property by continuing to graze on it without paying fees for it. It's amazing how quick you guys are to defend a free loader. I thought conservatives hated freeloaders? Nix Nightbird: There is a part of me that wants to see these militia asshats start something-- REALLY start something-- So we can all enjoy the tale of how a bunch of overweight toughguys armed with rifles, handguns, and shotguns thought they could take on the United States right up until the moment they were surrounded by tanks and blasted to Kingdom Come while they ineffectually fired thousands of rounds at the Nevada National Guard who stayed snug and safe in their armored vehicles. And if not that story, then I'll take the story of how a ranch and a gaggle of bald, limp-dicked conservative idiots armed to the teeth with guns and questionably-female human shields were turned into a deep crater thanks to the non-nuke ICBM fired from by a crew on the other side of the country. Seriously, it makes me laugh to know that these chucklef#cks believe they can fight the United States military armed with a bunch of guns they bought at some redneck gun show or firing range. Unless they have access to satellites, tanks, ICBMs, fighter jets, bombers, and other weapons of real war, they're about as threatening to the military as a militant branch of the Ringling Bros. clowns. Especially when you got Nellis AFB as well as all the bomb testing grounds literally right down the road from the ranch. RedVentrue: Serious Black: You didn't destroy property and weren't arrested because BLM agents assumed (probably correctly) that you would try to murder them if they didn't de-escalate the situation. Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken. OWS got thier arse kicked all over. This is why the 2nd is important. It makes the gov think twice before jackbooting. Yep. It's a hell of a lot harder to abuse armed protestors. Baz744: Also, I'm not sure if I mentioned this. But did you know Bundy's militia thugs boasted about their plans to cower behind women in the event of violence? 'twas a Fark thread about that one. pedrop357: FlashHarry: why isn't he in jail for threatening federal officers with firearms? because he didn't. I'm pretty sure the picture of the douchebag with the AK on the bridge was threatening federal officers with a firearm. Safely behind some concrete, natch. Of course, they didn't wave them around in the face of the cops, but they did kick a cop's dog. That's not really adult behavior. Grungehamster: That's exactly what BLM was doing: they corralled about 400 of the 900+ head of cattle he was grazing on the land, Bundy raised a militia, and then stormed the portion of the Bunkerville Allotment where the corralled cattle were being kept and made the BLM surrender them by gunpoint. Gunpoint? I've seen the pictures/videos of people on horseback and on foot rallying at that corral, but didn't see all the drawn and pointed guns. The real fun here is the liberal derp in agreement with Bill O'Reilly This should be fun...need more popcorm This is a red-blooded True American Patriot defending us from the shackles of tyranny from the jackbooted thugs at the BLM: GoldSpider: dr_blasto: Militia guys should be up on felony charges as well. At least felony obstruction. What did exactly did they obstruct? Loud protesting and rallying is not a crime. Mrtraveler01: This is a red-blooded True American Patriot defending us from the shackles of tyranny from the jackbooted thugs at the BLM: [img.fark.net image 582x386] Sort of. One guy covering the scene in case it gets out of control, no different than what the police do, and very prudent given the severe abuse meted out by the police against protestors in nearly every other protest of any serious size and passion. dr_blasto: I'm pretty sure the picture of the douchebag with the AK on the bridge was threatening federal officers with a firearm. Safely behind some concrete, natch. Of course, they didn't wave them around in the face of the cops, but they did kick a cop's dog. That's not really adult behavior. He wasn't threatening anyone with a firearm anymore than the police do when they deploy snipers on rooftops for public events, races, protests, etc. RedVentrue: Fart_Machine: RedVentrue: Fart_Machine: RedVentrue: Bob Robert: RedVentrue: OWS got thier arse kicked all over. This is why the 2nd is important. So if only OWS was armed to the teeth, they would have got their way and wouldn't have been targeted even heavier by the law? In what universe? I think they would have thought twice about being so heavy handed. Some sort of compromise might have been reached. Yes, armed protesters attacking police would totally not have escalated the situation. The alternative is armed police killing protesters. Is that better? Where did armed police kill protesters? I seem to remember one strapping youg hero that was aiming tear gas canisters at protesters heads during OWS. At least one of them died If you're talking about the guy who was hit in the head in Oakland he lived. So you're saying the cops wouldn't have moved beyond tear gas canisters if the protesters were armed? Really? pedrop357: Mrtraveler01: This is a red-blooded True American Patriot defending us from the shackles of tyranny from the jackbooted thugs at the BLM: [img.fark.net image 582x386] Sort of. One guy covering the scene in case it gets out of control, no different than what the police do, and very prudent given the severe abuse meted out by the police against protestors in nearly every other protest of any serious size and passion. So you shoot Federal employees in the head in case it gets "out of control"? Fart_Machine: RedVentrue: Fart_Machine: RedVentrue: Fart_Machine: RedVentrue: Bob Robert: RedVentrue: OWS got thier arse kicked all over. This is why the 2nd is important. So if only OWS was armed to the teeth, they would have got their way and wouldn't have been targeted even heavier by the law? In what universe? I think they would have thought twice about being so heavy handed. Some sort of compromise might have been reached. Yes, armed protesters attacking police would totally not have escalated the situation. The alternative is armed police killing protesters. Is that better? Where did armed police kill protesters? I seem to remember one strapping youg hero that was aiming tear gas canisters at protesters heads during OWS. At least one of them died If you're talking about the guy who was hit in the head in Oakland he lived. So you're saying the cops wouldn't have moved beyond tear gas canisters if the protesters were armed? Really? We'll never know, but we don't tell would be rape victims that arming themselves will only make it worse and they should instead rely on the mercy of their attacker. The cops tossing explosives and firing gas grenades at people in such a reckless manner are cowards, plain and simple. They're only strong when they're all grouped together and better armed than the people they're abusing. Let it be known that half of the protestors will be armed, and the police won't have the numbers to escalate things the way they do and survive, not even if they can convince outside agencies to come in and help. Each one will have to wonder if it's worth being the cop that gets killed after launching a tear gas grenade directly at a guys head or tossing a grenade into a small crowd trying to rescue the guy who was badly injured. Fart_Machine: pedrop357: Mrtraveler01: This is a red-blooded True American Patriot defending us from the shackles of tyranny from the jackbooted thugs at the BLM: [img.fark.net image 582x386] Sort of. One guy covering the scene in case it gets out of control, no different than what the police do, and very prudent given the severe abuse meted out by the police against protestors in nearly every other protest of any serious size and passion. So you shoot Federal employees in the head in case it gets "out of control"? Nope, you protect the protestors if the police start launching grenades at their head, wantonly beating people on the ground, tossing grenades at crowds trying help downed people, etc. Entry from a timeline UDHQ posted earlier from the Washington Post: April 10, 2014: A protest camp has formed. There is a sign at the entrance that reads "MILITA SIGHN IN." No doubt written in Crayon. And the sign-up list is mostly a series of X's also written in crayon. The Daily Show is about to tear Hannity another new one. pedrop357: Grungehamster: That's exactly what BLM was doing: they corralled about 400 of the 900+ head of cattle he was grazing on the land, Bundy raised a militia, and then stormed the portion of the Bunkerville Allotment where the corralled cattle were being kept and made the BLM surrender them by gunpoint. Gunpoint? I've seen the pictures/videos of people on horseback and on foot rallying at that corral, but didn't see all the drawn and pointed guns. The sniper sure as hell had his gun pointed. Even if they hadn't, there was the threat of violence inherent in the fact that the militia went onto federal land armed and would not allow the BLM to leave unless they surrendered the cattle. pedrop357: GoldSpider: dr_blasto: Militia guys should be up on felony charges as well. At least felony obstruction. What did exactly did they obstruct? Loud protesting and rallying is not a crime. Obstructing carrying out a court order in seizing the cattle that were to be removed from federal land by last October or face seizure of them. Or are we forgetting that they crashed an ATV into a BLM truck to halt the corralling of the cattle, and raised a militia to force the BLM to surrender the seized cattle to Bundy. You really believe that they were peaceably protesting and the BLM had a change of heart despite the law being on their side? Or was it the threat of violence that made the BLM hand over the cattle? pedrop357: Fart_Machine: pedrop357: Mrtraveler01: This is a red-blooded True American Patriot defending us from the shackles of tyranny from the jackbooted thugs at the BLM: [img.fark.net image 582x386] Sort of. One guy covering the scene in case it gets out of control, no different than what the police do, and very prudent given the severe abuse meted out by the police against protestors in nearly every other protest of any serious size and passion. So you shoot Federal employees in the head in case it gets "out of control"? Nope, you protect the protestors if the police start launching grenades at their head, wantonly beating people on the ground, tossing grenades at crowds trying help downed people, etc. Admit it. You got slightly "aroused" typing that, didn't you? pedrop357: dr_blasto: I'm pretty sure the picture of the douchebag with the AK on the bridge was threatening federal officers with a firearm. Safely behind some concrete, natch. Of course, they didn't wave them around in the face of the cops, but they did kick a cop's dog. That's not really adult behavior. He wasn't threatening anyone with a firearm anymore than the police do when they deploy snipers on rooftops for public events, races, protests, etc. Of course not. He was simply protecting everybody. I had him all wrong; clearly that man was making a noble sacrifice, defending the innocent and a truly exceptional American. Grungehamster: The sniper sure as hell had his gun pointed. Even if they hadn't, there was the threat of violence inherent in the fact that the militia went onto federal land armed and would not allow the BLM to leave unless they surrendered the cattle. Police snipers regularly have their guns pointed at people without any cause and while I find that offensive, I don't see tons of people claiming that the police are "pointing their guns in