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.

 

FBI Release full unedited video of Finicum shooting

page: 31
46
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 10:45 AM
link   
a reply to: imitator


That guy is a FED plant.... he's showing all the rooms and doors... totally not foraging, he's just showing all the hiding places and where to raid if need be.


I had exactly the same thought!!!

Which begs the question, how many plants were there? Was this just another ruse by the feds to entrap those who rightfully object and challenge their authoritay???

I hate to say it, but I don't trust Ammon Bundy at all...




posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 10:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Discotech
a reply to: imitator

Don't be stupid, unless you're intentionally trolling.

He's not a fed plant, David has been streaming as much as he can to document it all if the feds decide to raid so the world can see

If you'd been following events then you'd know that they're not actually staying inside the buildings, they're sleeping rough outside around a few cars they've parked up, so the feds are welcome to raid the buildings but they won't find anybody hiding


It looks like David is the plant.......... and if they ran into the building while taking cover from gunfire, David just sealed their deaths...


edit on 30-1-2016 by imitator because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: imitator

If he's the plant then why isn't he convincing the others to give themselves up ? why hasn't he got the feds to raid the past 2 nights when they've slept ? just what does he have to gain from still being there with 3 others after everyone else has left ?

What if you're a plant to derail my thread ?

see how silly it all sounds



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 10:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Discotech

You have a point there. I did not notice the brake lights. Thanks.

But don't call me a liar until I deliberately ignore a clear fact.

Nevertheless...

He had time to stop in my judgement, he may have tried too late to stop after riding the brake. Or maybe not. WE DONT KNOW

He probably knew there was a barricade somewhere. He was going quite fast just a bit earlier. So no ice worries on his part.

He let off passenger earlier. Why? Maybe he didn't want to be a part of the barricade buster brigade. He had guns? Why to resist lawful arrest,




edit on 30-1-2016 by SkyNetBeware because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 10:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: imitator

originally posted by: tweetie

The Oregonian



That guy is a FED plant.... he's showing all the rooms and doors... totally not foraging, he's just showing all the hiding places and where to raid if need be.

I'm sorry, I have no idea of what you are referring to at the link. I posted the link to the home page of The Oregonian because that website has the most comprehensive collection of articles, videos and pictures concerning this whole event of any other website I've come across. As to what is featured on the home page at any given time, that changes.



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 11:01 AM
link   
a reply to: SkyNetBeware

Don't forget it's not like a sunday drive with the kids

He's just escaped from the feds, adrenaline is high, they're all panicked so probably distracting him, there's a bend and he's going pretty fast AND it's winter so maybe the road is a little icey, if no ice it's definitely damp so braking distance increases anyway.

Added to that we don't know what visibility was like on the ground, hell he could have even had a steamed up windscreen for all we know

All things considered he reacts pretty well to avoid the blockade, he probably didn't think there would be a blockade further up the road, if you watch as he drives the road twists like an S so he brakes on the first corner, veers into the center then as he crests the corner and the blockade comes into view he starts braking again.

Definitely not signs of a man intent on ramming through a blockade.

Really we have to ask what were the feds thinking setting up a blockade so close to the exit of an S bend, do it on a long piece of straight road



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 11:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: tweetie

originally posted by: imitator

originally posted by: tweetie

The Oregonian



That guy is a FED plant.... he's showing all the rooms and doors... totally not foraging, he's just showing all the hiding places and where to raid if need be.

I'm sorry, I have no idea of what you are referring to at the link. I posted the link to the home page of The Oregonian because that website has the most comprehensive collection of articles, videos and pictures concerning this whole event of any other website I've come across. As to what is featured on the home page at any given time, that changes.


That site links to the video David posted yesterday.


‘It feels like a zombie apocalypse’: Remaining occupiers forage the refuge compound


David the plant is showing the FEDS around....


edit on 30-1-2016 by imitator because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 11:10 AM
link   
a reply to: SkyNetBeware



You willfully choose to have no integrity and ignore the citations and fail to do your own diligence when someone points out you are wrong. You probably are a science denier also. Right?

