|
|
 Nicknameless
Posts: 4565
  
Location: I can see the end of the world from here! | ThreeCorners - 2016-01-30 10:54 AM musikmaker - 2016-01-30 8:53 AM Im going to guess that no matter what you 'think' you think, you'll enjoy this video...forget that this man was just killed, watch it, get a sense of who he was and what he was doing...if you still consider him a 'virus' (as the democrat representatives in Oregon are calling him) then this discussion is mute, whether he was 'murdered' doesn't even matter...because our country isn't worth dying for any longer anyhow.
https://www.facebook.com/steve.worthington.5/videos/1107996929231308/?fref=nf
Here's the youtube version that you can download it from (however, I was told to stop posting that ***mn video...lol):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6VQKgYjJno
Edited by musikmaker 2016-01-30 12:15 PM
| |
| | |
Nicknameless
Posts: 4565
Location: I can see the end of the world from here! | If anyones interested, this is a meeting in Utah with the natural Resources Committee on the 22nd...I'm sharing this because Finney (?) said the legislators had 'moved on' from these issues...simply not true! I know some of these people personally and they are fighting as hard as they can to save our country!
http://southernutahlive.com/video/view/Natural-Resources-Public-Hearing-2016-01-22
| |
| | |
 Tried and True
Posts: 21185
  
Location: Where I am happiest | Bear - 2016-01-30 9:29 AM FinneyQuarterHorses - 2016-01-30 9:19 AM ThreeCorners - 2016-01-30 9:06 AM FinneyQuarterHorses - 2016-01-30 8:52 AM The Hammonds were found guilty on two charges which carried a mandatory minimum sentence of five years. A judge took it upon himself to decrease the sentence because he did not think the punishment fit the crime, the sentence was appealed not re-tried, and the Hammonds were ordered back to jail to complete the original minimum sentence that they received when convicted. They now have a clemency request filed and don't want the militia screwing it up. They should have taken the plea deal that was offered to them if they didn't want to take the risk of going to jail. Maybe they should have got a better lawyer. Thousands of people are in jail in the US on mandatory minimums that don't fit the crime, and you guys need to ask yourself if you care about them, or just the Hammonds. They were charged and tried under a Terrorist law. Which carried a min. 5 year sentence. They were not charged and tried under a law for burning 100 some odd acres. Which was set as a back burn to protect their own ranch land that drifted onto BLM land.Yet, the BLM can burn hundreds of thousands of acres, plus cattle and homes and are not accountable at all. You are right, they were tried under the terrorist law, but not before they were offered a plea deal that would have let them off with fines and probation. They chose a trial by their peers, which is how we do it in this country. Just like Finicum, they chose thir own path, and now they have to live with it. Then, of course, there is this looming out there, and it's possible relationship to recent events. Far fetched? Maybe. Still, something to ponder. How is this related to Uranium? This story was originally from none other than the New York Times. Go figure. http://www.cnbc.com/2015/04/23/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as...
They have found Uranium deposits on the Hammond Ranch and the BLM land they have rights to. They want that land! So they fined them $400,000 and put them in jail. Of course the govt. is first in line for their deeded ranch as "payment" for their hefty fines. Hard to pay the fines and maintane the ranch with the 2 men in prison. | |
| | |
 To the Left
Posts: 1865
Location: Florida | Seriously? Can you hear yourselves? The man said he would never be taken alive. That land is a national park, it belongs to all of us. Why do you support giving it to private industry for free? Because that is what these few so called ranchers want. Real men work for what they want, these guys want to take it from all of us.