the faces of American citizens". If the BLM felt threatened by a large group of people on horseback and foot demanding they change their position, that's the BLM's problem. Or are we forgetting that they crashed an ATV into a BLM truck to halt the corralling of the cattle ONE guy crashed his ATV into that truck and he might have been obstructing, but we see tons of that with people tying themselves to trees to keep them from being cut down, using backhoes to block logging, etc. Gecko Gingrich: pedrop357: Fart_Machine: pedrop357: Mrtraveler01: This is a red-blooded True American Patriot defending us from the shackles of tyranny from the jackbooted thugs at the BLM: [img.fark.net image 582x386] Sort of. One guy covering the scene in case it gets out of control, no different than what the police do, and very prudent given the severe abuse meted out by the police against protestors in nearly every other protest of any serious size and passion. So you shoot Federal employees in the head in case it gets "out of control"? Nope, you protect the protestors if the police start launching grenades at their head, wantonly beating people on the ground, tossing grenades at crowds trying help downed people, etc. Admit it. You got slightly "aroused" typing that, didn't you? Please don't bring your weird fetishes to this thread. pedrop357: If the BLM felt threatened by a large group of people on horseback and foot demanding they change their position While carrying weapons and threatening them? dr_blasto: pedrop357: dr_blasto: I'm pretty sure the picture of the douchebag with the AK on the bridge was threatening federal officers with a firearm. Safely behind some concrete, natch. Of course, they didn't wave them around in the face of the cops, but they did kick a cop's dog. That's not really adult behavior. He wasn't threatening anyone with a firearm anymore than the police do when they deploy snipers on rooftops for public events, races, protests, etc. Of course not. He was simply protecting everybody. I had him all wrong; clearly that man was making a noble sacrifice, defending the innocent and a truly exceptional American. Do you get this way when the police deploy multiple snipers at the most mundane events? Mrtraveler01: pedrop357: If the BLM felt threatened by a large group of people on horseback and foot demanding they change their position While carrying weapons and threatening them? Carrying a firearm is as constitutional as carrying signs and bullhorns. What were the actual threats from the crowd? pedrop357: Mrtraveler01: pedrop357: If the BLM felt threatened by a large group of people on horseback and foot demanding they change their position While carrying weapons and threatening them? Carrying a firearm is as constitutional as carrying signs and bullhorns. What were the actual threats from the crowd? Just from Bundy: That hasn't happened - yet - and the rancher insists his cattle aren't going anywhere. He acknowledges that he keeps firearms at his ranch and has vowed to "do whatever it takes" to defend his animals from seizure. "I've got to protect my property," Bundy said as Arden steered several cattle inside an elongated pen. "If people come to monkey with what's mine, I'll call the county sheriff. If that don't work, I'll gather my friends and kids and we'll try to stop it. I abide by all state laws. But I abide by almost zero federal laws." http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2013/sep/23/lone-rancher-prepared-fi gh t-feds-land/ pedrop357: Fart_Machine: pedrop357: Mrtraveler01: This is a red-blooded True American Patriot defending us from the shackles of tyranny from the jackbooted thugs at the BLM: [img.fark.net image 582x386] Sort of. One guy covering the scene in case it gets out of control, no different than what the police do, and very prudent given the severe abuse meted out by the police against protestors in nearly every other protest of any serious size and passion. So you shoot Federal employees in the head in case it gets "out of control"? Nope, you protect the protestors if the police start launching grenades at their head, wantonly beating people on the ground, tossing grenades at crowds trying help downed people, etc. You protect them by shooting the cops. Well that certainly won't escalate things. pedrop357: We'll never know, but we don't tell would be rape victims that arming themselves will only make it worse and they should instead rely on the mercy of their attacker. If the police were pulling people out of the crowd and raping them you'd have a point but they weren't. pedrop357: Let it be known that half of the protestors will be armed, and the police won't have the numbers to escalate things the way they do and survive, not even if they can convince outside agencies to come in and help. Each one will have to wonder if it's worth being the cop that gets killed after launching a tear gas grenade directly at a guys head or tossing a grenade into a small crowd trying to rescue the guy who was badly injured. If they didn't have the numbers then the next step would be summoning the National Guard and that always ends well. Mrtraveler01: Just from Bundy: That hasn't happened - yet - and the rancher insists his cattle aren't going anywhere. He acknowledges that he keeps firearms at his ranch and has vowed to "do whatever it takes" to defend his animals from seizure. "I've got to protect my property," Bundy said as Arden steered several cattle inside an elongated pen. "If people come to monkey with what's mine, I'll call the county sheriff. If that don't work, I'll gather my friends and kids and we'll try to stop it. I abide by all state laws. But I abide by almost zero federal laws." http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2013/sep/23/lone-rancher-prepared-fi gh t-feds-land/ So one guy vowing to do what it takes. It might seem threatening, but seems to be right on the edge and isn't that different from the police making similar statements that could be taken as threatening. When one or two people from the occupy movement(s) were held out as representative of everyone there, we rightly got people here and in other forums saying that not every person felt the same way, that that one person's statements were their own, etc. and that many people here had different reasons for attending. Hell, some were there to complain about war, lack of this or that, etc. People here seem to be really quick to demand that all of the so-called militia members should be arrested for various felonies based on the statements of a slim few and actions of even fewer. pedrop357: dr_blasto: I'm pretty sure the picture of the douchebag with the AK on the bridge was threatening federal officers with a firearm. Safely behind some concrete, natch. Of course, they didn't wave them around in the face of the cops, but they did kick a cop's dog. That's not really adult behavior. He wasn't threatening anyone with a firearm anymore than the police do when they deploy snipers on rooftops for public events, races, protests, etc. You know what the difference between the police setting up snipers along a parade route and a private citizen getting up on a bridge to set up a sniping position? A public event is a scheduled and approved event and the police are contracted to provide security, whereas the private citizen is going onto federal property in order to back up a group of people explicitly seeking the surrender of property legally collected by the federal government per a court order and 20 years of legal findings in favor of the federal government over the man now threatening violence if his demands aren't met. Do you think that is a valid point of contention or not? By that logic you could argue that there was nothing wrong with a private citizen could bust down a precinct door and seize any property they believe could be related to a crime they suspect the police of since cops are allowed to do that to them when they have a signed warrant. After all, it helps even things out and stops tyranny, right? Bundy disputes the federal government's authority to take such action. The Nevada Sheriff's Office, he contends, is the only entity empowered to impound his cattle. The Bundy Ranch website calls the federal agents "cattle thieves." Cattle thieves, says the website, "Should be hung!" It urges supporters to "hang them with words of disapproval." http://abcnews.go.com/Business/nevada-rancher-threatens-range-war-fe ds /story?id=23225314 pedrop357: Grungehamster: The sniper sure as hell had his gun pointed. Even if they hadn't, there was the threat of violence inherent in the fact that the militia went onto federal land armed and would not allow the BLM to leave unless they surrendered the cattle. Police snipers regularly have their guns pointed at people without any cause and while I find that offensive, I don't see tons of people claiming that the police are "pointing their guns in the faces of American citizens". If the BLM felt threatened by a large group of people on horseback and foot demanding they change their position, that's the BLM's problem. Or are we forgetting that they crashed an ATV into a BLM truck to halt the corralling of the cattle ONE guy crashed his ATV into that truck and he might have been obstructing, but we see tons of that with people tying themselves to trees to keep them from being cut down, using backhoes to block logging, etc. SO, basically, what I'm reading into this is that, personally, you do not see the brandishing of semi-automatic rifles en masse, taking up sniper positions and the like as a radical escalation of a situation and that you would not recognize the situation as having dramatically escalated were you, say, in the group on the ground at the end of sniper-douche's sights? I mean, I can imagine that possible, but that strikes me as completely foreign. EvilEgg: They should just pepper spray the area, like dusting crops. That'll break up the protest. They should use the area denial technology, like heat rays, and sonic blasters. pedrop357: Mrtraveler01: pedrop357: If the BLM felt threatened by a large group of people on horseback and foot demanding they change their position While carrying weapons and threatening them? Carrying a firearm is as constitutional as carrying signs and bullhorns. What were the actual threats from the crowd? You mean like the guy crashing his ATV into the truck? The guy kicking the police dog? The protesters getting nose to nose with LOE and screaming in their faces? Not to mention Bundy calling for a range war. The guy on the bridge pointing a weapon at LEO. I'm sure there's more. But yeah, totally peaceful protest by solid citizens defending the salt o'the earth. pedrop357: dr_blasto: pedrop357: dr_blasto: I'm pretty sure the picture of the douchebag with the AK on the bridge was threatening federal officers with a firearm. Safely behind some concrete, natch. Of course, they didn't wave them around in the face of the cops, but they did kick a cop's dog. That's not really adult behavior. He wasn't threatening anyone with a firearm anymore than the police do when they deploy snipers on rooftops for public events, races, protests, etc. Of course not. He was simply protecting everybody. I had him all wrong; clearly that man was making a noble sacrifice, defending the innocent and a truly exceptional American. Do you get this way when the police deploy multiple snipers at the most mundane events? Pictures of police snipers in protected shooting position at "mundane events?" I haven't seen any. Well, maybe once: GHW Bush landed in Marine One in MCAS Tustin while I was there. Two Secret Service guys in suits with rifles were on top of one of our hangars with