|
|
 Proud to be Deplorable
Posts: 1929
   
| ThreeCorners - 2016-01-31 6:37 PM
jbhoot - 2016-01-31 11:39 AM Bear - 2016-01-31 11:26 AM Terrible audio quality. I couldn't listen beyond the first 2 minutes of her talking. I'll wait for something of better quality. Also, does anyone know anything about the autopsy? Was there even an autopsy? There should be. Naturally LaVoy's people are going to call this murder and describe the events in such a way to support their version. I just want the truth, one way or the other, just like I wanted the truth when the thug in Fergusson Missouri was shot. There are better ones out there Scott. It may be her views on the incident but I find it hard to believe mainly because several of her statements do not match the unedited video.
I have watched The unedited video six times and stand by opinion. | |
| | |
  Warmblood with Wings
Posts: 27846
 
Location: Florida.. | jbhoot - 2016-01-31 8:32 PM ThreeCorners - 2016-01-31 6:37 PM jbhoot - 2016-01-31 11:39 AM Bear - 2016-01-31 11:26 AM Terrible audio quality. I couldn't listen beyond the first 2 minutes of her talking. I'll wait for something of better quality. Also, does anyone know anything about the autopsy? Was there even an autopsy? There should be. Naturally LaVoy's people are going to call this murder and describe the events in such a way to support their version. I just want the truth, one way or the other, just like I wanted the truth when the thug in Fergusson Missouri was shot. There are better ones out there Scott. It may be her views on the incident but I find it hard to believe mainly because several of her statements do not match the unedited video. I have watched The unedited video six times and stand by opinion.
me to.. | |
| | |
 BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25351
Location: Bastrop, Texas | jbhoot - 2016-01-31 7:32 PM
ThreeCorners - 2016-01-31 6:37 PM
jbhoot - 2016-01-31 11:39 AM Bear - 2016-01-31 11:26 AM Terrible audio quality. I couldn't listen beyond the first 2 minutes of her talking. I'll wait for something of better quality. Also, does anyone know anything about the autopsy? Was there even an autopsy? There should be. Naturally LaVoy's people are going to call this murder and describe the events in such a way to support their version. I just want the truth, one way or the other, just like I wanted the truth when the thug in Fergusson Missouri was shot. There are better ones out there Scott. It may be her views on the incident but I find it hard to believe mainly because several of her statements do not match the unedited video.
I have watched The unedited video six times and stand by opinion.
What I saw was they plowed into the snow and LaVon hopped out. He raised his hands and turned to look around, then reached with his right hand over to his left side, then he dropped. Nothing in that video indicated several shots were fired. It was consistent with one shot. If he was shot several times, an autopsy would prove it, obviously. Do we even know for sure if there was an autopsy? There should be. Didn't the FBI claim that he was only shot once? Good grief, it should be easy to prove if he was shot "several times". The family can request an autopsy.
I haven't seen an autopsy even mentioned anywhere. Has anyone else? | |
| | |
 Nicknameless
Posts: 4565
Location: I can see the end of the world from here! | Take it or leave it...be whatever you choose, just be ready for consequences...really think hard about this, the future of our world is at stake, your children, grandchildren. These people have nothing to gain and everything to lose...as do you.
CLIVEN D. BUNDY
PO BOX 7175
BUNKERVILLE, NV 89007
January 29, 2016
NEWS RELEASE
LIBERTY FREEDOM FOR GOD WE STAND!
In all things, we have sought guidance, and desired to do God, our Father’s, will! We have studied the gospel of Jesus Christ, through his prophets, and try to understand the proper form of government, mostly the inspired US Constitution, the supreme law of the land. Desiring freedom, that all man might be able to exercise his agency.
The US Constitution lays out a very plain simple form of inspired government. We as a nation only need to follow it! Our founding fathers fought the battles for freedom and laid out the plan, the supreme law. We the People need to make beneficial use of it and defend it.
