Ammon Bundy, other armed protesters at Oregon wildlife refuge, indicted

a reply to: Gryphon66

I'm sure I'll be told that's a crisis actor being interviewed and the whole interview is a sham, Wag the Dog style.

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: Gryphon66

I'm sure I'll be told that's a crisis actor being interviewed and the whole interview is a sham, Wag the Dog style.

Ha! Nailed it.

You information-spinner you!

All sense of irony (not to mention hypocrisy) is absolutely gone for some.

a reply to: Informer1958

Yes, he made it very clear he intended to point a gun back. It's because of threats like this they've yet to raid the area arresting them. They have warrants but the Feds are taking them very seriously and being as lenient as they can so this doesn't end up in a fire fight. For Christ sake, these men were able to drive to an interview? I mean, damn! For guys with warrants that they very well know exist and knew the authorities were watching their every move are allowed to drive around? They're still there, right? Even after being told to go home by little Bundy?

In any case, if you're gonna sit there and try to tell me and everyone who reads your post that Lavoy and his friends didn't make threats, and intended to make good on them, then I say to you, you're the lying propaganda machine.

Just so much balderdash Swills, the propaganda of the MSM.....
Try to step back a pace...maybe even read over your own statements....
You seem to be on this like white on rice.....like theres something really really personal going on.....
Theres going to be a lot more free citizens demonstrating while armed in the future...
Its in vogue now......get ready for that next one because it wont be long....this is a social meme your watching unfold....

Speaking of the actual Constitution ... the People of Oregon have spoken Constitutionally ..

Grand jury indicts 16 people for Oregon refuge occupation, including four holdouts still there

Also ... speaking of the County and the Sheriffs ...

The Harney County Court released a statement this week in response to the group’s request that its three members — a judge and two commissioners — resign along with Ward, saying: “All four individuals decline the request.”

The Oregon State Sheriffs’ Association, which has publicly supported Ward, said Thursday that it did not stand by people who it described as arming themselves, breaking into publicly owned buildings and intimidating and harassing local residents and officials.

“These men and women are asking for change, and we support their right to challenge our government to make change,” the association said in a statement. “However, we do not agree with or support any citizen or elected official who would advocate for change in a manner that includes illegal action, threats of violence, or violence against any citizen of the United States.”

a reply to: bandersnatch

So there's at least 3 of you that believe this fiction? The man said his words, all of his words, and made his intentions clear on January 5th to a reporter and it's all on video. Your biased interruption is not reality. I'm not gonna argue with you, all of you, about this anymore because the case is closed. But funny enough, not one of you has provided evidence he didn't say those words and those weren't his intentions. So far, I'm just being accused of being a MSM sheep.

I promise, any rational person watching those two interviews knows exactly what he said, and it isn't what you think.

And why are you against using a period? Just one period?

a reply to: Swills

PLease correct me if i am wrong but it does not seem that this man is a nutter and he surely was looking for a peaceful solution.....please give this vid 30 mins of your time.......

He has some really valid points....firstly he bought the land from people of the land,these lands were bought and sold by the ranchers of the time over many years,he has invested his life into this land and that goes for his family too....Te BLM have stolen his land and attempted to ruin him...if i were him i would be pissed

He talks of the constitution and the the rights of the federal government and does a good job of explaining why the BLM are in the wrong here,they basically put forward some legislation when they formed allowing themselves 1/3 of all land.....

He believes he is standing up for the constitution and he most certainly is standing up for his families future,it is pretty clear from this vid he is lucid,quite intelligent ....seems to me his statements of not ending up in a box were not about being violent there were a statement saying he would rather die than live in prison ....a sentiment many would share....he in fact says as much in another vid...

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

It doesn't matter what he believes and I never called him a nutter. The fact is, he clearly made it known he is armed and will not be taken into custody, he would die before that happens.

Why do you people think this is okay and an appropriate way to protest?

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

It doesn't matter what he believes and I never called him a nutter. The fact is, he clearly made it known he is armed and will not be taken into custody, he would die before that happens.

Why do you people think this is okay and an appropriate way to protest?

I am not sure it is an ok way to protest,im saying he has a point, he is clearly rational and non violent...

What would you do if a branch of government took away your lively hood? ...what if the very thing you worked your life for was to be taken away,the very source of your families income and future... how would you react ?

There is way more going on here than a bunch of ranchers illegally grazing.....,,,,watch the vid

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Just so you know, it's not appropriate or legal to protest this way. That should be obvious.

Sure, he's seems so rational when calmly talking to the press in the beginning, so what? He still made it clear he's armed and will not be arrested or go to prison. I also posted a video of his fellow militia men in this thread and you should watch it and then tell me how rational they were. Tell me they don't look like nutters.

