Oregon protest leader Ammon Bundy is arrested, says source

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
...'Two wrongs don't make a right'...

But three lefts do.

No, three lefts make one short of a full circle.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I see what you did there. Very apropos.

a reply to: diggindirt

Got it. So go grab your rifle, holster your pistol...and head out for Burns, Oregon! They need YOU!

For cripes sakes...what are you waiting for???? LOCK & LOAD, BAYBEE!!

(why are you sitting here banging away on some interwebz forum?????)

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

You caught that 'going round in circles' reference, did ya?

Before I depart this conversation, I am leaving this link to the salient facts regarding "the Constitution" that the Bundites serve: That Constitution The Bundy Terrorists Tote Around Is A Perverted Version Of The Real Thing (VIDEO)

It’s a convenient version for the right-wing terrorist; it retains the original spelling and punctuation from the 18th century, leaving it completely intact and just the way they like it. Read between the lines, however, and you’ll find the thoughts and analysis of a man who once called President Eisenhower a Soviet agent. His name is W. Cleon Skousen, once referred to by TIME Magazine as “an exemplar of the right-wing ultras.”

That's right ... that copy of "the Constitution" is not the actual Constitution, but a shredded to ribbons version interspaced with the irrational musings of Cleon Skousen. (Notably, any Amendments after 10 are not included)

The pamphlet, available for 35 cents, has zero respect in the educated world. Scholars have repudiated its teachings for decades and its author ended up dying in obscurity without ever achieving his goal of convincing people who government was of the people, by the people, and for God.

Ammon Bundy, who has been photographed both at the current occupation and at the Bundy “ranch” incident in 2014, had the principles of the Skousen Constitution ingrained in him by his father, Cliven Bundy, who told the LA Times:

“It’s something I’ve always shared with everybody and I carry it with me all the time. That’s where I get most of my information from. What we’re trying to do is teach the true principles of the proper form of government.”

The "true principles of the proper form of government" ...that tells these people they have the right to do whatever their conscience informed by the Mormon God tells them to do (yes, Ammon Bundy claims that Heavenly Father told him to seize a bird sanctuary) while ignoring anything in the actual Constitution they don't favor and taking the words of a religious fundamentalist to be equal to the scraps of the Constitution that they do bother to include.

It’s absolutely amazing that so many people have decided to be influenced by one discredited man’s interpretation of a document that is over 200 years old. While this is America and everyone is entitled to their opinion, Article 3 Section 2 pretty clearly reserves the right to decide matters of law and equity arising under the Constitution to the Supreme Court, who typically (though not always) rely on a couple of centuries of precedent, not the opinion of one asshole, to make their decisions. They sit in a really big building in Washington DC that is most definitely owned by the federal government.

The bottom line is, these people have been seriously misguided by a strange and lonely man whose views have been circulated among extremists and laughed at by scholars since the 1960s

Enjoy all. Gryph out.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Can you point out exactly what was said that's inaccurate with quotes and a video?

Just to be clear.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: Gryphon66

Can you point out exactly what was said that's inaccurate with quotes and a video?

Just to be clear.

Regarding my last post? Sure.

Here's the page where the so-called, distinctive "Pocket Constitution" as described in my first article linked above can be ordered from the National Center for Constitutional Studies (the organization that publishes Cleon Skousen's other books) Pocket Constitution . One can clearly see from the various photographs that it is the version being held up by members of the Bundy gang, and is often seen in the hands of the Bundy's themselves.

Here's an article with a clear photo of Jon Ritzheimer holding up this pamphlet from the LA Times; Oregon Armed Protesters invoke the Constitution -- Annotated by a Conspiracy Theorist

Here's a scholarly article published in the Denver University Law Review by Jared A. Goldstein of Brown University The Tea Party's Constitution. This is the best resource for understanding the background of Skousen himself, his ridiculous theories about the Constitution which these folks recapitiulate, etc.

Here's an article (unrelated to anything about the Bundy's or Oregon just for comparison) from Florida about this same twisted version of the Constitution being inflicted on school kids in Florida: Pocket Constitution Carries Religious Messages to Students

I can't link to the text of the pamphlet itself because that's the intellectual property of the NCCS.

