It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Mamatus
Found this from Cenk Uygur (Young Turks) on Live Leak this morning. Maybe I am late posting it. Did a quick search of Bundy Ranch and it did not come up. This was a response to the Storm Clouds Gathering conspiracy video recently posted on YouTube and linked here.
Not sure how to embed Live Leak videos here to I will just drop a link. If someone will tell me how to embed it that would be great.
www.liveleak.com...
Now my take on this:
First, I think Cenk to be a pretty upstanding dude when it comes to investigative reporting. Like any other media outlet it is always good to double check the facts being tosses out. So I did and I could find nothing ambiguous or misleading in his facts.
Second, I have said from the beginning that Bundy had no claim to the land. The entire situation is kind of like having someone let your family live in an extra house they had rent free for 100 years. Then the owner of that house coming back to you and saying that they were happy to loan you the house but times have changed and they would like you to start paying rent to continue to live in that house. Now, instead of gratitude for the last 100 years of rent free living the people that have lived in that house, your entire family and many others, pull out guns and forcibly attempt to steal the house.
IMO Bundy is not a good American, he is a trouble making ingrate. It is sad how many people will blindly follow along with him.
Keep in mind I am no fan of BLM as I got screwed over by them pretty hard myself, to the tune of 80k. I am still trying to recover and had I the extra cash I would have eventually won in Court as a local rancher conspired with BLM to remove my legally (and permitted) business from the area. I unlike Bundy did get screwed over. However, the facts remain the same in this case. Bundy has no rights to that land and never did.edit on 16-4-2014 by Mamatus because: Gwammer and speeeeling
They don't serve the public, they don't ask the public how it is that they should manage the lands or what is in the best interests of the public that rightfully owns this property.
deadeyedick
Seems clear to me that this boils down to the question of do you recognize the federal gov or the state gov. The fact is that the majority of gun owning americans will back states over the fed. Bundy is the last in a long line of changes that have come right or wrong by the feds. Those that didn't stand up before will gladly stand behind him now. No court decision will win is this matter regardless of legality. Americans have a bad taste in their mouths from being shat on over and over and in their minds it is simple. Man and cattle on ranch. gov try to remove man and cattle. ok i will gladly die for that. All talking points aside it is that simple to most who have lost their way of life. You can spin it into racism.poverty, sexuality whatever direction you choose but in the simple minds it is us vs them and us is tired of them. us will win or die trying while putting women and children first. We absolutely do not want to see what happens after the first shots are fired.
Olivine
reply to post by intrptr
He has been to court, at least 3 times. Losing each time. If he really has some legal right to access the land, don't you think there is as at least one lawyer willing to take up his cause, considering all the vocal support he has gotten in the past week?
Bundy wiki
As far as I can tell, this fellow really likes to have his opinion heard about States' sovereignty, and he enjoys free, profitable grazing at the expense of the environment and taxpayers.
For example, a year ago, he testified before the Nevada Assembly Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections, regarding AB227. That bill is to set up a committee to study the nuts & bolts of how & at what cost any federal lands given to the state of Nevada might be administered--a contigency wish list. The committee is to have 17 members, one from each county, since they are familiar with the federal lands and associated needs/wants/issues of the local residents.
Mr. Bundy's testimony, found in the Minutes of that meeting:
Cliven Bundy, Private Citizen, Bunkerville, Nevada:
I would like to give my condolences to Mr. Dahl. I stand here as a rancher
in southern Nevada. I am somewhat well known as the last man standing.
I must say that I am glad to see you people stand for state sovereignty today.
I do not support nor oppose this bill. Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 321.596
states, "The State of Nevada has a strong moral claim upon the public
land retained by the Federal Government within Nevada’s borders."
Let us strengthen that bill and go on and claim this land and our sovereignty.
Why would he not support this bill? Why go to the trouble of testifying if you don't have an opinion on the matter at hand?
My opinion, he likes the sound of his own voice.