Edited by Vickie 2016-01-30 1:51 PM
| |
| | |
Extreme Veteran
Posts: 464
| Vickie - 2016-01-30 1:49 PM
Seriously? Â Can you hear yourselves? Â The man said he would never be taken alive. Â That land is a national park, it belongs to all of us. Â Why do you support giving it to private industry for free? Â Because that is what these few so called ranchers want. Â Real men work for what they want, these guys want to take it from all of us.Â
Get you some cows, and a BLM lease. Nothing is stopping you. Run em on it for your 3 month period, and then ride in and bring em back. Shouldn't be a problem. | |
| | |
 Semper Fi
Location: North Texas | Vickie - 2016-01-30 1:49 PM Seriously? Can you hear yourselves? The man said he would never be taken alive. That land is a national park, it belongs to all of us. Why do you support giving it to private industry for free? Because that is what these few so called ranchers want. Real men work for what they want, these guys want to take it from all of us.
Then why is the BLM involved instead of The National Park Service?
And just how do Americans own all this 'Federal Land'? Also, are You familar with the original General Land Office and its stated purpose. (Which was the fore runner to The BLM and National Forest Service). | |
| | |
 Own It and Move On
Location: The edge of no where | Vickie - 2016-01-30 1:49 PM Seriously? Can you hear yourselves? The man said he would never be taken alive. That land is a national park, it belongs to all of us. Why do you support giving it to private industry for free? Because that is what these few so called ranchers want. Real men work for what they want, these guys want to take it from all of us.
They were not protesting land that the BLM currently owns. The BLM is prosecuting private landowners and taking their land. The Hammond ranch is private property! (At least it is for now) | |
| | |
 Champ
Posts: 19623
Location: Peg-Leg Julia Grimm | FinneyQuarterHorses - 2016-01-30 7:14 AM
While at the vet yesterday, got to talking with the horseshoer there about this deal and government ownership of land. This is kind of eye opening about how people who don't really understand how things work can get things screwed up in their mind.
He told me a story about how he used to go camping on BLM land between Cheyenne and Laramie with his horse and just have a real good time. Then, the Obama Administration sold off that land to two Denver millionaires and now they won't let anybody use that stuff anymore, and it was all Obama's fault that he couldn't have fun out there anymore. When I brought up the fact that that was exactly what the ranchers and militiamen (that he sympathizes with) wanted to happen, turning federal land that everybody could use into private or state run, he dropped the conversation.
The ironic and sad part of the situation is that the people who are screaming the loudest about taking federal ground away from BLM and Forest Service control, are the ones that would be hurt the most by private or state ownership. If the land was sold, no small time rancher would be able to afford it, it would go to people like the Koch Brothers who own the Matador Ranch in Montana (300,000 plus acres and six federal allotments). If the state owns it, it would be mined and drilled and grazed into oblivion by the highest bidder, or should I say campaign donor, and those ranchers would be sol. If on the off chance they were able to secure the leases, the rental rates for state and private ground are one h.... Of a lot bigger than the federal $1.69 fee they pay now.
But, on the bright side, the ranchers would be free to do whatever they wanted on their little private ranch that is too small to make a living on and with the loss of its federal leases, valueless. But again, they will be "free" to make their own decisions.
My advice is be careful what you wish for.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EWfGtQvyb4
In LaVoy's own words. | |
| | |
Champ
Posts: 19623
Location: Peg-Leg Julia Grimm | Vickie - 2016-01-30 11:49 AM
Seriously? Â Can you hear yourselves? Â The man said he would never be taken alive. Â That land is a national park, it belongs to all of us. Â Why do you support giving it to private industry for free? Â Because that is what these few so called ranchers want. Â Real men work for what they want, these guys want to take it from all of us.Â
Hammonds bought their ranch. Many other ranchers bought the land they claim. The BLM has voided their rights.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/what-is-the-oregon-...
| |
| | |
To the Left
Posts: 1865
Location: Florida | Why would I get a BLM lease? I own my land. I don't want governent welfare, including rediculously cheap leases.
| |
| | |
 My Heart Be Happy
Posts: 9159
Location: Arkansas | musikmaker - 2016-01-30 9:58 AM
FinneyQuarterHorses - 2016-01-30 8:41 AM We all digress. I have to go feed now, but I think people should look seriously at the rise of militia groups in this country. They profess a willingness to kill or be killed. It's dangerous, and certainly does not garner any sympathy from "the masses" for ranchers, who up until now have had some kind of mystic and romantic appeal in an old west kind of way. You can see by the absence of conservative media and political attention this time around that the armed westerners fighting for their constitutional right from the big bad government is so yesterday for them.