January 26, 2016, this week, LaVoy Finicum was assassinated by wicked and evil men representing our US government. These men in local, state, and US government feared the truths that LaVoy Finicum was standing for and teaching to his fellowmen. The truth about the supreme law of this land was more than these leaching bureaucrats could allow! The teaching of the true principles had to stop. Great fear needs to be put in the minds of We the People, great fear. (The work of the devil!) All is well. All is well in Zion. All is well in your government. There cannot be a cry go out for freedom, or for property rights, state sovereignty, local government closet to the people – government by the people – for the people. No, we cannot allow policing power be in the hands of We the People’s elected county Sheriff. We the great bureaucracies rule and have unlimited power over these lands. We feed our family, we buy our houses, our cars, and our offices are air-conditioned. We have guns, cars with lights, sirens, the best communication equipment, good health care and a lush guaranteed retirement plan! We have unlimited power. We can buy up everything and every man’s soul with their own money and with their 18 trillion dollar debt. We are prospering. We own the state government and their land. We buy and control their schools and their sheriff. We control the water in the river and under the earth. We control the airways, even the signals that pass around the world. We, the bureaucrat, are the supreme. We control, or at least we are about to control, the environment. We control all the endangered species of the creatures and plants. We control the elements in the earth and all the markets of the commodities of this earth. Yes, all is well in Zion!
Men like LaVoy Finicum, the Bundy brothers, those patriots and those who pray for freedom and liberty and support for people, such as women like Shawna Cox – they are all crazies! They are threatening our lifestyle, our unlimited and great authority, and our policing power. We are the majority. They are only a few producers, but with money and fear – we control the rest!
(All of these great powers mentioned above, the US constitution does not give to the US government. In the 10th Amendment only a very few enumerated powers are given by the people to the federal government. All other powers and rights are reserved to the states respectively or to the people.) (The Bill of Rights Article X)
With money and fear we will justify the assassination of LaVoy Finicum and make political prisoners of all that dare to lift their hand. (We can, we will kill.) This is our livelihood and we will protect our right of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, so help me Devil!
The line is drawn between We the People. On one side, the bureaucrat, the hungry fat cat. On the other side, the producer and the protector that cares for and multiplies and replenishes the God given resources with his blood, sweat, and tears to protect and feed this land. The one who pours the milk in the fat cat’s bowl!
How did America get to this point? Is it because We the People want to take a lick or two out of the bowl? Is it because we the rancher, the livestock industry, accepted the Taylor Grazing Act as being constitutional? The livestock industry did accept the work of the federal government in mapping and adjudicating our preempted property rights that were created through beneficial use of the renewable resources, water and forage. The adjudicated lands are all within admitted states within the union of the United States. When we look at the large map of the United States we see that in the west the federal government claims over 50% ownership of the land. In a state, like Nevada, they claim over 90% ownership of the land. How can that be? Show me. Show me where it says in the constitution that the federal government can own mass areas of land? Only in Article 4, Section 3 of our constitution do We the People give congress unlimited power over land and congress had power to dispose of these lands. That’s exactly what they did when they admitted states to the union. The only other power that the constitution affords the government is Article 1 Section 8 Clause 17, here We the People give congress unlimited power to legislate over 10 miles square, which is Washington DC, and other property purchased with the consent of state legislature for military purposes and other needful buildings.
So again the question is, how can the bureaucrat have so much unlimited power within an admitted state? Who are the stewards of the land over this red area on the map? Isn’t the rancher the one with the adjudicated rights the steward of the land? We the ranchers are responsible for this great over reach of the federal government. We, the rancher, signed contracts with the federal government such a leases, permits and licenses. We, the rancher, signed contracts giving the US bureaucracies unlimited power to manage our stewardship and we pay them a grazing fee to do this. This contract between the individual and the US government puts both parties in the federal court system because one party or the other breaches something in the contract. In the federal court system the resource user NEVER wins. Remember a contract has been signed that says they have unlimited power. This contract takes the constitutional jurisdiction and authority away from your local sheriff, away from your county government, away from state government giving unlimited power to the federal bureaucrats – BLM, Forest Service, US Fish & Wildlife, Park Service, EPA and etc. This is what LaVoy Finicum, my sons, Shawna Cox, and other patriots were out in the western lands trying to teach. This is why they assassinated LaVoy Finicum.