Does that answer your need? I don't have any "videos" to link, sorry.

Actually, In my prior post linking the article from Addicting Info ... I made several statements that were exaggerating the facts and I need to rectify:

I was actually able to view a physical copy of the pamphlet this afternoon ... rather than going on what others had stated about it online.

The "Pocket Constitution" offers a word for word (complete with archaic spelling) reprinting of the Constitution. It actually does include Amendments 11-27. I implied differently in my original comment regarding this document and I was mistaken.

So, facts are important, and I was mistaken on that statement. However, I stand by the remainder of my statements including:

1. The video released by the FBI clearly demonstrates that the felonious Lavoy Finicum resisted arrest, evaded capture and assaulted law enforcement officials with a deadly weapon.

2. Various videos (not linked by me but by others and easily available on the internet) of actual comments by the Bundys, Finicum, Ritzheimer, et. al. demonstrate clearly the comments I referred to as "spitting on the Constitution" to wit as they admit (Ammon and Cliven) readily, both have been heavily influenced by the racist and extremist philosophies of Cleon Skousen (who annotated the "Pocket Constitution") ... and stating that they are not subject to Federal laws, that the Federal government has no jurisdiction in Nevada (or Oregon), that the Mormon God (i.e. Heavenly Father) has instructed both Cliven and Ammon to take the "message" to the people that they should rebel against the government, attempt to disarm Federal agents, that they would create a bloodbath should any Federal agents try to remove them from their illegal occupation, that they harassed and threatened various employees of the Interior Department, as well as other citizens of Oregon.

... and that's all I have to say about that.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: diggindirt

Got it. So go grab your rifle, holster your pistol...and head out for Burns, Oregon! They need YOU!

For cripes sakes...what are you waiting for???? LOCK & LOAD, BAYBEE!!

(why are you sitting here banging away on some interwebz forum?????)

Why are you here banging away on some interwebz forum?

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk
I've said from the beginning I don't agree with their method but I support their right to protest peacefully. I'm simply tired of the demonetization by msm and the feds. They are not vandalizing property. They are not burning building or cars or shooting at anyone. They are an example of peaceful protest, unlike the protests we've observed in cities. They were peaceful because they put themselves in a position to carefully vet those joining them, to keep the violent provocateurs out, to be in a spot where actual negotiation would have been possible had the government wanted to actually follow the law and address their requests for redress of their grievances as outlined in the First Amendment.

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

source: www.archives.gov... In case someone is trying to say that I'm using some "different" Constitution, please note that the source is "archives.gov", not from my imagination.

Please tell me if you will, how a bunch of idiots advocating "spitting on the Constitution, stomping on the Constitution" and all the other silly charges, could draw crowds like they've done in such small populations. If the people weren't being abused, would 300 of them shown up in a county that numbers only 4,164 voters as of January 2015? sos.oregon.gov...
People who are happy with the way their government is operated don't get out in the middle of a snowy winter to travel many miles to hear crazy people rant. But they will go to public meetings if they know there is something wrong going on. If they were "tricked" into the first meeting, how do you explain the fact that even more people showed up at the second meeting, more at the third? Why would the local government try to keep those public meetings from being held? Wouldn't you think if they had a defense for their actions they would indeed be eager to show up themselves and defend the actions? Redress the grievances, as required by the First Amendment?
As I've said before, the only danger in this operation was to political careers. It was to the people who installed a mentally ill federal prosecutor and stood behind her crazy prosecution of men who were only protecting their lives and property. The feds committed the only violence. They shot a man with a gun in his pocket, not his hand, despite what you have been told that he "intended" to do...the fact remains that even the feds have admitted that the gun was found in his pocket. The video clearly shows him falling to the ground with empty hands after being shot by government agents dressed as a paramilitary force.

There are five rights enshrined in the first Amendment: freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom to assemble, freedom to petition for a redress of grievances.