The 'mystic appeal' is a live and well! Just like with the natives...lol. I can attest to that being in the hospitality industry.
Aside from that...it's not true that the western legislators have abandoned this, part of the problem is that we don't have the 'voice' in congress because we don't have the population! BECAUSE we can't 'grow' because the fed is claiming our land because...ugh.
The willingness to die is simple...it's not that anyone wants to die...it's that many, including me, feel that we'd rather die standing than on our knees begging. What does it teach our children if we're cowards? What happens when you're old and your grandchildren ask you about the stories of freedom while you're standing in the soup line and then ask why you laid down and didn't protect it for them?
"Give me liberty or give me death" is not a terrorist thought.Â
 | |
| | |
Champ
Posts: 19623
Location: Peg-Leg Julia Grimm | Douglas J Gordon - 2016-01-30 8:46 AM
OregonBR - 2016-01-30 12:03 AM OregonBR - 2016-01-29 6:56 PM https://www.oathkeepers.org/video-of-lavoy-tinicums-death-released/ Enhanced video of the final moments of LaVoy Finicum's life. He put BOTH hands to his left hip. Why would a right handed man go to his left hip with both hands to draw a weapon they said was in his pocket? And that he never drew out of said pocket? Eyewitness account have him being shot repeatedly. You can see one time shot in the back and how many are from other angles. Please actually LOOK at the links and videos being supplied right there for you? This is the final few moments of LaVoy's life. Have you ever tried to reach into your left jacket pocket with your right hand? Can't be done. https://www.oathkeepers.org/video-of-lavoy-tinicums-death-released/[...
This is th epoint I was trying to make in my previous post. We do not know what was going on at ground level. We need to hear the video and see it close up.
Did law enforcement tell him to drop his weapon? We don't know.
What were they saying to him? What was he sayiong to them?
Why did they not have the dogs take him down?
They knew he was a constitutional student and was keeping the Feds from taking land and water. We need to see close up video and audio!Â
They didn't release any sound. They have body cam video of this. We KNOW they do. Will they ever release them? KrisAnne Hall thinks they won't based on the patriot act. They have characterized these men as "terrorists" from the get-go. So they would be able to use the patriot act to not release the the sound and video from the body cams. Edited by OregonBR 2016-01-30 4:01 PM
| |
| | |
Champ
Posts: 19623
Location: Peg-Leg Julia Grimm | Vickie - 2016-01-30 1:42 PM
Why would I get a BLM lease? Â I own my land. I don't want governent welfare, including rediculously cheap leases.
Â
Do you not get it? They owned their ranch too. Yet they are being bullied by the BLM any way they can to get them to leave it. | |
| | |
Semper Fi
Location: North Texas | Vickie - 2016-01-30 3:42 PM
Why would I get a BLM lease? Â I own my land. I don't want governent welfare, including rediculously cheap leases.
Â
Again, why did The National Park Service get involved instead of The BLM with the claim of a National Park? Please respond. | |
| | |
 BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25351
Location: Bastrop, Texas | OregonBR - 2016-01-30 3:25 PM
FinneyQuarterHorses - 2016-01-30 7:14 AM
While at the vet yesterday, got to talking with the horseshoer there about this deal and government ownership of land. This is kind of eye opening about how people who don't really understand how things work can get things screwed up in their mind.
He told me a story about how he used to go camping on BLM land between Cheyenne and Laramie with his horse and just have a real good time. Then, the Obama Administration sold off that land to two Denver millionaires and now they won't let anybody use that stuff anymore, and it was all Obama's fault that he couldn't have fun out there anymore. When I brought up the fact that that was exactly what the ranchers and militiamen (that he sympathizes with) wanted to happen, turning federal land that everybody could use into private or state run, he dropped the conversation.