Cliven D. Bundy
| |
| | |
Warmblood with Wings
Posts: 27846
Location: Florida.. | I know someones tried to answer my question.. but i have asked here and on facebook.. no one can tell me.... The land his home was built on.. was it his bought and paid for by him.. the land his home was on.. also.. grazing rights isnt considered their land is it? I have asked for a few days and I keep getting these copy paste stuff but no definitive answers.. its black and white..
Edited by Bibliafarm 2016-01-31 8:34 PM
| |
| | |
Nicknameless
Posts: 4565
Location: I can see the end of the world from here! | Bear - 2016-01-31 7:27 PM jbhoot - 2016-01-31 7:32 PM ThreeCorners - 2016-01-31 6:37 PM jbhoot - 2016-01-31 11:39 AM Bear - 2016-01-31 11:26 AM Terrible audio quality. I couldn't listen beyond the first 2 minutes of her talking. I'll wait for something of better quality. Also, does anyone know anything about the autopsy? Was there even an autopsy? There should be. Naturally LaVoy's people are going to call this murder and describe the events in such a way to support their version. I just want the truth, one way or the other, just like I wanted the truth when the thug in Fergusson Missouri was shot. There are better ones out there Scott. It may be her views on the incident but I find it hard to believe mainly because several of her statements do not match the unedited video. I have watched The unedited video six times and stand by opinion. What I saw was they plowed into the snow and LaVon hopped out. He raised his hands and turned to look around, then reached with his right hand over to his left side, then he dropped. Nothing in that video indicated several shots were fired. It was consistent with one shot. If he was shot several times, an autopsy would prove it, obviously. Do we even know for sure if there was an autopsy? There should be. Didn't the FBI claim that he was only shot once? Good grief, it should be easy to prove if he was shot "several times". The family can request an autopsy. I haven't seen an autopsy even mentioned anywhere. Has anyone else?
Autopsy has most definitely been requested as have pictures of the pickup...so far, zilch.
You cannot tell without audio when the shots were fired, however, it's very obvious that the back window of the camper was shot out befoe Lavoy was shot as was the windshield and in the unedited version of the shooting, after Lavoy was shot, the camera clearly shows shots being fired after it pans towards the front of the vehicle...I suppose a person can see what they want to to justify their 'position and opinion' otherwise it would never have been released.
I recall vividly the fbi saying one thing immediately following the news (3 shots fired by fbi) 'shootout' (as in return fire), 'charging the police' (uh-huh) and 'traffic stop'...verses the young girls version that matches this exactly...I guess with all the bull**** they had to 'match' up their story as close as they could...it stinks to me, but hey, maybe my 'smeller' is just a little sharper than some?
It looks to me that Lavoy was pointing to the pickup! Why in the h** would he exit the pickup THEN try to draw his gun???? He was not a stupid man. He was a 'target'.
I know it's very hard to imagine that our government could do this to citizens...or that we could we live in la la land. Denial enables all things...that is a fact.
I still believe, so far, that the fed expected a 'shootout' and when it didn't happen the shooters stopped...maybe because they finally ralized it was 'hit'? Maybe they had a conscience and couldn't continue...surely they didn't run out of ammo...
| |
| | |
Proud to be Deplorable
Posts: 1929
| Bear - 2016-01-31 8:27 PM
jbhoot - 2016-01-31 7:32 PM
ThreeCorners - 2016-01-31 6:37 PM
jbhoot - 2016-01-31 11:39 AM Bear - 2016-01-31 11:26 AM Terrible audio quality. I couldn't listen beyond the first 2 minutes of her talking. I'll wait for something of better quality. Also, does anyone know anything about the autopsy? Was there even an autopsy? There should be. Naturally LaVoy's people are going to call this murder and describe the events in such a way to support their version. I just want the truth, one way or the other, just like I wanted the truth when the thug in Fergusson Missouri was shot. There are better ones out there Scott. It may be her views on the incident but I find it hard to believe mainly because several of her statements do not match the unedited video.
I have watched The unedited video six times and stand by opinion.