Granite
reply to post by Mamatus
Facts:
1. In 1870's, Bundy homestead on open high desert with Virgin river frontage.
2. In 1910, state of Nevada formed...Bundy deed their land to the state in return for services (Sheriff protection from "wild west" types). He pays taxes, grazing fees to Nevada.
Don't be re-writing history...especially American history.
Kali74
reply to post by seeker1963
Try watching it again with your points in mind.
ScientiaFortisDefendit
Regardless of what the socialist mouthpiece Cenk Uygur says, the ownership of the land is a red herring. The issue that people have is with the massive armed response by the federal government to COWS MUNCHING GRASS.
By the way, CU debunked nothing.edit on 16-4-2014 by ScientiaFortisDefendit because: (no reason given)
ScientiaFortisDefendit
Regardless of what the socialist mouthpiece Cenk Uygur says, the ownership of the land is a red herring. The issue that people have is with the massive armed response by the federal government to COWS MUNCHING GRASS.
By the way, CU debunked nothing.edit on 16-4-2014 by ScientiaFortisDefendit because: (no reason given)
buster2010
Granite
reply to post by Mamatus
Facts:
1. In 1870's, Bundy homestead on open high desert with Virgin river frontage.
2. In 1910, state of Nevada formed...Bundy deed their land to the state in return for services (Sheriff protection from "wild west" types). He pays taxes, grazing fees to Nevada.
Don't be re-writing history...especially American history.
You left out a few facts.
3. In the 1990's Bundy stopped paying grazing fees and lied about how many cows he had on the land so the BLM ordered him off the land.
4. In 2012 Bundy contacted the local Sherriff saying that the BLM was stealing his cattle he was then informed it is Federal land the can do what they want with it.
5. Bundy's arguments has already been rejected by two appeals courts.
If you want to start stating fact don't pick and choose from all facts.
Mamatus
ScientiaFortisDefendit
Regardless of what the socialist mouthpiece Cenk Uygur says, the ownership of the land is a red herring. The issue that people have is with the massive armed response by the federal government to COWS MUNCHING GRASS.
By the way, CU debunked nothing.edit on 16-4-2014 by ScientiaFortisDefendit because: (no reason given)
How many Bundy fans are going to take the time to help out any number of over-reactions by Law Enforcement? Do you see the Oathkeepers running off to fight the Albuquerque PD? Or how about running off to stand up for the citizens rights after the Boston bombing?
Defending the Bundys in this case is fighting the wrong fight.
So when are you going to give your house and land back to the American Indians?edit on 16-4-2014 by Mamatus because: added content.
Mamatus
ScientiaFortisDefendit
Regardless of what the socialist mouthpiece Cenk Uygur says, the ownership of the land is a red herring. The issue that people have is with the massive armed response by the federal government to COWS MUNCHING GRASS.
By the way, CU debunked nothing.edit on 16-4-2014 by ScientiaFortisDefendit because: (no reason given)
So when are you going to give your house and land back to the American Indians?
Its like their revolution fantasy come to life, sadly, if a shot was fire at the agents, all of them would be dead. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...
Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by Mamatus
(like every other rancher does).
Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by Mamatus
I looked into this situation the first day it came up and came to the same conclusions you did. I just didn't see the point of posting here when the vast majority of people have their minds made up that Bundy is some kind of hero. He's sucking off the federal teat and not paying for it (like every other rancher does). Hmmm... I thought most of his supporters would be upset about that, but they seem to support him 100%.
U.S. v. Hage
The ranchers are alleged to have repeatedly grazed livestock without federal permits despite repeated trespass notices from the BLM and the Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service.[18] The court found in favor of the ranchers for all other charges, including water rights, grazing rights and all but two livestock trespass charges in United States v. Wayne Hage (2013). In the ruling,
the judge said, "government officials ... entered into a literal, intentional conspiracy to deprive the Hages not only of their permits but also of their vested water rights. This behavior shocks the conscience of the Court and provides a sufficient basis for a finding of irreparable harm to support the injunction described at the end of this Order."