You have made many assumptions about alot of things in this thread and all I can say about that is the ones about me have been false. You then directly attack my character without any provocation. What does that say about yours? I have done my due diligence regarding Law and Statute for over 10 years yet you seem to think that posting a wiki link for me to read is somehow going to inform me of something I don't know. It was stated a few posts ago in a very clear way what the difference is but you chose to ignore that. I wonder why? For the record, no I am not a science denier. I love and embrace science but I do have an open mind and don't take science as the final word. Attack my or anyone else's character in this thread again and I will completely ignore you. If you choose to come down off your high horse and have a civil debate then I am all ears...

edit on 1/30/2016 by OveRcuRrEnteD because: added quote



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Discotech
a reply to: SkyNetBeware

Don't forget it's not like a sunday drive with the kids

He's just escaped from the feds, adrenaline is high, they're all panicked so probably distracting him, there's a bend and he's going pretty fast AND it's winter so maybe the road is a little icey, if no ice it's definitely damp so braking distance increases anyway.

Added to that we don't know what visibility was like on the ground, hell he could have even had a steamed up windscreen for all we know

All things considered he reacts pretty well to avoid the blockade, he probably didn't think there would be a blockade further up the road, if you watch as he drives the road twists like an S so he brakes on the first corner, veers into the center then as he crests the corner and the blockade comes into view he starts braking again.

Definitely not signs of a man intent on ramming through a blockade.

Really we have to ask what were the feds thinking setting up a blockade so close to the exit of an S bend, do it on a long piece of straight road


I think the Feds have std procedures and practices. They don't want a long straightaway because the offender can then speed up and have long time to think. They want confusion and indecision and mistakes. Finicut defied the law and out himself in this situation.



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Discotech


Really we have to ask what were the feds thinking setting up a blockade so close to the exit of an S bend, do it on a long piece of straight road


Yes!!! Thank you!!!

The feds were in complete control of how that situation was set up. Are we supposed to believe they're just incompetent idiots who didn't know the consequences of that trap? Or are we to believe that they knew exactly what they were doing: Leading a man to his death.

It's not enough to ask for answers. We have to DEMAND answers.



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: SkyNetBeware

Why use a blockade so close to an S bend though when it can only potentially put the officers at risk of injury IF the car they're trying to stop decides to try and ram them ?

Doesn't seem to make sense to me, but procedure usually defies logic at times.

For instance they could have airlifted those concrete barriers in

Or they could have used a stinger to stop the vehicle



They did seem to make it more difficult than it could have been to stop the vehicle without causing a near death for the trooper jumping into the path of the pickup



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: OveRcuRrEnteD
a reply to: SkyNetBeware



You willfully choose to have no integrity and ignore the citations and fail to do your own diligence when someone points out you are wrong. You probably are a science denier also. Right?

You have made many assumptions about alot of things in this thread and all I can say about that is the ones about me have been false. You then directly attack my character without any provocation. What does that say about yours? I have done my due diligence regarding Law and Statute for over 10 years yet you seem to think that posting a wiki link for me to read is somehow going to inform me of something I don't know. It was stated a few posts ago in a very clear way what the difference is but you chose to ignore that. I wonder why? For the record, no I am not a science denier. I love and embrace science but I do have an open mind and don't take science as the final word. Attack my or anyone else's character in this thread again and I will completely ignore you. If you choose to come down off your high horse and have a civil debate then I am all ears...


I corrected you about us code being law, after you foolishly claimed otherwise. I even took the time to prove it. You then decided to ignore the proof, and you're having a hissy fit about your character bring impugned? Yeah,when you deliberately ignore proof to something you're wrong about, your character should be questioned. You could have admitted your claim that us code is not law was wrong, but you took the low road instead.



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: SkyNetBeware
I'll lay this out as simply and plainly as I can. I will not be providing links.
Our government known as the United States of America is a corporation as are most state, county and city governments. Corporations cannot make Laws so they make Codes and Statutes. The supreme Law of this land is the Constitution. Case Law follows and is exactly that. Period. End of story.

edit on 1/30/2016 by OveRcuRrEnteD because: clarified a sentence





foolishly claimed




having a hissy fit




took the low road

And I'm done. Good Day.
edit on 1/30/2016 by OveRcuRrEnteD because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: tweetie

Yea. I was already linked an article. Will do my best to rummage through them when I'm off work. What I WOULD like is video of him saying it.



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 12:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: OveRcuRrEnteD
a reply to: SkyNetBeware
I'll lay this out as simply and plainly as I can. I will not be providing links.
Our government known as the United States of America is a corporation as are most state, county and city governments. Corporations cannot make Laws so they make Codes and Statutes. The supreme Law of this land is the Constitution. Case Law follows and is exactly that. Period. End of story.


