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.

 

LaVoy Finicum (BUNDY) was NOT shot with his hands up! He charged at LEO's. (from others arrested)

page: 10
25
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 11:57 PM
link   
a reply to: GeisterFahrer




One tries to surrender when raising their arms in the air and shouting they are unarmed.

You could hear him shouting? I couldn't.

Why would one believe a man who was known to go armed? A man who had proudly proclaimed he would rather die than be captured.

edit on 1/28/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 11:57 PM
link   
a reply to: GeisterFahrer

First off, he wasn't a father of "11 children"; he was the FOSTER guardian of several children. They were the family's primary source of income (i.e. from taxpayer support for foster care).

Secondly, his arms were NOT in the air when he was shot! They were at his waist and in his jacket.

Thirdly, the witness reports you cite state he exited the vehicle to his knees. The video clearly shows he did NOTHING of the sort. He was never on his knees.

Those witness reports you cite as being credible are anything BUT credible.

Believe whatever you want to convince yourself is reality. Myself, I'll go by Funicum's own statements wherein he said he wouldn't be taken alive, and his own videos where he was repeatedly armed and clearly stated he was ready to fight. Law enforcement had every reason to believe he was armed (heck, I would have).

Lastly, even if we believe all the evil conspiracy theories about big bad law enforcement, even if we believe them to be true...don't you think it would be pretty foolish to start running around when Big Brother ambushes you (right or wrong)????

Funicum wanted to die in a hail of gunfire...and it looks like he got his wish.

That's too bad in my opinion; not that he died, but that he got his wish!




posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 12:04 AM
link   
a reply to: GeisterFahrer

And did they get in trouble for burning their own land or the 139 acres that was not theirs?
Or when in 2006 when there was a no burn ban in affect and they decided to against that?
edit on thFri, 29 Jan 2016 00:05:11 -0600America/Chicago120161180 by Sremmos80 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 12:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: GeisterFahrer




One tries to surrender when raising their arms in the air and shouting they are unarmed.

You could hear him shouting? I couldn't.

Why would one believe a man who was known to go armed? A man who had proudly proclaimed he would rather die than be captured.


Ah, I see you have resorted to being intentionally obtuse.

I couldn't hear him either - apparently, the video was released without audio.

No transcripts either. So, neither of us heard the officers telling Finicum to put his gun on the ground. We couldn't hear the shot that hit him in the waist, which made it appear he was reaching for his gun. We also couldn't hear Finicum making threats to the police that they would never take him alive.

What we do have, is the eyewitness testimony of Victoria Sharp.



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 12:19 AM
link   
I wonder if anyone really wants to know what's sad about this whole incident....(?)

What's sad is how much taxpayer money was wasted on these wanna-be rebels

What's sad is how these wanna-be rebels took a potentially credible cause and twisted it around into some delusional religious, soveriegn citizen garbage.

What's sad is how Bundy and his ilk used the Hammonds to fight for a cause which wasn't even the Hammonds.

What's sad is how much traction these idiots got from the MSM.

What's sad is how difficult it will be to ever get the real issues back up on the table for discussion because they will be immediately dismissed as extremism because of these idiots.

What's sad is how little people know about what really happened up in Burns Oregon, but yet feel like they are informed enough to make some kind of a comment or spout some rhetoric.

What's sad...is how many people rallied behind these people for no other reason than they were looking for a fight with someone...anyone.

What's sad is the lengths to which people have gone to defend some of these people's actions when clearly they're not bolted down to reality.

What's sad is how easily people are influenced by media and rumors.

What's sad is how lazy people are in doing any research, about anything...at all.

What's sad is....well, that's probably enough for now.



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 12:25 AM
link   
a reply to: GeisterFahrer




I couldn't hear him either - apparently, the video was released without audio.

You think there should be audio from an aircraft mounted camera?


edit on 1/29/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 12:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: GeisterFahrer

And did they get in trouble for burning their own land or the 139 acres that was not theirs?
Or when in 2006 when there was a no burn ban in affect and they decided to against that?


Apparently, they were accused of "covering up poaching" when they accidentally burned the 139 acres of Federal Land.

I am guessing that someone who has never farmed, or hunted for that matter, was sitting behind a desk at some point and read what the punishment for poaching was. "Hey guys! let's make this stick!"

You might not be aware of this, unless you are familiar with farming and hunting, but there are a heck of a lot easier ways to cover up poaching than burning 139 acres of Federal Land. I don't mean to be rude, or impolite, but there really is no way to say this politely ... that is just retarded.

It is obvious someone wanted them framed. It was obvious to those BLM employees in the article I linked. It was obvious to the Former Fire Chief who made his little speech during the Oregon stand off.

It will increasingly become more obvious that the Hammonds, and other families, are being targeted by BLM.

Now, don't get me wrong - I am no militia member; I really don't know a heck of a lot about them. I am also not the kind of person who wants to "overthrow the government". I do, however, want those who would corrupt my government, to not only be exposed, but tossed out and imprisoned for a very long time.

While I may agree with everything Bundy has said, I cannot agree with his actions. You cannot expose corruption by willfully breaking the law.
edit on 29-1-2016 by GeisterFahrer because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 12:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
I wonder if anyone really wants to know what's sad about this whole incident....(?)

