Oregon protest leader Ammon Bundy is arrested, says source

originally posted by: Phage

originally posted by: GeisterFahrer

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: GeisterFahrer

And there you go, leaving out the part where they are acting as Federal Troops.

No. They aren't.

They have no Congressional Authority to act in that capacity

False.

Yes, they are.

You contradicted yourself.

They are not military.
They have authority to make arrests.

§3052. Powers of Federal Bureau of Investigation

The Director, Associate Director, Assistant to the Director, Assistant Directors, inspectors, and agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the Department of Justice may carry firearms, serve warrants and subpoenas issued under the authority of the United States and make arrests without warrant for any offense against the United States committed in their presence, or for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States if they have reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing such felony.

When they were initially established (which was what I had said) they did not have arrest powers.

They were established in 1908 under the Roosevelt Administration.

Today, most Americans take for granted that our country needs a federal investigative service, but in 1908, the establishment of this kind of agency at a national level was highly controversial. The U.S. Constitution is based on "federalism:" a national government with jurisdiction over matters that crossed boundaries, like interstate commerce and foreign affairs, with all other powers reserved to the states. Through the 1800s, Americans usually looked to cities, counties, and states to fulfill most government responsibilities.

www.fbi.gov...

Are you having to resort to taking things out of context now?

How is it that an agency established with no arrest powers, suddenly has the capability of Federal Troops and can now violate the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878?

a reply to: GeisterFahrer

Are you saying they should 'comply or die?'

No. I'm saying that they should accept responsibility for their actions.

They won't die. They'll get uncomfortable then go to prison.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Well, since you asked, it's not so much that I think I'm clever but that I'm noting a specific lack of cleverness in your posts.

As well as an absence of anything resembling facts, evidence, meaningful connections to the topic, etc.

Keep congratulating yourself, and have a good evening!

a reply to: GeisterFahrer

When they were initially established (which was what I had said) they did not have arrest powers.

No. You didn't say that. You said they do not have congressional authority.

How is it that an agency established with no arrest powers, suddenly has the capability of Federal Troops and can now violate the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878?

They are not federal troops.
They do not violate the act of 1878 (they are not the Army).
Section 3052 became law in 1948.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: GeisterFahrer

Are you saying they should 'comply or die?'

No. I'm saying that they should accept responsibility for their actions.

They won't die. They'll get uncomfortable then go to prison.

The murderers should be the ones in prison. they were the ones that committed a violent crime.

Bah.

a reply to: GeisterFahrer

The murderers should be the ones in prison. they were the ones that committed a violent crime.

No, they didn't. They apprehended people suspected of criminal activity.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Well, since you asked, it's not so much that I think I'm clever but that I'm noting a specific lack of cleverness in your posts.

As well as an absence of anything resembling facts, evidence, meaningful connections to the topic, etc.

Keep congratulating yourself, and have a good evening!

Pffft so you accuse me of an ad hominem and then throw one at me...ok

Sadly your comprehension is lacking so...pat yourself on the back, kiss your muscles in the mirror and...

You have a good evening too

a reply to: GeisterFahrer

man these guys were just as patriotic as tax evaders. you have to recognise when phage is toying with you, i mean the discussion is now officially over, all the issues and points have been deconstructed into oblivion. the evidence is clear and their agenda has been fully debunked. when nazi germany gets brought into the discussion, its over.

An interesting part to all this is that there are 16000 ranchers that use Federal land and pay grazing taxes, out of those 16000 about 1000 are behind in their taxes. Of the 1000 90% are less than 60 days, so this means about 100 ranchers are over 60 days not paid. This puts the bundys in a very small group of the actual people who are physically a part of what he represents.

I say this because if there was big issues and not some guy who owes over a million in back taxes covering decades then we would have a large number of people supporting him, but we don't. I admit that I truly do not understand everything about the situation, but I do look at numbers and the numbers do not suggest an out of control federal land grab, or over control.

The question is why today are ranchers/militia doing this and a quick post from a true Oregon rancher says it all.

This week, the Ammon Bundy-led seizure of a federal wildlife refuge thrust Oregon’s ranchers into the spotlight. While I don’t agree with the occupiers’ tactics, I sympathize with their position. Being a rancher was always challenging. And it has become increasingly difficult under the Obama administration.

What seemed to work in the past is not working today so where do we look.... I see ranchers who are feeling the pain of 8 years under Obama that another 50% or more of America is feeling, and so I would say get in line...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: GeisterFahrer

When they were initially established (which was what I had said) they did not have arrest powers.

No. You didn't say that. You said they do not have congressional authority.

How is it that an agency established with no arrest powers, suddenly has the capability of Federal Troops and can now violate the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878?

They are not federal troops.
They do not violate the act of 1878 (they are not the Army).
Section 3052 became law in 1948.

What I actually said, was they do not have Congressional Authority to "act as federal troops".

But you knew that. You are just attempting to trip me up.

That USC you cited regarding arrest powers of the FBI was published in 1948. The FBI was established in 1908. the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 is still the law - that law has not changed. The role of the FBI from being investigators, to Federal Troops is what has changed, to fill that void in order to break the law.