rifles while he addressed a bunch of us. That, however, doesn't strike me as a super mundane event and I kind of expect snipers around presidents. Fart_Machine: You protect them by shooting the cops. Well that certainly won't escalate things. If the police are launching devices at people's faces, tossing grenades at people trying to help those people, and beating subdued people on the ground, the situation has already been escalated. If the police were pulling people out of the crowd and raping them you'd have a point but they weren't. The point is that we don't tell would be victims that they should just take it and depend on the mercy of their attacker to save them. We don't tell people in gang infested neighborhoods to just take what the gang dishes out. If they didn't have the numbers then the next step would be summoning the National Guard and that always ends well. If they summon them ahead of time, that will have a polarizing effect on people. Some will feel that this is the first step in a war on the people, others will be scared and stay away. Nobody will be happy if that happens. For the national guard to be summoned afterwards would require that the situation be seriously escalated and that requires at least a few people to be "the first one". As I said, the cops severely beating and firing weapons at unarmed protestors are cowards and most of them aren't going to step up and be that first cop to get killed while attacking someone without cause if they know the crowd is armed. pedrop357: Mrtraveler01: Just from Bundy: That hasn't happened - yet - and the rancher insists his cattle aren't going anywhere. He acknowledges that he keeps firearms at his ranch and has vowed to "do whatever it takes" to defend his animals from seizure. "I've got to protect my property," Bundy said as Arden steered several cattle inside an elongated pen. "If people come to monkey with what's mine, I'll call the county sheriff. If that don't work, I'll gather my friends and kids and we'll try to stop it. I abide by all state laws. But I abide by almost zero federal laws." http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2013/sep/23/lone-rancher-prepared-fi gh t-feds-land/ So one guy vowing to do what it takes. It might seem threatening, but seems to be right on the edge and isn't that different from the police making similar statements that could be taken as threatening. When one or two people from the occupy movement(s) were held out as representative of everyone there, we rightly got people here and in other forums saying that not every person felt the same way, that that one person's statements were their own, etc. and that many people here had different reasons for attending. Hell, some were there to complain about war, lack of this or that, etc. People here seem to be really quick to demand that all of the so-called militia members should be arrested for various felonies based on the statements of a slim few and actions of even fewer. Really? You dispute that Cliven Bundy had ANY authority or control of a militia that explicitly came to get back his cattle? He's just one voice in the crowd, and assuming they're following his directions just because they came there explicitly to join his cause and directed the militia to go onto the federal land to block off BLM from loading up the cattle and leaving is giving him too much credit? pedrop357: Mrtraveler01: Just from Bundy: That hasn't happened - yet - and the rancher insists his cattle aren't going anywhere. He acknowledges that he keeps firearms at his ranch and has vowed to "do whatever it takes" to defend his animals from seizure. "I've got to protect my property," Bundy said as Arden steered several cattle inside an elongated pen. "If people come to monkey with what's mine, I'll call the county sheriff. If that don't work, I'll gather my friends and kids and we'll try to stop it. I abide by all state laws. But I abide by almost zero federal laws." http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2013/sep/23/lone-rancher-prepared-fi gh t-feds-land/ So one guy vowing to do what it takes. It might seem threatening, but seems to be right on the edge and isn't that different from the police making similar statements that could be taken as threatening. When one or two people from the occupy movement(s) were held out as representative of everyone there, we rightly got people here and in other forums saying that not every person felt the same way, that that one person's statements were their own, etc. and that many people here had different reasons for attending. Hell, some were there to complain about war, lack of this or that, etc. People here seem to be really quick to demand that all of the so-called militia members should be arrested for various felonies based on the statements of a slim few and actions of even fewer. Aiding and abetting a felony has always been a felony in itself. dr_blasto: SO, basically, what I'm reading into this is that, personally, you do not see the brandishing of semi-automatic rifles en masse, taking up sniper positions and the like as a radical escalation of a situation and that you would not recognize the situation as having dramatically escalated were you, say, in the group on the ground at the end of sniper-douche's sights? I mean, I can imagine that possible, but that strikes me as completely foreign. If that counts as escalation, then every police presence ever is also considered to be radical escalation. At various public events where the police set up snipers, I or others in that group have undoubtedly been in their sights. At least if the ONE guy we saw setting up a sniper position were to shoot someone, there would be a thorough investigation by the DA and police. The other members of his group (assuming he's in a group) wouldn't get to investigate him the way the police investigate themselves. chuggernaught: You mean like the guy crashing his ATV into the truck? The guy kicking the police dog? The protesters getting nose to nose with LOE and screaming in their faces? Not to mention Bundy calling for a range war. The guy on the bridge pointing a weapon at LEO. I'm sure there's more. But yeah, totally peaceful protest by solid citizens defending the salt o'the earth. A few bad apples, isolated incident, etc. You literally brought up maybe 10 people total, some of whom were acting just like protestors at protests (yelling in the face), and others who try to block off streets or push back against the police. dr_blasto: Aiding and abetting a felony has always been a felony in itself. In that case, many occupiers were aiding and abetting by "intimidating" the police when they tried to break up their little campouts in public and private parks. pedrop357: If the police are launching devices at people's faces, tossing grenades at people trying to help those people, and beating subdued people on the ground, the situation has already been escalated. No, escalating would be using live ammo to shoot into the crowd once the crowd starts firing on you. pedrop357: If they summon them ahead of time, that will have a polarizing effect on people. Some will feel that this is the first step in a war on the people, others will be scared and stay away. Nobody will be happy if that happens. If the cops are fired upon by protesters then that polarizing effect will be on the protesters, not the cops. Then the public won't have all that much sympathy once the National Guard starts gunning people down. Mrtraveler01: The Daily Show is about to tear Hannity another new one. They did, and it was a thing of beauty. pedrop357: dr_blasto: SO, basically, what I'm reading into this is that, personally, you do not see the brandishing of semi-automatic rifles en masse, taking up sniper positions and the like as a radical escalation of a situation and that you would not recognize the situation as having dramatically escalated were you, say, in the group on the ground at the end of sniper-douche's sights? I mean, I can imagine that possible, but that strikes me as completely foreign. If that counts as escalation, then every police presence ever is also considered to be radical escalation. At various public events where the police set up snipers, I or others in that group have undoubtedly been in their sights. At least if the ONE guy we saw setting up a sniper position were to shoot someone, there would be a thorough investigation by the DA and police. The other members of his group (assuming he's in a group) wouldn't get to investigate him the way the police investigate themselves. I don't agree that there's an equivalence between the cops and the militia clowns: the uniformed types are anserable to society as a whole-yeah, I understand the joke-but the beardo militia toolbag is answerable to only himself. Cops don't draw, typically don't carry rifles. I can concede that aggressive posture would make a difference. When cops adapt an aggressive posture, they're most definitely escalating the situation. I still can't remember ever seeing a non-presidential sniper thing though. pedrop357: dr_blasto: Aiding and abetting a felony has always been a felony in itself. In that case, many occupiers were aiding and abetting by "intimidating" the police when they tried to break up their little campouts in public and private parks. Trespassing is a misdemeanor. If you start pulling guns on cops who try and move you then you've just graduated it into a felony. Grungehamster: You know what the difference between the police setting up snipers along a parade route and a private citizen getting up on a bridge to set up a sniping position? A public event is a scheduled and approved event and the police are contracted to provide security, whereas the private citizen is going onto federal property in order to back up a group of people explicitly seeking the surrender of property legally collected by the federal government per a court order and 20 years of legal findings in favor of the federal government over the man now threatening violence if his demands aren't met. Do you think that is a valid point of contention or not? Being paid or contracted to do something doesn't change what's being done. That citizen was on public property backing up protestors, which is very prudent given how police all ove the country across decades have treated protestors. If the motives or objectives of the protestors mean that they are somehow undeserving of protection, we're headed down an ugly road. By that logic you could argue that there was nothing wrong with a private citizen could bust down a precinct door and seize any property they believe could be related to a crime they suspect the police of since cops are allowed to do that to them when they have a signed warrant. After all, it helps even things out and stops tyranny, right? I actually would love for people to start applying police tactics against them, especially civil forfeiture. Fart_Machine: pedrop357: dr_blasto: Aiding and abetting a felony has always been a felony in itself. In that case, many occupiers were aiding and abetting by "intimidating" the police when they tried to break up their little campouts in public and private parks. Trespassing is a misdemeanor. If you start pulling guns on cops who try and move you then you've just graduated it into a felony. Who pulled guns on cops? pedrop357: Fart_Machine: pedrop357: dr_blasto: Aiding and abetting a felony has always been a felony in itself. In that case, many occupiers were aiding and abetting by "intimidating" the police when they tried to break up their little campouts in public and private parks. Trespassing is a misdemeanor. If you start pulling guns on cops who try and move you then you've just