What I saw was they plowed into the snow and LaVon hopped out. He raised his hands and turned to look around, then reached with his right hand over to his left side, then he dropped. Nothing in that video indicated several shots were fired. It was consistent with one shot. If he was shot several times, an autopsy would prove it, obviously. Do we even know for sure if there was an autopsy? There should be. Didn't the FBI claim that he was only shot once? Good grief, it should be easy to prove if he was shot "several times". The family can request an autopsy.
I haven't seen an autopsy even mentioned anywhere. Has anyone else?
I am sure there will be one. | |
| | |
 I Prefer to Live in Fantasy Land
Posts: 64864
Location: In the Hills of Texas | Bibliafarm - 2016-01-31 8:32 PM I know someones tried to answer my question.. but i have asked here and on facebook.. no one can tell me.... The land his home was built on.. was it his bought and paid for by him.. the land his home was on.. also.. grazing rights isnt considered their land is it? I have asked for a few days and I keep getting these copy paste stuff but no definitive answers.. its black and white..
Most own their homes and some land but then lease grazing rights where they are then allowed to have their cattle graze on that land that unconsitutionally is owned by the federal government. Those lands should belong to the states.
I think where you are getting confused is the article I posted about what is going on with the BLM and ranchers along the Red River in Texas. What is the Bureau of Land Management claiming?
The subject of dispute is a 116-mile stretch of land along the Red River. Basically, the BLM claims that the land—which many ranchers and property owners, including Aderholt, hold deeds on—are actually public lands, because the river’s course has changed. The BLM claims that the land actually hasn’t been private since a Supreme Court case in the 1920’s established what part of the Red River belongs to the public, but the people who own the deeds have been paying taxes on that property in that time.
What do the deed holders say?
Not a huge surprise, but they don’t buy it. Some, like Aderholt, have built homes on the land that the BLM says belongs to the public, and many of them use the land for ranching, so it’s not just the principle of the matter—people’s livelihoods are at stake here. So they’re angry, and they have been since the issue came up last year. It may be true that a Supreme Court case nearly a hundred years ago explained what’s public land and what’s private land along the Red River, but those borders have never clearly defined, which has deed holders suspicious about why the BLM is only now claiming that it’s land that they’ve been using.
So whose land is it?
That’s the big question here. If the river’s course changed gradually, through erosion, the Bureau of Land Management has a case here. It’s an unpopular school of thought if you hold the deed, but, as former Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson put it last year, “When rivers move, boundaries change. That’s accepted law, no one disputes that.”
The issue here, though, is whether the Red River’s banks have moved through gradual erosion, or whether it was a process called avulsion, where the river’s banks change suddenly because of a flood or another catastrophic event. When that’s the cause of the change, the land rights aren’t affected. Patterson told Breitbart last year that “the BLM always assumes that it’s avulsive when it works to their advantage, and that it’s erosion when it works to their advantage.” Patterson argues that, if the Bureau of Land Management wants that land, they’ll have to prove that it was erosion that changed the course of the river.
The laws at work here are old—dating back to the Louisiana Purchase—and complicated. It’s hard to know exactly whose land it is, but it’s also likely that the ownership issue here fairly blindsided the deed holders. In the Bundy Ranch standoff, sympathies were pretty easy to assign along party lines—part of Bundy’s argument for why the land in question was his was that he didn’t “recognize the federal government as even existing,” which appealed to those who share that belief, but alienated those who considered Bundy’s claims to the land dubious at best. Deed holders like Aderholt, on the other hand, require less worldview-identification to sympathize with. That’s important here, as the case proceeds to move through the court of public opinion.
- See more at: http://www.texasmonthly.com/the-daily-post/is-the-bureau-of-land-ma...
| |
| | |
Nicknameless
Posts: 4565
Location: I can see the end of the world from here! | Bibliafarm - 2016-01-31 7:32 PM I know someones tried to answer my question.. but i have asked here and on facebook.. no one can tell me.... The land his home was built on.. was it his bought and paid for by him.. the land his home was on.. also.. grazing rights isnt considered their land is it? I have asked for a few days and I keep getting these copy paste stuff but no definitive answers.. its black and white..