That is the thinking that got finicum to put himself into a dangerous situation.p and get killed. He's an idiot.

The constitution explicitly gives the Feds the power to create laws (us code).

Break us code at your own risk, and don't have a hissy fit when the Feds bring the heat.

I have sympathy with gvmt and corporate corruption, but I do not want idiots like finicum running around with guns saying they are exempt from us code. People like finicum have been manipulated by the big mining companies and big agri and big ranches to try to wrest public land for their own selfish use.



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 12:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Discotech
a reply to: SkyNetBeware

Why use a blockade so close to an S bend though when it can only potentially put the officers at risk of injury IF the car they're trying to stop decides to try and ram them ?

Doesn't seem to make sense to me, but procedure usually defies logic at times.

For instance they could have airlifted those concrete barriers in

Or they could have used a stinger to stop the vehicle



They did seem to make it more difficult than it could have been to stop the vehicle without causing a near death for the trooper jumping into the path of the pickup

They had a spike strip in the road but LaVoy somehow missed it. Scroll down until you find the part that applies.

FBI Statements on Arrest, Shooting



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: SkyNetBeware
Since you did not insult me that time, I will respond



That is the thinking that got finicum to put himself into a dangerous situation

It's not thinking, it's fact.



The constitution explicitly gives the Feds the power to create laws (us code).

Where exactly does the Constitution "explicitly" give that "power" to the "Feds"?

One more question: Do you know the difference between De Facto and De Jure?



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 12:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: pteridine

Mr. Finicum made his choices. I don't agree with them, I think he was doomed to failure from the start, but I can also understand that he had no good choices either. I can also appreciate how he felt that was the
But Mr. Finicum cannot and did not force anyone else -- specifically, the Feds -- to do a thing. They made their own choices. And their judgment day will come. honorable and courageous thing to do. He put his life on the line and paid the ultimate price for his convictions.



If I dare you to kill me, are you gonna do it? What if I double-dog dare you? Triple-dog dare you??? Do you really believe any jury in this country would let you off for murder because you said, "She triple-dog dared me!!!"



Mr. Finicum had every opportunity to surrender peacefully and chose not to avail himself of those opportunities. His actions had consequences and his reckless behavior was the cause of his demise.
What if you are a felon that has run a roadblock with innocents in your vehicle, only to discover a second roadblock and, in your desperation to escape, tried to go around it and got stuck in the snow? What if you then emerged from your vehicle and ran around waving your arms and not paying attention to the officers' instructions? What if you reached for the loaded gun in your belt and then "triple-dog dared" the officer charged with arresting you to do something about it?

Finicum made his choices and got the results he wanted. Whether he felt his actions were honorable and courageous or not doesn't matter. Whether he put his life on the line for his convictions or personal pride doesn't matter. He was a serious threat to others and that is why he was shot.



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 12:33 PM
link   
All I saw watching the video was a man attempt to go around a barricade. He then jumps out hands up but before long his hands aren't up anymore. It "looks" like he's reaching for something but regardless, he was wanted by the Feds and decided to leave his compound. Mistake 1. He was intercepted and attempted to flee. Mistake 2. When his vehicle was disabled and he stepped out with his hands up but didn't keep them up. Mistake 3.

Regardless of their cause, right or wrong, you'd have to be stoopid to not expect something like this. Poor #er didn't even see the cop behind him.



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 12:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: OveRcuRrEnteD
a reply to: SkyNetBeware
Since you did not insult me that time, I will respond



That is the thinking that got finicum to put himself into a dangerous situation

It's not thinking, it's fact.



The constitution explicitly gives the Feds the power to create laws (us code).

Where exactly does the Constitution "explicitly" give that "power" to the "Feds"?

One more question: Do you know the difference between De Facto and De Jure?


Why do you keep saying goodbye but then you stick around?

Seriously? You have to be pointed at parts of the Constitution where the legislature is empowered with the rights to create law? Here's one part....

Article 1, Sec 8: "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."

I think you are one of the people who would benefit from more listening and reading, and less talking and writing. I certainly wish you were one of those who voted less often, because you are woefully deficient in Civics 101.




top topics



 
46
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join