graduated it into a felony. Who pulled guns on cops? Weren't you saying you wanted the protesters to be armed? dr_blasto: Aiding and abetting a felony has always been a felony in itself. No, see! They were just hundreds of people traveling to Bunkerville, Nevada (pop. 1303) for all sorts of reasons! Not all the protesters were there over the tyranny of the government in seizing those cows pursuant a valid court order, we just must have missed their signs and they weren't interviewed. pedrop357: dr_blasto: Aiding and abetting a felony has always been a felony in itself. In that case, many occupiers were aiding and abetting by "intimidating" the police when they tried to break up their little campouts in public and private parks. They were being rude, loud and possibly aggressive. Those aren't felonies. Neither was camping in the parks. Well that's easy. The militia types want to be left alone while taking free taxpayer stuff. OWS types want lots of attention while people hand them gimme gimme free taxpayer stuff on a platter. I can see why the two are easily confused though, because both are entitled whiny douchefests. Grungehamster: dr_blasto: Aiding and abetting a felony has always been a felony in itself. No, see! They were just hundreds of people traveling to Bunkerville, Nevada (pop. 1303) for all sorts of reasons! Not all the protesters were there over the tyranny of the government in seizing those cows pursuant a valid court order, we just must have missed their signs and they weren't interviewed. I do hope they weren't there for ATV driving lessons. Because if they paid for that, they got ripped off. dr_blasto: I don't agree that there's an equivalence between the cops and the militia clowns: the uniformed types are anserable to society as a whole-yeah, I understand the joke-but the beardo militia toolbag is answerable to only himself. Cops don't draw, typically don't carry rifles. I can concede that aggressive posture would make a difference. When cops adapt an aggressive posture, they're most definitely escalating the situation. I still can't remember ever seeing a non-presidential sniper thing though. The uniformed types can hide behind qualified immunity, their departments can sometimes be protected by sovereign immunity, and they routinely investigate themselves. The so-called militia members don't get any of that from the state. Imagine how many people here would be losing their minds if the guy on the freeway just said that he was following procedures and that we would have to talk to his friends/companions after they're done investigating him to determine if he did anything wrong. Cops draw all the time and carry rifles all the time. Cops draw in situations and circumstances that would see the average person arrested for brandishing at a minimum and menacing or assault more likely. I also don't see anyone in the videos drawing handguns or carrying rifles at the ready (lots of slung rifles, few in both hands ready to fire) Fart_Machine: pedrop357: Fart_Machine: pedrop357: dr_blasto: Aiding and abetting a felony has always been a felony in itself. In that case, many occupiers were aiding and abetting by "intimidating" the police when they tried to break up their little campouts in public and private parks. Trespassing is a misdemeanor. If you start pulling guns on cops who try and move you then you've just graduated it into a felony. Who pulled guns on cops? Weren't you saying you wanted the protesters to be armed? I do. But being armed and pulling guns on people are two different things. pedrop357: dr_blasto: Aiding and abetting a felony has always been a felony in itself. In that case, many occupiers were aiding and abetting by "intimidating" the police when they tried to break up their little campouts in public and private parks. People can't freely use public land now? Tell Bundy that. JC22: most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese. DRINK! pedrop357: Grungehamster: You know what the difference between the police setting up snipers along a parade route and a private citizen getting up on a bridge to set up a sniping position? A public event is a scheduled and approved event and the police are contracted to provide security, whereas the private citizen is going onto federal property in order to back up a group of people explicitly seeking the surrender of property legally collected by the federal government per a court order and 20 years of legal findings in favor of the federal government over the man now threatening violence if his demands aren't met. Do you think that is a valid point of contention or not? Being paid or contracted to do something doesn't change what's being done. That citizen was on public property backing up protestors, which is very prudent given how police all ove the country across decades have treated protestors. If the motives or objectives of the protestors mean that they are somehow undeserving of protection, we're headed down an ugly road. By that logic you could argue that there was nothing wrong with a private citizen could bust down a precinct door and seize any property they believe could be related to a crime they suspect the police of since cops are allowed to do that to them when they have a signed warrant. After all, it helps even things out and stops tyranny, right? I actually would love for people to start applying police tactics against them, especially civil forfeiture. Alright, so I understand your position: do you believe Cliven Bundy's position is the correct one in this case, or is your position "law enforcement has too much latitude in behavior so anything that undermines them is a good thing regardless if the people involved are guilty as sin"? Felgraf: JC22: My view is if the guy is breaking the law, then put a lien on his stuff. But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese. And Reid needs to get his foot out of his mouth that was just in his @$$and shut up about domestic terrorists because he has no idea what a domestic terrorist is. And lastly Mr Reid. If you are going to spout off about enforcing the law and some citizen can't do what he's doing then you need to enforce all laws, especially those that are here ILLEGALLY and also those in that certain government run tax agency called the IRS that owe billion in back taxes. Can't have it both ways jackass. Hey, how do you enforce a lien? Oh right. By confiscating property. Hey what do you do when the person whose property you're trying to confiscate threatens to shoot you? Put the lien on it so when he dies, those taxes will be taking out of the inheritance. Serious Black: JC22: My view is if the guy is breaking the law, then put a lien on his stuff. But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese. And Reid needs to get his foot out of his mouth that was just in his @$$ and shut up about domestic terrorists because he has no idea what a domestic terrorist is. And lastly Mr Reid. If you are going to spout off about enforcing the law and some citizen can't do what he's doing then you need to enforce all laws, especially those that are here ILLEGALLY and also those in that certain government run tax agency called the IRS that owe billion in back taxes. Can't have it both ways jackass. Please infrom us then: what is a domestic terrorist? You serious don't understand the difference of what a domestic terrorist is vs what is going on in Nevada. Go educate yourself on say the Wall Street van bombing of the towers, Theodore Kaczynski the unabomber, Timothy McVeigh and maybe that recent one up in Boston if you got the time. pedrop357: Fart_Machine: pedrop357: Fart_Machine: pedrop357: dr_blasto: Aiding and abetting a felony has always been a felony in itself. In that case, many occupiers were aiding and abetting by "intimidating" the police when they tried to break up their little campouts in public and private parks. Trespassing is a misdemeanor. If you start pulling guns on cops who try and move you then you've just graduated it into a felony. Who pulled guns on cops? Weren't you saying you wanted the protesters to be armed? I do. But being armed and pulling guns on people are two different things. But you're OK with protestors pointing guns at people just to make sure things don't "get out of hand". Grungehamster: Alright, so I understand your position: do you believe Cliven Bundy's position is the correct one in this case, or is your position "law enforcement has too much latitude in behavior so anything that undermines them is a good thing regardless if the people involved are guilty as sin"? I lean towards the latter. I don't much care for the fact this particular incident was what brought some of this about, but I can't help but be glad that it happened. It's like when a typically untouched mob boss starts getting push back from another smaller mob. I may not agree with the reasons why the latter is doing it, but can't help but smirk and nod in the affirmative that the former is getting a very tiny dose of what he gives out. Basically, a softer form of 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend'. I find it funny that so many people on the left are now obsessed with 'freeloading' and this guy's use of crap land far away from anything, but can't be too upset about it without being hypocritical because another group who (my guess, anyway) also knew nothing about it are using it as a rallying point against the feds. I will also say that I find at least some of the positions on the right to be hypocritical. The same ones who were quick to flip out over occupiers using parks and things like that don't seem bothered by this particular use of supposedly public resources. I mainly dislike the ones who think the feds should keep the land and are perfectly legitimate in owning 85+% of a state but also think they're being unfair to Bundy. If a politician who thinks the feds should be divesting themselves of the land to the respective states supports this guy, it makes sense that they would support his use of it over the feds objections. Felgraf: JC22: My view is if the guy is breaking the law, then put a lien on his stuff. But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese. And Reid needs to get his foot out of his mouth that was just in his @$$and shut up about domestic terrorists because he has no idea what a domestic terrorist is. And lastly Mr Reid. If you are going to spout off about enforcing the law and some citizen can't do what he's doing then you need to enforce all laws, especially those that are here ILLEGALLY and also those in that certain government run tax agency called the IRS that owe billion in back taxes. Can't have it both ways jackass. Hey, how do you enforce a lien? Oh right. By confiscating property. Hey what do you do when the person whose property you're trying to confiscate threatens to shoot you? Disputes over fees normally result in a lien placed on your property, which gets satisfied when the property is sold or inherited. This military response is quite unusual...and if you don't think so, then you are really clueless. Reid has some vendetta or personal goal here and his buddy runs the BLM. Fart_Machine: pedrop357: Fart_Machine: pedrop357: Fart_Machine: pedrop357: dr_blasto: Aiding and abetting a felony has always been a felony in itself. In that case, many occupiers were aiding and abetting by "intimidating" the police when they tried to break up their little campouts in public and private parks. Trespassing is a misdemeanor. If you start pulling guns on cops who try and move you then you've just graduated it into a felony. Who pulled guns on cops? Weren't you saying you wanted the protesters to be armed? I do. But being armed and