What's sad is how much taxpayer money was wasted on these wanna-be rebels


I would be more impressed if the stand off was in a MLK or Gandhi style of protest. To go the militia route just begged for armed intervention which didn't happen.



What's sad is how these wanna-be rebels took a potentially credible cause and twisted it around into some delusional religious, soveriegn citizen garbage.


None of us has the whole truth to the situation, but I do know that Bundy owed over a million in back grazing taxes that stretched over 25 years, and it seems the vast majority of other ranchers do not have issues... hmmm


Bundy has refused to accept federal authority, and refuses to pay the fees, but according to the new data, that makes him an anomaly. Roughly 16,000 public land ranchers graze cattle, sheep and other livestock on more than 21,000 allotments on 155 million acres of public land, according to the BLM. Only 458 of those ranchers have any late fees, meaning 97% are regularly paying their bills on time. Meanwhile, 99% of those who have outstanding fees are less than 60 days late with those








posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 12:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: GeisterFahrer




I couldn't hear him either - apparently, the video was released without audio.

You think there should be audio from an aircraft mounted camera?



Ah, the intentional obtuseness is strong in you my friend.

Did you see the roadblock in the video? I am sure you did. Did you see all those officers scrambling about? I am sure you might have.

And not a single bodycam video? Not a single dashcam video?

Ohhhhhh ... how transparent lolololololol

Wouldn't you agree that a simple FOIA request to the OSP for those videos should be in order?
edit on 29-1-2016 by GeisterFahrer because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 12:33 AM
link   
a reply to: GeisterFahrer

Did you see the roadblock in the video?
Yes.



And not a single bodycam video? Not a single dashcam video?
I don't know.

You make a lot of assumptions.
edit on 1/29/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 12:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: GeisterFahrer

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: GeisterFahrer




I couldn't hear him either - apparently, the video was released without audio.

You think there should be audio from an aircraft mounted camera?



Ah, the intentional obtuseness is strong in you my friend.

Did you see the roadblock in the video? I am sure you did. Did you see all those officers scrambling about? I am sure you might have.

And not a single bodycam video? Not a single dashcam video?

Ohhhhhh ... how transparent lolololololol





You are not supposed to point out the obvious.....
edit on 29-1-2016 by hopenotfeariswhatweneed because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 12:39 AM
link   
Ok, so i edited my last post to include something kind of obvious, but in case you missed it

An FOIA request to the OSP for the dashcam videos, and the bodycam videos (because yes, they have them) is in order.

Since the FBI has claimed they released a full unedited video of the entire sequence of events (minus audio) for the purpose of transparency, would it be too much to ask for all the details?

or should we wait another 24 hours to allow them to put a positive spin on everything?
edit on 29-1-2016 by GeisterFahrer because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 12:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: GeisterFahrer

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: GeisterFahrer




I couldn't hear him either - apparently, the video was released without audio.

You think there should be audio from an aircraft mounted camera?



Ah, the intentional obtuseness is strong in you my friend.

Did you see the roadblock in the video? I am sure you did. Did you see all those officers scrambling about? I am sure you might have.

And not a single bodycam video? Not a single dashcam video?

Ohhhhhh ... how transparent lolololololol

Yeah, of all the footage they could have released the FBI release farthest away video...zero vocals, zero clarity,,,case closed he reached for a shoota.? Whatever happened to him rushing LE....I see no rushing anyone.

The guy could have been shot at several times before he puts his hands down for all we know...

I'm no expert, i've never been shot, but i would hazard a guess that if shot at or shot, my hands wouldn't be in the air either. My first reaction if shot would be to plug the hole.
edit on 29-1-2016 by Soloprotocol because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 12:46 AM
link   
a reply to: GeisterFahrer




An FOIA request to the OSP for the dashcam videos, and the bodycam videos (because yes, they have them) is in order.

Sure, go for it.



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 12:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol




My first reaction if shot would be to plug the hole.

Unless the first shot killed you.



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 12:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Soloprotocol




My first reaction if shot would be to plug the hole.

Unless the first shot killed you.


enhanced and zoomed video - looks like he was shot before the reach:



so ... where's the audio? Enquiring minds and all ...

Or, are we allowed to even ask question?



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 12:58 AM
link   
Just watched the video. As disturbing as it is, on many levels,I have to bring a bit of levity...

The officer that enters the upper left screen at 9:29ish appears to be in short sleeves. In the winter. In deep snow. All the guys on the road appear to have better kit. Was this guy urinating in the treeline, intending to only briefly be out of a warm cab, when Finicum came plowing through? What timing.



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 01:00 AM
link   
a reply to: GeisterFahrer




looks like he was shot before the reach:

Not to me. What do you see that makes it appear he was shot?


Or, are we allowed to even ask question?
Yes.
edit on 1/29/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 01:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: GeisterFahrer
so ... where's the audio? Enquiring minds and all ...


So you think there should be audio from a plane?



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 01:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: GeisterFahrer




looks like he was shot before the reach:

Not to me. What do you see that makes it appear he was shot?


Or, are we allowed to even ask question?
Yes.


the officer in the lower right takes aim, places his free hand on the gun, you see recoil, then you see Finicum 'reaching in his coat pocket".

In that order.
edit on 29-1-2016 by GeisterFahrer because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join