The ironic and sad part of the situation is that the people who are screaming the loudest about taking federal ground away from BLM and Forest Service control, are the ones that would be hurt the most by private or state ownership. If the land was sold, no small time rancher would be able to afford it, it would go to people like the Koch Brothers who own the Matador Ranch in Montana (300,000 plus acres and six federal allotments). If the state owns it, it would be mined and drilled and grazed into oblivion by the highest bidder, or should I say campaign donor, and those ranchers would be sol. If on the off chance they were able to secure the leases, the rental rates for state and private ground are one h.... Of a lot bigger than the federal $1.69 fee they pay now.
But, on the bright side, the ranchers would be free to do whatever they wanted on their little private ranch that is too small to make a living on and with the loss of its federal leases, valueless. But again, they will be "free" to make their own decisions.
My advice is be careful what you wish for.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EWfGtQvyb4
In LaVoy's own words.
He sure sounds like a good man and a nice guy. Certainly not some whacko nut job. He was definitely very brave, but he can no longer do anyone any good, except as a martyr.
Maybe this sounds a little idealistic, but I got to thinking when he was talking about the 3 branches of government. Why not have something like a congressional hearing, but make it a televised public forum where this issue is discussed by: 1.) a sampling of concerned citizens, 2.) members of the U.S. Congress, 3.) Supreme Court Justices, 4.) the Chief Executive of the land, and 5.) Elected state officials from the states where this is a hot button issue. We are talking about ownership, control, and regulation of 1/3 of the entire U.S. land mass. The first priority would be to establish and make clear what is supported within the framework of the constitution, and what isn't. Who knows? Maybe the consensus will wind up being that a Constitutional Ammendment is called for? We can either do something like this or continue the pattern we've seen over the last 40 years. | |
| | |
Semper Fi
Location: North Texas | Bear - 2016-01-30 4:41 PM
OregonBR - 2016-01-30 3:25 PM
FinneyQuarterHorses - 2016-01-30 7:14 AM
While at the vet yesterday, got to talking with the horseshoer there about this deal and government ownership of land. This is kind of eye opening about how people who don't really understand how things work can get things screwed up in their mind.
He told me a story about how he used to go camping on BLM land between Cheyenne and Laramie with his horse and just have a real good time. Then, the Obama Administration sold off that land to two Denver millionaires and now they won't let anybody use that stuff anymore, and it was all Obama's fault that he couldn't have fun out there anymore. When I brought up the fact that that was exactly what the ranchers and militiamen (that he sympathizes with) wanted to happen, turning federal land that everybody could use into private or state run, he dropped the conversation.
The ironic and sad part of the situation is that the people who are screaming the loudest about taking federal ground away from BLM and Forest Service control, are the ones that would be hurt the most by private or state ownership. If the land was sold, no small time rancher would be able to afford it, it would go to people like the Koch Brothers who own the Matador Ranch in Montana (300,000 plus acres and six federal allotments). If the state owns it, it would be mined and drilled and grazed into oblivion by the highest bidder, or should I say campaign donor, and those ranchers would be sol. If on the off chance they were able to secure the leases, the rental rates for state and private ground are one h.... Of a lot bigger than the federal $1.69 fee they pay now.
But, on the bright side, the ranchers would be free to do whatever they wanted on their little private ranch that is too small to make a living on and with the loss of its federal leases, valueless. But again, they will be "free" to make their own decisions.
My advice is be careful what you wish for.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EWfGtQvyb4
In LaVoy's own words.
He sure sounds like a good man and a nice guy. Certainly not some whacko nut job. He was definitely very brave, but he can no longer do anyone any good, except as a martyr.