Didn't the Feds give them every chance to go home? Didn't they stay on protest? They broke the law and were given a way out but they didn't take it. Then there was no choice now, they had to be arrested and they knew full well this was gonna happen eventually.

Nothing rational at all about their protest. One man dead and the rest off to trial. Nothing accomplished.

a reply to: Swills
Did you even listen to what the man was saying? There was no threat there, just his view of the way things could be if the Feds wanted violence. It is now clear who wanted and who instigated the violence. They even made a snuff film and popped it out quickly to show anyone who would try to "spread the protest" any further what will happen if you stand against their evil.
He was about educating the non-educated on these issues. But it isn't a sound bite issue so it takes more time than most people are willing to devote to the issues. Like you, they would rather take msm's views as their own than expend the effort to understand the perils we face as US citizens.
www.youtube.com...

Do you hear any threats? Does he seem like a raving maniac that is going to go out shooting people? I'd say he was a man of his word.

a reply to: Swills

....
But funny enough, not one of you has provided evidence he didn't say those words and those weren't his intentions.
...

You're asking for proof of something that never happened?
Isn't there a formal name for that---
You have ample "proof" ( his words) that he didn't want violence. He said he didn't want to die. He said he was ready to die.
There is a giant difference.
I don't want to die.
I don't fear death.
I am ready to die.
My words should not to be twisted into permission for someone to shoot me.
Nor should his.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

What land of Lavoy Finicum's did BLM steal?

... and was this before or after he started living off government-sponsored charities?

From a mix of tabulations by Oregon Public Broadcasting and Finicum's own account, Finicum and his wife apparently get almost all or all of their income from being foster parents. His ranch in Chino Valley, Arizona is break even at best and appears to generate no income.

Now, foster parents, especially those who care for troubled children, are truly doing God's work. And they are entitled to compensation, both for the work involved in being a parent and for the substantial out of pocket expenses involved in raising children. But it seems at least ironic and perhaps more than ironic that this paragon of getting the government off our backs and radical, near-absolute individualism supports himself and his wife off state subsidies.

Source

a reply to: diggindirt

oops tried to reply to too many people at once
....

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

What land of Lavoy Finicum's did BLM steal?

... and was this before or after he started living off government-sponsored charities?

From a mix of tabulations by Oregon Public Broadcasting and Finicum's own account, Finicum and his wife apparently get almost all or all of their income from being foster parents. His ranch in Chino Valley, Arizona is break even at best and appears to generate no income.

Now, foster parents, especially those who care for troubled children, are truly doing God's work. And they are entitled to compensation, both for the work involved in being a parent and for the substantial out of pocket expenses involved in raising children. But it seems at least ironic and perhaps more than ironic that this paragon of getting the government off our backs and radical, near-absolute individualism supports himself and his wife off state subsidies.

Source

Well according to him he bought the land in a private deal,the BLM created legislation allowing them to steal the land.....saying he is smooching off the government for funds to raise these foster kids is a non argument it has nothing to do with the land issue

a reply to: Swills

Nothing rational at all about their protest. One man dead and the rest off to trial. Nothing accomplished.

He stood up for what he believed in,his livelihood was in jeopardy....he was a man of his convictions

I'm so glad these idiots finally got arrested.
I hope these freeloading welfare-ranchers rot in prison.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Freeloading on federal land and scamming the foster care system; some convictions.

originally posted by: NotTooHappy
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Freeloading on federal land and scamming the foster care system; some convictions.

Foster parents are a needed part of the world today ....He claims it was his land that he purchased legitimately....if you can show me where the BLM have legitimate rights to this land i will happily retract my statements....

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

What land of Lavoy Finicum's did BLM steal?

... and was this before or after he started living off government-sponsored charities?

From a mix of tabulations by Oregon Public Broadcasting and Finicum's own account, Finicum and his wife apparently get almost all or all of their income from being foster parents. His ranch in Chino Valley, Arizona is break even at best and appears to generate no income.

Now, foster parents, especially those who care for troubled children, are truly doing God's work. And they are entitled to compensation, both for the work involved in being a parent and for the substantial out of pocket expenses involved in raising children. But it seems at least ironic and perhaps more than ironic that this paragon of getting the government off our backs and radical, near-absolute individualism supports himself and his wife off state subsidies.

Source

Well according to him he bought the land in a private deal,the BLM created legislation allowing them to steal the land.....saying he is smooching off the government for funds to raise these foster kids is a non argument it has nothing to do with the land issue

Wow. Can you quote where Finicum says this?