pulling guns on people are two different things. But you're OK with protestors pointing guns at people just to make sure things don't "get out of hand". I'm OK with average citizen snipers covering crowds the way the police do in case things get out of hand. If a non-police officer covering the crowd with a rifle is the equivalent of pointing guns at cops just doing their job, then every police sniper is doing the same thing to average citizens exercising their rights. pedrop357: dr_blasto: I don't agree that there's an equivalence between the cops and the militia clowns: the uniformed types are anserable to society as a whole-yeah, I understand the joke-but the beardo militia toolbag is answerable to only himself. Cops don't draw, typically don't carry rifles. I can concede that aggressive posture would make a difference. When cops adapt an aggressive posture, they're most definitely escalating the situation. I still can't remember ever seeing a non-presidential sniper thing though. The uniformed types can hide behind qualified immunity, their departments can sometimes be protected by sovereign immunity, and they routinely investigate themselves. The so-called militia members don't get any of that from the state. Imagine how many people here would be losing their minds if the guy on the freeway just said that he was following procedures and that we would have to talk to his friends/companions after they're done investigating him to determine if he did anything wrong. Sure, that's true. Cops draw all the time and carry rifles all the time. Cops draw in situations and circumstances that would see the average person arrested for brandishing at a minimum and menacing or assault more likely. For the first sentence, I'm not going to agree. For the second, definitely true, depending on where you live. I also don't see anyone in the videos drawing handguns or carrying rifles at the ready (lots of slung rifles, few in both hands ready to fire) Hard to get past the sniper guy. Another thing is, we as a society pay the uniformed types to do this shiat, with a separate layer of responsibility and generally, broader powers. The point being that they are enforcement corps for society as a whole. That doesn't make them immune to corruption, doesn't make their actions of brutality suddenly "OK," but it does imply they are part of our social contract and their presence to some is comforting, to some annoying and to some frightening. But to just about everyone, they're pretty normal. The militarized riot cops are too much for all but the worst situations and that shiat is way the fark over the line. The excessive deployment of SWAT is also bullshiat. fark all that stuff. Now, take away the answerability, take away the protections of the courts, and arm up a bunch of yahoos. That is an escalation. That creates excess risk, and leads to felony action when they interfere with the lawful actions of federal officers, also that guy on the bridge is assaulting the crowd below with a rifle, brandishing and threatening a government agent while in the pursuit of their duties. The people who blocked off that bridge to keep access limited aided and abetted that felony. There's a picture of a bunch of nuts that are going to potentially (hopefully, as the schadenfreude would be wonderful) lose their weapons collection. So, there's that. Be funny if the sovereign citizen Bundy nabbed a felony and lost his guns too. His kid might; he assaulted a police officer. When the little shiatbag rammed the BLM truck, he did so with a weapon. That's a violent felony if charges are pressed. I imagine that they won't pursue charges, though. They'll extract their pounds of flesh from the Bundys and the event will fade into history without martyrs or heroes. The RWA movements will move on to whatever other commie bogeyman they find next. AurizenDarkstar: JC22: My view is if the guy is breaking the law, then put a lien on his stuff. But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese. And Reid needs to get his foot out of his mouth that was just in his @$$ and shut up about domestic terrorists because he has no idea what a domestic terrorist is. And lastly Mr Reid. If you are going to spout off about enforcing the law and some citizen can't do what he's doing then you need to enforce all laws, especially those that are here ILLEGALLY and also those in that certain government run tax agency called the IRS that owe billion in back taxes. Can't have it both ways jackass. Yup, you're right. It has nothing to do with a rancher flouting federal law and thumbing his nose at the BLM, it's all about some dirty, conniving, lowlife DEM (who we all know can't be trusted any further than we can throw them). In fact, we should throw Mr. Reid in prison for his comments (just to be safe) and strip him of his office while we're out it. Will that make you feel better, pumpkin? Ah..so a rancher thumbing his nose at questionable law here (which is still under scrutiny) requires 200 armed agents and snipers to come in? Now tell me again how something like this brings this type of response yet we don't even get this at the border with drug smugglers and illegals crossing all the time. Reid is as corrupt as they come. He's got a personal vendetta against this guy and there is obviously more going on here. And Reid can't sit there and whine about a guy not following the law, when they aren't even following the law. They are saying it's to protect the tortoise YET are killing them because there are too many. And they also have cut land deals for developers and they then move the tortoises off that land. Now how can you say you are protecting the habitat while removing them from it for development and protecting the species yet killing them because there are too many? pedrop357: Fart_Machine: pedrop357: Fart_Machine: pedrop357: Fart_Machine: pedrop357: dr_blasto: Aiding and abetting a felony has always been a felony in itself. In that case, many occupiers were aiding and abetting by "intimidating" the police when they tried to break up their little campouts in public and private parks. Trespassing is a misdemeanor. If you start pulling guns on cops who try and move you then you've just graduated it into a felony. Who pulled guns on cops? Weren't you saying you wanted the protesters to be armed? I do. But being armed and pulling guns on people are two different things. But you're OK with protestors pointing guns at people just to make sure things don't "get out of hand". I'm OK with average citizen snipers covering crowds the way the police do in case things get out of hand. If a non-police officer covering the crowd with a rifle is the equivalent of pointing guns at cops just doing their job, then every police sniper is doing the same thing to average citizens exercising their rights. To clarify, I'm in full support of parity and balance. If the police can set up snipers on every roof top to cover a protest, then I fully support the protestors setting up their own snipers to protect those protestors against abuse by the police as well as counter snipers. We've done the unarmed protestor thing in this country, literally to death for some people and if it takes people balancing the scales to make the police behave, I'm in favor of it. I'm especially in favor of it a scumbag outfit like the Albuquerque PD deploys numerous fully armed SWAT officers to peaceful protests against them killing people all the time. Pimparoo: However, the theory that Reid's putative involvement in the Bundy dispute was motivated by a desire to somehow profit from the building of a solar plant falls flat in the face of two basic facts: The site that ENN Mojave Energy was planning to buy in order to build a solar plant is nowhere near the public land Bundy has been disputing with the government, and ENN gave up the solar project and terminated its agreement to buy land to house it as far back as June 2013: Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/conspiracy/nevada.asp#T7RQI3w3hxtC6bu5 . 99 /In case anyone still buys the Harry Reid bogeyman theory Oh look..a liberal news site. Yah I'll buy that. Can you tell me why the information on it was removed suddenly from the BLM then? pedrop357: find it funny that so many people on the left are now obsessed with 'freeloading' and this guy's use of crap land far away from anything, but can't be too upset about it without being hypocritical because another group who (my guess, anyway) also knew nothing about it are using it as a rallying point against the feds. I believe you're just seeing people having fun throwing the right-wing bullshiat back at them as their rampant hypocrisy is fun and amusing to call out. The exact same thing happens when some nutball Republican is caught wearing diapers while banging prostitutes at night and espousing family values during the day. I'm a way left-wing person who doesn't care if you bang prostitutes and wear diapers or whatever. But I'll certainly be happy to use your own arguments against you. JC22: Disputes over fees normally result in a lien placed on your property, which gets satisfied when the property is sold or inherited. This military response is quite unusual...and if you don't think so, then you are really clueless. Reid has some vendetta or personal goal here and his buddy runs the BLM. In this case not really. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/04/15/everything -y ou-need-to-know-about-the-long-fight-between-cliven-bundy-and-the-fede ral-government/ The supporters have a history of bombing BLM offices and intimidating officials. It has nothing to do with Reid unless you're a conspiracy nut. JC22: Pimparoo: However, the theory that Reid's putative involvement in the Bundy dispute was motivated by a desire to somehow profit from the building of a solar plant falls flat in the face of two basic facts: The site that ENN Mojave Energy was planning to buy in order to build a solar plant is nowhere near the public land Bundy has been disputing with the government, and ENN gave up the solar project and terminated its agreement to buy land to house it as far back as June 2013: Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/conspiracy/nevada.asp#T7RQI3w3hxtC6bu5 . 99 /In case anyone still buys the Harry Reid bogeyman theory Oh look..a liberal news site. Yah I'll buy that. Can you tell me why the information on it was removed suddenly from the BLM then? Ah, so you're trolling. Go you. JC22: Ah..so a rancher thumbing his nose at questionable law here (which is still under scrutiny) requires 200 armed agents and snipers to come in? He already lost two court cases. The law isn't questionable; he's just a freeloader asshat. JC22: Pimparoo: However, the theory that Reid's putative involvement in the Bundy dispute was motivated by a desire to somehow profit from the building of a solar plant falls flat in the face of two basic facts: The site that ENN Mojave Energy was planning to buy in order to build a solar plant is nowhere near the public land Bundy has been disputing with the government, and ENN gave up the solar project and terminated its agreement to buy land to house it as far back as June 2013: Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/conspiracy/nevada.asp#T7RQI3w3hxtC6bu5 . 