I don't know. I haven't researched the land parcel ownership in Arizona...the BLM has a site where you can find the history of the so-called 'public land'.
http://www.geocommunicator.gov/GeoComm/
I highly doubt that their home is on lease land, it usually doesn't work that way...they likely 'own' a section where their home is and own the resources on adjoining sections...and otherwise. Ranchers out here must own grazing rights for summer and winter pastures.
| |
| | |
Warmblood with Wings
Posts: 27846
Location: Florida.. | Thanks you all. I wonder how they can take their home itself then, not the land around it... unless owed money etc..
Edited by Bibliafarm 2016-01-31 9:07 PM
| |
| | |
Nicknameless
Posts: 4565
Location: I can see the end of the world from here! | Bibliafarm - 2016-01-31 8:07 PM Thanks you all. I wonder how they can take their home itself then, not the land around it... unless owed money etc.. They put such a burden on the ranchers through regulations that they cannot afford to keep it. I shared a video of lavoy earlier where he was explaining this...the pasture he was speaking of at the time was one that the blm had pulled from grazing for six years even though he still had to pay the AUM on it. The federal government is no more adept at managing land than they were the Mustang Ranch. And the wildfires out here are crazy! We're losing so much wildlife, timber, grazing, watersheds...due to the inept manegment by the fed. It must stop. The states need to take it over quick.
Edited by musikmaker 2016-01-31 9:16 PM
| |
| | |
Warmblood with Wings
Posts: 27846
Location: Florida.. | musikmaker - 2016-01-31 10:14 PM Bibliafarm - 2016-01-31 8:07 PM Thanks you all. I wonder how they can take their home itself then, not the land around it... unless owed money etc.. They put such a burden on the ranchers through regulations that they cannot afford to keep it. I shared a video of lavoy earlier where he was explaining this...the pasture he was speaking of at the time was one that the blm had pulled from grazing for six years even though he still had to pay the AUM on it. The federal government is no more adept at managing land than they were the Mustang Ranch. And the wildfires out here are crazy! We're losing so much wildlife, timber, grazing, watersheds...due to the inept manegment by the fed. It must stop. The states need to take it over quick.
Now that makes sense.!! thanks .. | |
| | |
 Veteran
Posts: 287
| musikmaker - 2016-01-31 7:14 PM
Bibliafarm - 2016-01-31 8:07 PM Â Thanks you all. I wonder how they can take their home itself then, not the land around it... unless owed money etc.. They put such a burden on the ranchers through regulations that they cannot afford to keep it. I shared a video of lavoy earlier where he was explaining this...the pasture he was speaking of at the time was one that the blm had pulled from grazing for six years even though he still had to pay the AUM on it. The federal government is no more adept at managing land than they were the Mustang Ranch. And the wildfires out here are crazy! We're losing so much wildlife, timber, grazing, watersheds...due to the inept manegment by the fed. It must stop. The states need to take it over quick.
100% true! We are going through the very same here. Not just natural resources but actual cattle too. Theyou set a backfire that almost killed a friend's husband and 200 head of cattle. At least they won the lawsuit on that one. My best friend has a pasture full of cows with burnt feet cause they were told they had 24 hours to get them out and they actually got about two hours notice. And these people run 400-500 pair on that mountain. And there was many other families with cattle up there too that went through the same. 100's of head burnt to deal. Lives risked and tens of thousands of pasture unusable in the middle of summer because the government doesn't give one sh!t about the farmers or ranchers. Ugghhh. And that was just one fire! | |
| | |
Veteran
Posts: 287
| Hope I've not already posted that story, lol. I'm like 50 first dates and forget what stories I tell, lol | |
| | |
Warmblood with Wings
Posts: 27846
Location: Florida.. | Heres the story in reaccounting it.. I still believe he got shot due to his actions..
not ambushed not murdered.. read every bit of it..