Five, not four.

ushistory.org - "First Amendment Rights"

Additionally, the Supreme Court of the United States, (which is for those that don't know, the highest judicial body in the land, encoded in Article III of the Constitution) tells us specifically what the "freedom to petition" (or the Petition Clause) means:

This Court’s precedents confirm that the Petition Clause protects the right of individuals to appeal to courts and other forums established by the government for resolution of legal disputes. “[T]he right of access to courts for redress of wrongs is an aspect of the First Amendment right to petition the government.” Sure-Tan, Inc. v. NLRB , 467 U. S. 883, 896–897 (1984) ; see also BE&K Constr. Co. v. NLRB , 536 U. S. 516, 525 (2002) ; Bill Johnson’s Restaurants, Inc. v. NLRB , 461 U. S. 731, 741 (1983) ; California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited , 404 U. S. 508, 513 (1972) .

To be clear, the right to petition for the redress of grievances means to appeal to courts and other forums established by the government for the resolution of legal disputes.

That's what it means. The right to petition does not mean that a small group of citizens (that certainly doesn't represent all citizens) can merely present a list of demands upon government and expect them to be met.

The right to assemble means just what it says ... citizens can gather together for any lawful purpose (in public or private). The common constraints upon this right are "time, place, manner" as decided by SCOTUS in Grayned v. City of Rockford and expressed thusly:

"The crucial question is whether the manner of expression is basically incompatible with the normal activity of a particular place at a particular time."

Therefore, the right to assemble specifically does not mean that a group of armed citizens, with the stated intent of total disruption of a government facility's operation, and the additional stated purpose to disrupt the peace, and to forcibly assault any law enforcement (Federal, State, local) that might challenge their occupation (for weeks). It also does not grand grant the right to vandalize, destroy, or disrupt property of any entity, not even the much-hated-by-them Federal Government.

Also, pointedly, neither the right to assemble nor the right to petition allows for anyone to deny Federal, State and local law, to arbitrarily deny the decisions of magistrates, and particularly, of grand juries.

Bundy said the group will begin breaking up the refuge land and returning portions of it to local ranchers. He didn't describe how he will achieve that goal, but said it will unwind a century of wrongdoing by the federal government.

www.oregonlive.com

From the same source:

One of the occupiers, Shawna Cox, read a list of grievances about the Hammonds' case that she said were sent to Oregon Gov. Kate Brown and local officials. For instance, she said, the Hammonds haven't committed a crime and the grand jury acted improperly in indicting them.

Other sources, substantiating the same outlaw statements and actions of the now defunct "occupiers" are easily found.

Finally, as to "spitting on the Constitution" ... the Bundys and their band of occupiers have not only stated repeatedly that God had told them that they were not subject to the laws of the United States, but their version of the Constitution is the aforementioned pamphlet annotated by Cleon Skousen.

Search most photos of the armed occupiers who took over a federal wildlife refuge in Oregon, and you're liable to see a few common features. Beards, sure. Stiff-brimmed cowboy hats, too. And, in many shirt pockets, a tiny bound volume.

It's the Constitution. But not the way most people read it.

It includes all 4,543 words inscribed by the Founding Fathers, with 18th-century spelling and punctuation preserved, but the pocket Constitution held aloft by Ammon Bundy at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge contains some notations courtesy of an anti-communist conspiracy theorist named W. Cleon Skousen.

LA Times, via Arcamax

I have provided ample sources above to substantiate the wild extremist nature of Skousen's philosophies (that the Bundys repeatedly state forms the basis of their understanding of government) ... but from the same source:

Its message: The Founding Fathers intended the United States to be a Christian nation, beholden to the Christian God, and never intended the federal government to have any power over its people.

...

Other quotations center on the need for people to take power for themselves, and not let government lay too heavy a hand on their affairs.

It's a message that rings clear to Cliven Bundy, who had a copy of the booklet during his 2014 standoff with federal agents on his Nevada ranch over unpaid grazing fees. His sons, Ammon and Ryan, brought it to the Oregon wildlife refuge.

"It's something I've always shared with everybody, and I carry it with me all the time," Cliven Bundy said Thursday. "That's where I get most of my information from. What we're trying to do is teach the true principles of the proper form of government."