Maybe this sounds a little idealistic, but I got to thinking when he was talking about the 3 branches of government. Why not have something like a congressional hearing, but make it a televised public forum where this issue is discussed by: 1. ) a sampling of concerned citizens, 2. ) members of the U.S. Congress, 3. ) Supreme Court Justices, 4. ) the Chief Executive of the land, and 5. ) Elected state officials from the states where this is a hot button issue. We are talking about ownership, control, and regulation of 1/3 of the entire U.S. land mass. The first priority would be to establish and make clear what is supported within the framework of the constitution, and what isn't. Who knows? Maybe the consensus will wind up being that a Constitutional Ammendment is called for? We can either do something like this or continue the pattern we've seen over the last 40 years.
I believe a Convention of States would answer the question of Constitutional Amendment requirements...................... | |
| | |
Miracle in the Making
Posts: 4013
|
the biggest problem is 1 he was middle age white dude not burning and looting had pis pants where they belonged
now is he had been black and throw gas bomb we would know everything | |
| | |
Tried and True
Posts: 21185
Location: Where I am happiest | Bear - 2016-01-30 4:41 PM OregonBR - 2016-01-30 3:25 PM FinneyQuarterHorses - 2016-01-30 7:14 AM While at the vet yesterday, got to talking with the horseshoer there about this deal and government ownership of land. This is kind of eye opening about how people who don't really understand how things work can get things screwed up in their mind. He told me a story about how he used to go camping on BLM land between Cheyenne and Laramie with his horse and just have a real good time. Then, the Obama Administration sold off that land to two Denver millionaires and now they won't let anybody use that stuff anymore, and it was all Obama's fault that he couldn't have fun out there anymore. When I brought up the fact that that was exactly what the ranchers and militiamen (that he sympathizes with) wanted to happen, turning federal land that everybody could use into private or state run, he dropped the conversation. The ironic and sad part of the situation is that the people who are screaming the loudest about taking federal ground away from BLM and Forest Service control, are the ones that would be hurt the most by private or state ownership. If the land was sold, no small time rancher would be able to afford it, it would go to people like the Koch Brothers who own the Matador Ranch in Montana (300,000 plus acres and six federal allotments). If the state owns it, it would be mined and drilled and grazed into oblivion by the highest bidder, or should I say campaign donor, and those ranchers would be sol. If on the off chance they were able to secure the leases, the rental rates for state and private ground are one h.... Of a lot bigger than the federal $1.69 fee they pay now. But, on the bright side, the ranchers would be free to do whatever they wanted on their little private ranch that is too small to make a living on and with the loss of its federal leases, valueless. But again, they will be "free" to make their own decisions. My advice is be careful what you wish for. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EWfGtQvyb4 In LaVoy's own words. He sure sounds like a good man and a nice guy. Certainly not some whacko nut job. He was definitely very brave, but he can no longer do anyone any good, except as a martyr. Maybe this sounds a little idealistic, but I got to thinking when he was talking about the 3 branches of government. Why not have something like a congressional hearing, but make it a televised public forum where this issue is discussed by: 1. ) a sampling of concerned citizens, 2. ) members of the U.S. Congress, 3. ) Supreme Court Justices, 4. ) the Chief Executive of the land, and 5. ) Elected state officials from the states where this is a hot button issue. We are talking about ownership, control, and regulation of 1/3 of the entire U.S. land mass. The first priority would be to establish and make clear what is supported within the framework of the constitution, and what isn't. Who knows? Maybe the consensus will wind up being that a Constitutional Ammendment is called for? We can either do something like this or continue the pattern we've seen over the last 40 years.
I would love that to happen!! I would love the BLM to be investigated!! I dont however think we need any constitutional ammendments. I believe we need the rogue agency's and congress to be held to the Constitution and reined in!
? Also, just a side note..Many are saying LaVoy was shot first and that is why he reached down. He was reaching to where he was shot. | |
| | |
Tried and True
Posts: 21185
Location: Where I am happiest | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gioIUdfAiTk | |
| | |
 BHW's Lance Armstrong 
Posts: 11134
Location: Somewhere between S@%&# stirrer and Saint |
 Wow, good man fighting against a giant. He is gone so who will continue the fight? | |
| |
| |
Folks on-line