doesnt mean I feel the government is right in taking land.. but in this situation I believe the officers were justified to shot him.he does carry a gun on that side BTW.. proof in the photos at interviews yet so many were saying no way....http://bearingarms.com/lavoy-finicum-murdered-forced-oregon-police-shoot/ | |
| | |
Tried and True
Posts: 21185
Location: Where I am happiest | jbhoot - 2016-01-31 7:32 PM ThreeCorners - 2016-01-31 6:37 PM jbhoot - 2016-01-31 11:39 AM Bear - 2016-01-31 11:26 AM Terrible audio quality. I couldn't listen beyond the first 2 minutes of her talking. I'll wait for something of better quality. Also, does anyone know anything about the autopsy? Was there even an autopsy? There should be. Naturally LaVoy's people are going to call this murder and describe the events in such a way to support their version. I just want the truth, one way or the other, just like I wanted the truth when the thug in Fergusson Missouri was shot. There are better ones out there Scott. It may be her views on the incident but I find it hard to believe mainly because several of her statements do not match the unedited video. I have watched The unedited video six times and stand by opinion.
You have that right. However, many police officers also concure he was shot and reaching for his gunshot and are saying the video matches her account of events. Read for yourself. https://www.facebook.com/Law-and-Order-American-Justice-105477983124317/?pnref=story | |
| | |
Tried and True
Posts: 21185
Location: Where I am happiest | Bibliafarm - 2016-01-31 9:47 PM Heres the story in reaccounting it.. I still believe he got shot due to his actions..
not ambushed not murdered.. read every bit of it..
doesnt mean I feel the government is right in taking land.. but in this situation I believe the officers were justified to shot him.he does carry a gun on that side BTW.. proof in the photos at interviews yet so many were saying no way....http://bearingarms.com/lavoy-finicum-murdered-forced-oregon-police-shoot/
Finicum is a right handed shooter. He wore a right handed hip holster. At the scene, he was reaching to his left side. According the the TWO THAT WERE THERE, he was unarmed. His guns are still at the reserve! | |
| | |
BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25351
Location: Bastrop, Texas | Bibliafarm - 2016-01-31 9:47 PM
 Heres the story in reaccounting it.. I still believe he got shot due to his actions..
not ambushed not murdered.. read every bit of it..
doesnt mean I feel the government is right in taking land.. but in this situation I believe the officers were justified to shot him.he does carry a gun on that side BTW.. proof in the photos at interviews yet so many were saying no way....http://bearingarms.com/lavoy-finicum-murdered-forced-oregon-police-shoot/
This is the best explanation I've read so far. It all seems to fit.
As much as I feel their plight, I just think LaVoy made the same mistake so many inner city thugs have made. In those instances, there were similar claims that the cops murdered the thug, same as LaVoy. I'm not saying he's some thug, but he made the same fatal error in judgement, and the claims that he was murdered are the same. If he was murdered, then there should be enough evidence to lead to an indictment. This is definitely worth reading. | |
| | |
BHW Resident Surgeon
Posts: 25351
Location: Bastrop, Texas | ThreeCorners - 2016-01-31 10:16 PM
Bibliafarm - 2016-01-31 9:47 PM Â Heres the story in reaccounting it.. I still believe he got shot due to his actions..
not ambushed not murdered.. read every bit of it..
doesnt mean I feel the government is right in taking land.. but in this situation I believe the officers were justified to shot him.he does carry a gun on that side BTW.. proof in the photos at interviews yet so many were saying no way....http://bearingarms.com/lavoy-finicum-murdered-forced-oregon-police-shoot/
Obviously you didn't even glance at the link posted by Biblia. Go back and read. There are even pictures, if that's what you want. | |
| | |
Proud to be Deplorable
Posts: 1929
| Bibliafarm - 2016-01-31 9:47 PM
 Heres the story in reaccounting it.. I still believe he got shot due to his actions..
not ambushed not murdered.. read every bit of it..
doesnt mean I feel the government is right in taking land.. but in this situation I believe the officers were justified to shot him.he does carry a gun on that side BTW.. proof in the photos at interviews yet so many were saying no way....http://bearingarms.com/lavoy-finicum-murdered-forced-oregon-police-shoot/
I agree with this.
| |
| |
| |
Folks on-line