_________

TL;DR: The Constitutional rights of Petition and Assembly do not allow for the multiple weeks of armed occupation of a Federal facility (a bird sanctuary for gods sake), the disruption of normal operations of that facility, the vandalization of property, etc. The Right to Petition, specifically means that a group of citizens can appeal to courts and other forums established by the government for the resolution of legal disputes.

The version of the Constitution that the Bundys and their minions favor is annotated by a extreme right-wing fanatic who argues that citizens are not subject to Federal laws, that God has bestowed the ability on citizens do decide which laws they will follow, etc. etc.

If that doesn't qualify as "spitting on the Constitution" I don't know what does, but that is what I would call it: call it what you will.

And, yes, the Bundy "militia" group has vandalized property:

Oregon militia's behavior increasingly brazen as public property destroyed

On Friday evening, Rodrique said she was horrified to learn that the militia, led by Nevada rancher Ammon Bundy, had paved a road through part of the wildlife sanctuary. That move came days after occupiers destroyed part of a US Fish and Wildlife Service fence, to allow cattle to freely graze on public lands the federal government controls.

Militiamen have also removed cameras at the refuge they claim the FBI was using for “surveillance”. LaVoy Finicum, an Arizona rancher and one of the main spokesmen for the militia, showed up to a Saturday morning press conference carrying a basket filled with black cameras.

Not only Federal property, but, these miscreant buffoons also rambled through and possibly destroyed several Native American artifacts stored at the facility!

Bundy Militia Post Video Of Themselves Messing With Native American Artifacts

In a new video posted to the Bundy Ranch’s Facebook account, several ranchers search boxes of artifacts that belong to the Paiute tribe. As members of the group sift through documents and objects, holding them up to the camera, LaVoy Finicum talks about how poorly the artifacts have been stored and proposes a dialogue with local Paiute.

“We want to make sure these things are returned to their rightful owners and that they’re taken care of,” he says, noting rat droppings in some of the boxes. “This is how Native Americans’ heritage is being treated. To me, I don’t think it’s acceptable,” Finicum concludes.

Members of the tribe have repeatedly slammed the militia, telling the ranchers to “get the hell out.”

“We as Harney County people can stand on our own feet,” Jarvis Kennedy of the Burns Paiute Tribal council said at a press conference earlier this month. “We don’t need some clown to come in here and stand up for us.”

Finicum, Finicum ... where have I heard that name? Oh yes, he was the felon (accomplice to destruction of government property, theft by taking, etc.) that resisted arrest, assaulted officers and evoked "suicide by cop."