99 /In case anyone still buys the Harry Reid bogeyman theory Oh look..a liberal news site. Yah I'll buy that. Can you tell me why the information on it was removed suddenly from the BLM then? OK so you are a conspiracy nut. Nice knowing you. Nina_Hartley's_Ass: "I don't recognize the United States government as even existing." [images.dailykos.com image 550x367] Funny how his Passionate Defenders are desperately trying to extract some reason or philosophy from this idiot's actions. He just doesn't want to pay his bills. All there is to it. we really *are* living in different realities... dr_blasto: Hard to get past the sniper guy. Another thing is, we as a society pay the uniformed types to do this shiat, with a separate layer of responsibility and generally, broader powers. The point being that they are enforcement corps for society as a whole. That doesn't make them immune to corruption, doesn't make their actions of brutality suddenly "OK," but it does imply they are part of our social contract and their presence to some is comforting, to some annoying and to some frightening. But to just about everyone, they're pretty normal. The militarized riot cops are too much for all but the worst situations and that shiat is way the fark over the line. The excessive deployment of SWAT is also bullshiat. fark all that stuff. Agreed Now, take away the answerability, take away the protections of the courts, and arm up a bunch of yahoos. That is an escalation. That creates excess risk, and leads to felony action when they interfere with the lawful actions of federal officers, also that guy on the bridge is assaulting the crowd below with a rifle, brandishing and threatening a government agent while in the pursuit of their duties. The people who blocked off that bridge to keep access limited aided and abetted that felony. This is going to have be an agree to disagree thing. If anyone is operating without accountability or under reduced accountability, it would be the police. The fact that you and others are so upset and calling for felony charges for one guy pointing a rifle, some others with slung rifles, and others armed with handguns in holsters shows how different the standard is for average citizens. Be honest. You get a choice about which bar you want to go to. One bar has about 50% of these militia types in it armed, the other has about 50% cops (the other 50% is average people). Which bar do you really want to go into? Assume you have to pick one. Yes, it's a bit of a set up question. I will always choose the non-cop bar simply because I know that the courts will not automatically take the word of the other armed 'militia' guys if something (illegal) happens to me and they claim it was self defense. I also know that it will be another party (the police) investigating it and the chances of these guys getting away with it will be low. I can't say the same for a cop bar, especially if it's one full of cops from one department. I would also be very confident that these 'militia' guys wouldn't be operating under the mindset that they can get away with it the way I think the cops would. I don't see that guy as "assaulting" crowd anymore than the police do all the time. Violating people's civil rights is a crime and the snipers setting up over the crowd to take people out who might fight back against those abusive cops makes them aiders and abetters. To prove that the people blocking off the freeway were aiding and abetting that particular guy, you have to get him for something solid, THEN you have to prove that they did what they did for him. There's a picture of a bunch of nuts that are going to potentially (hopefully, as the schadenfreude would be wonderful) lose their weapons collection. If that happens, I will be back here expressing my support for them if they choose to use whatever means are necessary to stop that seizure. dr_blasto: pedrop357: find it funny that so many people on the left are now obsessed with 'freeloading' and this guy's use of crap land far away from anything, but can't be too upset about it without being hypocritical because another group who (my guess, anyway) also knew nothing about it are using it as a rallying point against the feds. I believe you're just seeing people having fun throwing the right-wing bullshiat back at them as their rampant hypocrisy is fun and amusing to call out. It's not immediately apparent if the people doing this are doing it just to show them how it feels or if they are serious in their seemingly inconsistent positions. Either way, I am indeed enjoying it. The exact same thing happens when some nutball Republican is caught wearing diapers while banging prostitutes at night and espousing family values during the day. I'm a way left-wing person who doesn't care if you bang prostitutes and wear diapers or whatever. But I'll certainly be happy to use your own arguments against you. So much this. I love watching the hypocrisy volleys, but always wish one side be the one to stop as it means we always have a side (assuming just two sides here) violating its principles to rub the others face in their own violation of their principles. pedrop357: Mrtraveler01: Just from Bundy: That hasn't happened - yet - and the rancher insists his cattle aren't going anywhere. He acknowledges that he keeps firearms at his ranch and has vowed to "do whatever it takes" to defend his animals from seizure. "I've got to protect my property," Bundy said as Arden steered several cattle inside an elongated pen. "If people come to monkey with what's mine, I'll call the county sheriff. If that don't work, I'll gather my friends and kids and we'll try to stop it. I abide by all state laws. But I abide by almost zero federal laws." http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2013/sep/23/lone-rancher-prepared-fi gh t-feds-land/ So one guy vowing to do what it takes. It might seem threatening, but seems to be right on the edge and isn't that different from the police making similar statements that could be taken as threatening. When one or two people from the occupy movement(s) were held out as representative of everyone there, we rightly got people here and in other forums saying that not every person felt the same way, that that one person's statements were their own, etc. and that many people here had different reasons for attending. Hell, some were there to complain about war, lack of this or that, etc. People here seem to be really quick to demand that all of the so-called militia members should be arrested for various felonies based on the statements of a slim few and actions of even fewer. So, you're arguing that Bundy somehow has the right to disregard federal laws, because he can? I mean, that's the end issue here, a rancher who has decided that he will not follow federal laws no matter what, even to the point of getting people with weapons to stand as proxies to 'defend' him from some belief that we are presently under a tyrannical government. Just because you may not like the laws doesn't give you a right to disregard them whenever you feel like it. No matter HOW much you disagree with the federal government. And by bringing in proxies to escalate the issue, all you are doing is setting up a possible violent clash that could easily be avoided. But I guess since it won't be Bundy himself getting shot, he doesn't give a damn if others are willing to (or are willing to get their wives, girlfriends and daughters shot, that is). dr_blasto: pedrop357: find it funny that so many people on the left are now obsessed with 'freeloading' and this guy's use of crap land far away from anything, but can't be too upset about it without being hypocritical because another group who (my guess, anyway) also knew nothing about it are using it as a rallying point against the feds. I believe you're just seeing people having fun throwing the right-wing bullshiat back at them as their rampant hypocrisy is fun and amusing to call out. And get this. I've been paying taxes for decades. If I lose my job, I can get the unemployment I've been paying for for decades. For this, Republican scum will call be a "freeloader." This asshole is an actual fuking freeloader, and he's the Republican's darling right now. Tribalist scum. JC22: Felgraf: JC22: My view is if the guy is breaking the law, then put a lien on his stuff. But to show up in that type of force is absolutely ridiculous and something else is going on and most likely it involves Reid and the solar farm from the Chinese. And Reid needs to get his foot out of his mouth that was just in his @$$and shut up about domestic terrorists because he has no idea what a domestic terrorist is. And lastly Mr Reid. If you are going to spout off about enforcing the law and some citizen can't do what he's doing then you need to enforce all laws, especially those that are here ILLEGALLY and also those in that certain government run tax agency called the IRS that owe billion in back taxes. Can't have it both ways jackass. Hey, how do you enforce a lien? Oh right. By confiscating property. Hey what do you do when the person whose property you're trying to confiscate threatens to shoot you? Disputes over fees normally result in a lien placed on your property, which gets satisfied when the property is sold or inherited. This military response is quite unusual...and if you don't think so, then you are really clueless. Reid has some vendetta or personal goal here and his buddy runs the BLM. The cattle weren't gathered up in order to collect on his unpaid grazing fees. The fact that he continued to break the law after two court orders that he either pay up or stop grazing on the land led to a third court order where the Federal government's position was: Thus, the United States seeks a third Order as follows: (1) declaring that Bundy has placed or allowed his livestock to graze on the Allotment in violation of the Court's Orders; (2)directing Bundy to remove his livestock from the Allotment within 45 days of the Court's Order; (3) explicitly authorizing the United States to seize and impound Bundy's livestock if they have not been removed as directed; (4) instructing Bundy that he may not physically interfere with an impoundment operation authorized by the Court's Order; and (5)authorizing the United States to seize and impound Bundy's livestock should he continue to violate the Court's Permanent Injunction in the future. In other words, he was supposed to have the cattle off the land within 45 days unless he's willing to have them seized and impounded. After nearly 6 months he still hadn't removed the cattle, so the BLM started seizing and imposing the cattle as directed. It's not rocket science. meat0918: Serious Black: You didn't destroy property and weren't arrested because BLM agents assumed (probably correctly) that you would try to murder them if they didn't de-escalate the situation. Last I checked, nobody in OWS waved guns in the faces of federal agents and dared them to play chicken. It would have been a totally different tone of coverage too. "Armed gunmen have taken over a protest and are now in a stand off with New York Police. FBI and DHS agents to assess and assist NYPD, meanwhile the National Guard has been deployed to staging areas around Wall Street, should the violence spill into the city at large." This should be repeated. Damn, this thread just keeps on giving! EJ25T: youmightberight: demaL-demaL-yeH: LandOfChocolate: sigdiamond2000: [img.fark.net image 652x365] He looks like he's questioning whether O'Reilly even lifts. You're on national TV, can't you at least put on a collared shirt? I didn't know that dress shirt collars came in size fireplug. As a reasonably fit guy with a size 17 1/2 neck I can assure you that anything over a 17 neck is cut more like a tent than a shirt. And woe unto you if you try to tuck the damn thing in. I love it when you have to pleat and fold your shirt around your waist just so it fits in your pants. 18" neck here... on a 5'6" frame with a 46" chest and a 31" sleeve. Buying a dress shirt usually comes down to, "How much does the damn thing cost after I add$18 for alterations?"