Now, that FBI officers have not only set up an ambush as federal troops would do, and employed federal military strategies, as federal troops would do, and executed a US Citizen on the side of the road as he was surrendering, it is clear who was violating the law.

they should be given a fair trial.


edited: I see you edited your post when you realized you couldn't trip me up. No, the FBI is NOT the Army .. lol .. we both know that. But they have all of the Army's "toys" and they are playing with those toys while policing civilians. That is what the Posse Comitatus Act specifically prohibits.

a reply to: GeisterFahrer

What I actually said, was they do not have Congressional Authority to "act as federal troops".

Well, I agree on that. They don't. But they do have law enforcement authority, which you denied.

That USC you cited regarding arrest powers of the FBI was published in 1948. The FBI was established in 1908.

So what?

The role of the FBI from being investigators, to Federal Troops is what has changed, to fill that void in order to break the law.

That makes no sense. If the intent was to break the law, why not just send in the Army?

The FBI is a law enforcement agency under the Department of Justice. They are not under the Department of Defense.

Criminy.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: GeisterFahrer

What I actually said, was they do not have Congressional Authority to "act as federal troops".

Well, I agree on that. They don't. But they do have law enforcement authority, which you denied.

That USC you cited regarding arrest powers of the FBI was published in 1948. The FBI was established in 1908.

So what?

The role of the FBI from being investigators, to Federal Troops is what has changed, to fill that void in order to break the law.

That makes no sense. If the intent was to break the law, why not just send in the Army?

The FBI is a law enforcement agency under the Department of Justice. They are not under the Department of Defense.

Criminy.

Their acting role as federal troops makes no sense to you?

Where the heck have you been? You can't see the forests for the trees?

en.wikipedia.org...

Since when did the Federal government nullify the Posse Comitatus Act by allowing military to police civilians? More importantly, don't you think a murderer should go to jail?

Where is your head?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: GeisterFahrer

The murderers should be the ones in prison. they were the ones that committed a violent crime.

No, they didn't. They apprehended people suspected of criminal activity.

yeah, and they executed one of them while he was attempting to surrender.

That is called "murder' to those of us who are sane.

originally posted by: vjr1113
a reply to: GeisterFahrer

man these guys were just as patriotic as tax evaders. you have to recognise when phage is toying with you, i mean the discussion is now officially over, all the issues and points have been deconstructed into oblivion. the evidence is clear and their agenda has been fully debunked. when nazi germany gets brought into the discussion, its over.

The discussion for you was over a long time ago. Have you ever heard of "Manifest Destiny"?

What would that term have to do with a bunch of cowboys taking over a wildlife refuge? What would that term have to do with the Nazi ideology of "lebensraum"? Go ahead and invoke Godwin's law and tell yourself how smart you are.

The rest of you may actually learn something here.

German geographer Friedrich Ratzel visited North America beginning in 1873[84] and saw the effects of American manifest destiny.[85] Ratzel sympathized with the results of "manifest destiny", but he never used the term. Instead he relied on the Frontier Thesis of Frederick Jackson Turner.[86] Ratzel promoted overseas colonies for Germany in Asia and Africa, but not an expansion into Slavic lands.[87] Later German publicists misinterpreted Ratzel to argue for the right of the German race to expand within Europe; that notion was later incorporated into Nazi ideology, as Lebensraum.[85] Harriet Wanklyn (1961) argues that Ratzel's theory was designed to advance science, and that politicians distorted it for political goals.[88]

en.wikipedia.org...

Lebensraum was a term specifically used By Adolf Hitler in his national policies.

dictionary.reference.com...

additional territory considered by a nation, especially Nazi Germany, to be necessary for national survival or for the expansion of trade. 2. any additional space needed in order to act, function, etc. Origin of Lebensraum Expand.

Lebensraum, under the Nazi context of that word, was the government forced takeover of other people's property.

Now tell me how that is any different than what is happening right now. How is it any different than what the Federal Government has done in the past when they forcibly removed Native Americans from their land?

Why would a handful of ranchers have a problem with an overbearing, intrusive and heavy handed federal government?

I guess an overbearing, intrusive and heavy handed government would have a problem with them pointing out the corruption - they would probably even ambush the most vocal member of the group and execute him on the side of the road.

Turns out these arrested felons are due to be defended on the People's dime!

Huffington Post

I'm sure they will refuse to take yet ANOTHER FEDERAL HANDOUT, right? Since the Federal Government is illegitimate?

Except for rich cattleman Bundy of course, who's begging for money online and has raised a whole $2000 bucks.

These buffoons are utterly pathetic.

a reply to: Gryphon66

I still disagree with you on a lot of points but your right about that... Kinda pathetic.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: Gryphon66

I still disagree with you on a lot of points but your right about that... Kinda pathetic.

Yeah, this pretty much throws the legitimacy of their whole argument out the window.

a reply to: Gryphon66

I think your too focused on their faults.

Try focusing on the real problem which is the BLM. I'm more afraid of them then I am a couple Bundy boys. They are far more powerful.