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk
Yes, because that's what the power-hungry want the citizens to be doing. Focusing attention on anything, just anything else to draw attention away from their misdeeds. Get the abused folks fighting about who is the most abused, or who is worthy to have our support when their civil rights are violated.
When a border guard, a public servant, is killed by a gang with a weapon supplied to them illegally by the United States Justice Department, the very agency that is supposed to be protecting his rights by obeying the law of the land....who gets upset other than a few of his family and friends? When it is revealed that this illegal activity has been going on since the Bush administration---crickets abound. Because revelations like those threaten political parties and their power. Because those political parties care only about power, not about the rights of the citizens they are hired to serve and protect from the over-reach of that government.
The more they can keep us fighting among ourselves, much like the native inhabitants of the continent, the more power they can grab because we don't even know enough to stand up and say, "No more."
Some of us do know enough to stand up. We've been in the streets and in the voting booths since the '60s and we've seen their tactics get steadily more violent.
Back at the turn of the 20th century, it was fire hoses, dogs and night sticks turned on "militant" women who were simply standing in front of the White House holding signs asking for the right to vote. They were beaten and imprisoned for their efforts.
Then it was fire hoses, dogs, night sticks, tear gas and guns turned on peaceful protesters in the Civil Rights movement. Network tv showed the horror of women and children being mowed down by fire hoses and men with dogs and night sticks. They were chastised for showing such violence on prime time tv.
At Kent State's completely non-violent protest, the bullets flew from the government's guns, not the protesters' guns. People who weren't even attending the protest were shot! In daylight. No provocation.
They set fire to the Waco compound and burned everyone alive. We all saw it on tv. It was an amazing demonstration of their power and nobody said BOO to the murder of those people. Nobody with enough power to reign in the federal government. Well, after all, member of a "cult" don't have any rights do they?
That power is supposed to be seated in the States of the union. But the States have become states, slaves to the federal government rather than its master as laid out in the Constitution. And by and large, the citizens have become slaves of the states because it is easier to be a slave than to do the work required to be an upright, consciously-good, citizen. They have, in the government-sponsored schools, over the past 30 years begun to teach our children that the only things required of them to be a good citizen is to vote, to obey commands by authorities and to rat out law-breakers. They have systematically demonized the founding fathers for any number of reasons, to demean the philosophies they held and laid out in their plan for a country of liberty-loving citizens.
If they can keep us afraid and cowering in our homes, watching the government-approved tv, fat and medicated, they can continue to exert their illegal powers. If they can keep those of us who are aware of the very evil present in the current political system fighting amongst ourselves over religion, skin color, gender or sports team, they have won and the quest for ever more power and money will proceed apace.
If we truly believe in liberty and justice for all, we will join with people whose might not agree with us on which road it is we need to take, but will agree with us that the one we are currently traveling is heading for a cliff. We have to get stopped before we head over the cliff, take a look at other possibilities and discuss how to best solve the problems.
If we take the time to turn off the tv, go down to the local government's meetings and see what they're talking about and how they're proposing to solve those issues, we can make a start. If we research and get in and do the work of making the community a better place, it takes a lot of our time. Crooks in government are masters of hiding their misdeeds. Until a person actually gets into the morass that is local, state and federal government agencies, one hasn't a clue as to even know how to look for the clues. Then, once the clues are found, your average Joe Citizen has no idea where to take the clues to be investigated. You can put in hundreds of hours unearthing and studying documents but until you have the ear of the proper authority, you got Jack Snit.
Locally, we had a corrupt clerk in the courthouse. Lots of folks suspected she was corrupt. It was whispered about widely. It wasn't until six people of varying knowledge of the office got together and actually went through the documents, taking over 100 hours, to figure out how her theft was being accomplished. Then it was a five hour drive to the capitol to put the evidence in the hands of someone who could actually investigate this office.
She went to jail but it wasn't because the local government held her accountable. They defended her! Said this pattern was just "an oversight." She went to jail because the Commonwealth Auditor saw the evidence and did his job as required by the Kentucky Constitution.
We can't leave it to the government to investigate and punish its own members. That's like asking a bunch of five year-olds to write food laws. That's not the way this country was set up to be run. We the people are more numerous and have far more rights over the governments than the governments have over us. See my signature below.

a reply to: Gryphon66
You're joking, right?
That video proves my point. You have actually watched it right? And you're evidently hoping that nobody will take the time to actually watch and listen to what the man is saying. I promise you, he's not giving the patriots some coded message that can only be picked up with their special decoder rings. He means exactly what he says and he is saying the opposite of what you have alleged.

If it proved your point the guy wouldn't be saying, "Go look it up on the internet." he would be pointing to his copy and saying, "And don't read any of that claptrap on the internet, you must get this copy of the Constitution."

Where is the threat to anyone in that video? Where is the call for violence? Where is the assertion that the Constitution doesn't apply to them? Mainstream media made it up!

You admit that you can't even find a copy of this mythical "perverted" constitution.

Just out of curiosity, how can the original wording, spelling and punctuation be "perverted'?
I've not seen this document nor heard of the fellow of which your LA TIMES source speaks. What a lot of bosh spewed out because of the cover of a copy of the Constitution has been "spotted" at two recent protests. Gee whiz, I guess it's now illegal to study anyone's interpretation of the Constitution except "government-approved sources." We wouldn't want to muddy the waters with opposing opinions would we?

So yes, I'll continue to try to stem the "circling" we seem to find ourselves doing from time to time. I will support these protesters in the ways I am able because I believe we all deserve liberty and justice. We are all worthy before the laws penned by our founders.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: Gryphon66

Can you point out exactly what was said that's inaccurate with quotes and a video?