/Yeah, I'm built like a fireplug.
//GIS "Hack Wilson" for a good representation of my build
///I wish I could hit like Hack Wilson...

DeadPhelps: EJ25T: youmightberight: demaL-demaL-yeH: LandOfChocolate: sigdiamond2000: [img.fark.net image 652x365]

He looks like he's questioning whether O'Reilly even lifts.

You're on national TV, can't you at least put on a collared shirt?

I didn't know that dress shirt collars came in size fireplug.

As a reasonably fit guy with a size 17 1/2 neck I can assure you that anything over a 17 neck is cut more like a tent than a shirt.

And woe unto you if you try to tuck the damn thing in. I love it when you have to pleat and fold your shirt around your waist just so it fits in your pants.

18" neck here... on a 5'6" frame with a 46" chest and a 31" sleeve.

Buying a dress shirt usually comes down to, "How much does the damn thing cost after I add \$18 for alterations?"

/Yeah, I'm built like a fireplug.
//GIS "Hack Wilson" for a good representation of my build
///I wish I could hit like Hack Wilson...

I don't wanna know why GIS suggests I might also want images for the search "Hack Wilson Fetal Alcohol Syndrome."

Occupy was protesting succesful businessmen who control investing for the entire country, when Democratic policy caused a bump in the stock market. Scumbag liberals with all the corporate gadgets, iPhones, tunes, tampons, etc were crying that the stock market exists.

Bundy is protesting brown shirt activity and tyranny, theft and intimidation by a corrupt, and lawless government (both are literally proven true, but since the DOJ is corrupt, well, nothgin will be done).

Thunderpipes: Occupy was protesting succesful businessmen who control investing for the entire country, when Democratic policy caused a bump in the stock market. Scumbag liberals with all the corporate gadgets, iPhones, tunes, tampons, etc were crying that the stock market exists.

Bundy is protesting brown shirt activity and tyranny, theft and intimidation by a corrupt, and lawless government (both are literally proven true, but since the DOJ is corrupt, well, nothgin will be done).

You're a clearly a smart feller; I'm glad there are people like you with all the right answers.

pedrop357: dr_blasto: SO, basically, what I'm reading into this is that, personally, you do not see the brandishing of semi-automatic rifles en masse, taking up sniper positions and the like as a radical escalation of a situation and that you would not recognize the situation as having dramatically escalated were you, say, in the group on the ground at the end of sniper-douche's sights?

I mean, I can imagine that possible, but that strikes me as completely foreign.

If that counts as escalation, then every police presence ever is also considered to be radical escalation.

At various public events where the police set up snipers, I or others in that group have undoubtedly been in their sights.

At least if the ONE guy we saw setting up a sniper position were to shoot someone, there would be a thorough investigation by the DA and police.  The other members of his group (assuming he's in a group) wouldn't get to investigate him the way the police investigate themselves.

Ah, I see the problem here. Most of us have never been to an event where the police thought they might have to have snipers. Furthermore, any of us who have likely never found themselves in the sniper's crosshairs.

The fact that you have speaks *volumes*.

Gecko Gingrich: pedrop357: dr_blasto: SO, basically, what I'm reading into this is that, personally, you do not see the brandishing of semi-automatic rifles en masse, taking up sniper positions and the like as a radical escalation of a situation and that you would not recognize the situation as having dramatically escalated were you, say, in the group on the ground at the end of sniper-douche's sights?

I mean, I can imagine that possible, but that strikes me as completely foreign.

If that counts as escalation, then every police presence ever is also considered to be radical escalation.

At various public events where the police set up snipers, I or others in that group have undoubtedly been in their sights.

At least if the ONE guy we saw setting up a sniper position were to shoot someone, there would be a thorough investigation by the DA and police.  The other members of his group (assuming he's in a group) wouldn't get to investigate him the way the police investigate themselves.

Ah, I see the problem here. Most of us have never been to an event where the police thought they might have to have snipers. Furthermore, any of us who have likely never found themselves in the sniper's crosshairs.

The fact that you have speaks *volumes*.

That's a thing. As I mentioned, I've only ever seen government snipers in the US one time, that was a presidential address that took place outdoors.

I am not aware of ever having seen a sniper or, even, up-armored cops at regular events. I have seen the up-armored cops at protests, almost always in an aggressive posture and they were only ever at left-themed protests. Cops seem to treat the right-wing protests with more general respect.

dr_blasto: Thunderpipes: Occupy was protesting succesful businessmen who control investing for the entire country, when Democratic policy caused a bump in the stock market. Scumbag liberals with all the corporate gadgets, iPhones, tunes, tampons, etc were crying that the stock market exists.

Bundy is protesting brown shirt activity and tyranny, theft and intimidation by a corrupt, and lawless government (both are literally proven true, but since the DOJ is corrupt, well, nothgin will be done).

You're a clearly a smart feller; I'm glad there are people like you with all the right answers.

The Bundy ranch is protesting the power of the federal government.  OWS was protesting the power of private industry and upset that the Federal government wasn't taking more from the rich to give to the poor.

Seems pretty polar opposite to me.

Thunderpipes: Bundy is protesting brown shirt activity and tyranny, theft and intimidation by a corrupt, and lawless government (both are literally proven true, but since the DOJ is corrupt, well, nothgin will be done).

So lawless that they won 2 court cases in their favor.  Wait... what?

dr_blasto: That's a thing. As I mentioned, I've only ever seen government snipers in the US one time, that was a presidential address that took place outdoors.

I am not aware of ever having seen a sniper or, even, up-armored cops at regular events. I have seen the up-armored cops at protests, almost always in an aggressive posture and they were only ever at left-themed protests. Cops seem to treat the right-wing protests with more general respect.

I really don't want to post anything to make it look like I'm on Pedro's side but.

TNel: dr_blasto: That's a thing. As I mentioned, I've only ever seen government snipers in the US one time, that was a presidential address that took place outdoors.

I am not aware of ever having seen a sniper or, even, up-armored cops at regular events. I have seen the up-armored cops at protests, almost always in an aggressive posture and they were only ever at left-themed protests. Cops seem to treat the right-wing protests with more general respect.

I really don't want to post anything to make it look like I'm on Pedro's side but.

[www.theblaze.com image 456x403]

Well, there's an actual instance. So there's that. Cops shouldn't think this is OK.

I'd hardly call that normal or regular. Neither a DM position nor the Super Bowl.

Isitoveryet: Hey Libtards,

I bet you're all asking yourselves "why is it that the militia member looks so much more American and patriotic than i could ever look?".

because he is.

/check & crown me

\visual representation of above message

Gecko Gingrich: pedrop357: dr_blasto: SO, basically, what I'm reading into this is that, personally, you do not see the brandishing of semi-automatic rifles en masse, taking up sniper positions and the like as a radical escalation of a situation and that you would not recognize the situation as having dramatically escalated were you, say, in the group on the ground at the end of sniper-douche's sights?

I mean, I can imagine that possible, but that strikes me as completely foreign.

If that counts as escalation, then every police presence ever is also considered to be radical escalation.

At various public events where the police set up snipers, I or others in that group have undoubtedly been in their sights.

At least if the ONE guy we saw setting up a sniper position were to shoot someone, there would be a thorough investigation by the DA and police.  The other members of his group (assuming he's in a group) wouldn't get to investigate him the way the police investigate themselves.

Ah, I see the problem here. Most of us have never been to an event where the police thought they might have to have snipers. Furthermore, any of us who have likely never found themselves in the sniper's crosshairs.

The fact that you have speaks *volumes*.

I know, going to Las Vegas Strip on New Years really speaks volumes about me.

Thunderpipes: Occupy was protesting succesful businessmen who control investing for the entire country

This is what Republicans actually believe!

pedrop357: I know, going to Las Vegas Strip on New Years really speaks volumes about me.

And what were you doing to end up in their cross-hairs?

GoldSpider: What's there to prove or disprove? He said what he said. He's voiced a personal opinion, using (in my opinion) emotionally charged rhetoric that adds zero substance to the discussion of how incidents like the Bundy ranchers should be handled in the future.

Reid properly defined what those protesters are, what their thinking really is that they cannot admit in public, and how society should treat them. The truth obviously hurt, since right wing lunatics like you have been on the defensive 24/7 since the story broke.

pedrop357: Police snipers regularly have their guns pointed at people without any cause and while I find that offensive, I don't see tons of people claiming that the police are "pointing their guns in the faces of American citizens".

Your first mistake is comparing what the police do and thinking an untrained self described militia member can do exactly the same thing.

"But officer I caught someone speeding so I chased them and tried to pull them over, you do the same thing!"

Bob Robert: GoldSpider: What's there to prove or disprove? He said what he said. He's voiced a personal opinion, using (in my opinion) emotionally charged rhetoric that adds zero substance to the discussion of how incidents like the Bundy ranchers should be handled in the future.

Reid properly defined what those protesters are, what their thinking really is that they cannot admit in public, and how society should treat them. The truth obviously hurt, since right wing lunatics like you have been on the defensive 24/7 since the story broke.

So let me get this straight, if I don't take the extreme view of this and call them "terrorists", then I am supporting them? You know who else said "if you are not with us, you're against us"?

Thunderpipes: Occupy was protesting succesful businessmen who control investing for the entire country, when Democratic policy caused a bump in the stock market. Scumbag liberals with all the corporate gadgets, iPhones, tunes, tampons, etc were crying that the stock market exists.

Bundy is protesting brown shirt activity and tyranny, theft and intimidation by a corrupt, and lawless government (both are literally proven true, but since the DOJ is corrupt, well, nothgin will be done).

So successful these businessmen needed bailouts from the government to keep their banks afloat.

Gecko Gingrich: pedrop357: I know, going to Las Vegas Strip on New Years really speaks volumes about me.

And what were you doing to end up in their cross-hairs?

I don't know if I was in them, but different parts of the crowd certainly were.

Who exactly was in the crosshairs of the guy on the freeway?

pedrop357: I don't know if I was in them, but different parts of the crowd certainly were.

And what were they doing to end up in the cross-hairs?

pedrop357: Who exactly was in the crosshairs of the guy on the freeway?

Federal agents carrying out a lawful order.

Gecko Gingrich: pedrop357: I don't know if I was in them, but different parts of the crowd certainly were.

And what were they doing to end up in the cross-hairs?

They were present.

pedrop357: Who exactly was in the crosshairs of the guy on the freeway?

Federal agents carrying out a lawful order.

So, it's not that different from the police pointing guns at law abiding people at events like the Super Bowl, NASCAR, marathons, parades, rallies.

pedrop357: Gecko Gingrich: pedrop357: I don't know if I was in them, but different parts of the crowd certainly were.

And what were they doing to end up in the cross-hairs?

They were present.

pedrop357: Who exactly was in the crosshairs of the guy on the freeway?

Federal agents carrying out a lawful order.

So, it's not that different from the police pointing guns at law abiding people at events like the Super Bowl, NASCAR, marathons, parades, rallies.

I'm happy to go back and forth with on this you until the thread expires, but it doesn't matter how many times you stamp your feet and indulge your paranoia, you're still going to be wrong in equating a police officer with a gun nut.

Gecko Gingrich: pedrop357: Gecko Gingrich: pedrop357: I don't know if I was in them, but different parts of the crowd certainly were.

And what were they doing to end up in the cross-hairs?

They were present.

pedrop357: Who exactly was in the crosshairs of the guy on the freeway?

Federal agents carrying out a lawful order.

So, it's not that different from the police pointing guns at law abiding people at events like the Super Bowl, NASCAR, marathons, parades, rallies.

I'm happy to go back and forth with on this you until the thread expires, but it doesn't matter how many times you stamp your feet and indulge your paranoia, you're still going to be wrong in equating a police officer with a gun nut.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/21/police-chief-shoots-himself -a gain_n_4638731.html

Why not both?

GoldSpider: So let me get this straight, if I don't take the extreme view of this and call them "terrorists", then I am supporting them? You know who else said "if you are not with us, you're against us"?

Why is it an extreme view to explain what the word domestic terrorist means, and then show why you are properly applying it to a group? What is this with us or against us bit about? Do you not believe in the English language?

pedrop357: So, it's not that different from the police pointing guns at law abiding people at events like the Super Bowl, NASCAR, marathons, parades, rallies.

Except for the fact that, you know, they are the POLICE and you are not.

Gecko Gingrich: pedrop357: I don't know if I was in them, but different parts of the crowd certainly were.

And what were they doing to end up in the cross-hairs?

pedrop357: Who exactly was in the crosshairs of the guy on the freeway?

Federal agents carrying out a lawful order.

You know who else thought they were carrying out lawful orders?

Deep Contact: You know who else thought they were carrying out lawful orders?

The federal agents at Waco and Ruby Ridge.

Grognard: Canton: iheartscotch: To be fair. His cow have probably done more for the US than the entirety of the Occupy movement.

/ what's the difference between a cow and a hippy? Cows actually have a purpose.

And the cows might actually fight back.

Cows with guns?

That is beautiful. And somehow, I'm not questioning the cows using guns and pondering the gender status of the cow guru. Male in the song, has udders in the animation. Freemartin cow revolutionary is my best guess...

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

In Other Media
1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.