Just to be clear.

Regarding my last post? Sure.

Here's the page where the so-called, distinctive "Pocket Constitution" as described in my first article linked above can be ordered from the National Center for Constitutional Studies (the organization that publishes Cleon Skousen's other books) Pocket Constitution . One can clearly see from the various photographs that it is the version being held up by members of the Bundy gang, and is often seen in the hands of the Bundy's themselves.

Here's an article with a clear photo of Jon Ritzheimer holding up this pamphlet from the LA Times; Oregon Armed Protesters invoke the Constitution -- Annotated by a Conspiracy Theorist

Here's a scholarly article published in the Denver University Law Review by Jared A. Goldstein of Brown University The Tea Party's Constitution. This is the best resource for understanding the background of Skousen himself, his ridiculous theories about the Constitution which these folks recapitiulate, etc.

Here's an article (unrelated to anything about the Bundy's or Oregon just for comparison) from Florida about this same twisted version of the Constitution being inflicted on school kids in Florida: Pocket Constitution Carries Religious Messages to Students

I can't link to the text of the pamphlet itself because that's the intellectual property of the NCCS.

Does that answer your need? I don't have any "videos" to link, sorry.

Your LA TIMES article---do you remember me asking specifically that you not post msm's opinions of what the protesters were saying but actual words from their mouths, you know, videos like the ones I posted who let them speak for themselves?---is simply a mishmash of what the government wants people to believe---that somehow the original documents are perverted if the same booklet contains obvious commentary from a different point of view and uses quotes from the founders to back up the "perverted" views. Including the words of the men who penned the very document is quite clearly a very bad, evil, and clever disinformation plan isn't it?
Holy Cowpies! The Tea Party read it too! No wonder they're running around murdering federal officials and bombing buildings like Bill and the rest of the WeatherUnderground! So that's what has set off all the violence?
Of course it is shameful to provide students with the actual wording of the original documents. They've been taught to hear and obey. To present them with another view of the original documents, using the words of the original documents and the writings of the authors of the original documents would simply blow out the circuits in their brains because we all know that US students are not taught to use the critical thinking skills it would take to sort out who might be correct and who might be incorrect.
Of course you don't have videos because you simply made up all that stuff about them stamping on the Constitution and calling for armed revolt. You listened to the news as presented by the Big Six and Feds and never once questioned whether they were being truthful or lying to cover their misdeeds.

Again you assert they are plentiful but you don't post a single link to support your empty accusations. If they are so plentiful why are you keeping them all for yourself? Why not share with us so we can see for ourselves those words coming from their mouths and those actions being taken? Your only offering of a video was one that said exactly the opposite of what you claimed! LOL!

Not one single video of people doing what you claim they are depicted as doing. Just msm reports that they have studied a "perverted" Constitution.
If it weren't so sad, I'd be rolling on the floor laughing.

a reply to: Gryphon66
So, anyone with a view of the Constitution that doesn't match yours is spitting on that document? Anyone who reads anything that is different from the government-sponsored textbooks views, is spitting or stomping on the Constitution?

I believe the operative word in your rant is "annotated." Annotated doesn't change the document, it simply furnishes explanations or criticisms of a document.
What better way is there to find out what the authors of documents themselves meant than to read their other writings?
Perverted Constitution indeed! Now I am laughing.

a reply to: Gryphon66
Pointing out that the federal agency charged with protecting and properly preserving artifacts isn't doing the job properly is a very bad thing isn't it? Showing it on camera---the actual violations shown to the public at large---is a very violent, felonious action for sure isn't it?
Claiming to properly protect and preserve artifacts while letting rodents plunder them is a good thing of course because the feds will tell you that they don't have to follow federal laws, they ARE federal law. Just ask 'em!
Oh those bad, bad people exposing the shortcomings and abuse of the federal government. Someone's feelings will get hurt if we're not careful. That man obviously needed to be shot on the side of the road for doing such evil things.

a reply to: diggindirt

Thanks for so completely validating my previous comments down to the letter!

I stand by everything I have written.