|
|
 Nicknameless
Posts: 4565
  
Location: I can see the end of the world from here! | Since the Bundy Standoff these Patriots have been referred to as 'anti-government terrorists'. That is the 1st bit of propaganda that needs correcting. The blm, atf, fbi...are not valid branches of our structured government...they are akin to Al Capone's 'army', therefore, being 'anti' department of interior is not anti-government.
The People are the government! It's high time we realize it.
The fbi...federal bureau of investigation...created to investigate the federal government.
Which is exactly what Ammon Bundy demanded they do prior to and during the legal occupation...investigate.
The fbi is an internal bureau just like all the others within and under the complete control of the executive branch...not at all what our framers had in mind! And we the people do have tools to return the balance of power where it belongs, then a group who is doing exactly that is targeted and murdered...hmmm...it's not that hard to figure out.
The question is, will we stand behind them or cower?
I'm of the mind that the main stream media are scared to death of this...and they should be. Nobody wants a civil war...nobody.
Our nation can be returned to greatness without bloodshed...as KrisAnne Hall says, "We need a revolution of the mind". We get there through education...understanding and asserting our rights...it requires our local elected officials on up...starting with the sheriff.
There are many who are working on this...all is not lost!
I know most of us grasp this and I'm not saying anything we don't already know...I just want to reiterate in hopes that we stay the course and help to make a difference, share the info, teach your children the things they won't learn in school, pray...and know that all the socialists I've ever met have resentful hearts...pray for them, too.
This is just a recap on Newsmax...I know we're all emotionally worn from seeing a good man killed over and over...I try to think of it as his gift to America...and it's now our duty to carry his message forward.
https://www.facebook.com/DMLdaily/videos/1111323878907068/?fref=nf
| |
| | |
 I'm not opinionated
Posts: 4597
Location: Online | I realize there are people out there who won't believe a word of this because their heads are buried do deep in the sand that they only believe what the government tells them - those who lack common sense. No matter how much this statement from an eye witness makes sense. I found it interesting that the only footage the Feds released was a soundless, grainy video from above. In an attempt to appease the masses, because they think we are stupid. I won't be satisfied until I see the dashcam with sound, pictures of the truck before they crush it, and an autopsy report. I'm actually surprised the witnesses that were in the truck are still alive. That they didn't get in an "accident" on the way to jail.
In Obama's America, the little people are stupid and believe everything they see on "official" video. Especially when they hear commentary from a Fed to explain what is going on in said video.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B__um65-yUXEREdGS1llOGFfSGs/view?pref=2&pli=1 | |
| | |
 Shelter Dog Lover
Posts: 10277
 
| foundation horse - 2016-02-04 9:38 AM FinneyQuarterHorses - 2016-02-03 10:07 PM foundation horse - 2016-02-03 9:33 PM Finney, You impress me as a whiney, undereducated, jealous person who has the idea Government is supposed to right all wrongs........................................ And you don't impress me with your twisted logic to "protect the ranchers from the big, bad government" on one hand while advocating for privatization that would destroy those very same ranchers. My late brother-in-law in western Montana ranched next to privatized land purchased by Ted Turner. His purchase of an enormous tract of land displaced 17 ranchers. You howl for the love of it, not because you give a hoot about the ranch families, so don't pretend you do. Otherwise you wouldn't stomp and shout about the government taking their land but not the capitalistic billionaires who never have enough land or money. You and your kind are hypocrites, looking for a reason to spew your anti-government rhetoric, and you found just the right target in an economically depressed community filled with people looking for a miracle. So don't pretend you care about those ranchers, because if that 40% of the workforce that keeps Harney County hanging on is gone, that community is done. Your hatred has twisted you so that can't even comprehend or understand that leaders in your movement are already touting how much money they could make with all those resources. And maybe you need to revisit your history lessons if you have forgotten the bloody mess that was the cattle baron wars, where small ranchers were murdered and driven off their land by wealthy capitalists who purchased the lawmakers. Sound familiar? So you can fool all the silly little girls and boys reading your garbled logic that you are a warrior for the ranchers, but you don't fool me. So you admit to being "anti-capitalist"? What about your love of The OKC Thunder Basketball Team? Are they 'capitalist'? You brought up me being a hypocrite, usually when one tosses out a label like that, said invariably speaks from experience. Also, You are quite condescending in regards to insinuating the rest of the people on this board are 'silly little boys and girls". I believe there are many intelligent people in this group who can and do think for themselves.
Finney is a capitalist, just on a different scale as the big dogs. I am sure she retains her profits from sells of her horses etc. When she voluntarily shares/gives her land and profits away, she will no longer be a capitalist. What Finney doesn't seem to get is that her advocating for big government control is the same thing as advocating for the "greedy capitalists" and capitalism that she seems to hate-even though this is the same system, ills and all, that allows for her way of life, allows for her to make choices, allows for individual freedoms. I have no resentment for those who have found huge wealth. I don't want anyone telling me how much land I can own. I like states rights to chose for themselves. | |
| | |
 Knowledge is Power
Posts: 4051
Location: wherever my daughter's running | The below text in red was copied from an article shared on the first page of this thread. To me this and the fact that the Hammonds had to sign a legal document giving the BLM firt right of refusal for their ranch shows the Hammond Ranch is hindering the federal government from securing their farm as part of the Malheur Refuge. A refuge that was ordered by Roosevelt and started as 87,000 something acreas and has know grown to over 187,000 acres. It was started to protect birds from plum hunters that were harvesting plums from the birds of that area for womens hats. This has been a refuge for the birds since 1908 - was 87,000 not enough to insure the birds had a refuge? The federal government wants the Hammond Ranch - pure and simple. If this was something new I think peoples point of view may be different. Clearly the federal goverment has taken to amassing large amounts of land - reseach how much they own in states like Nevads and sorrounding states. It has been documented time after time where the government uses tactics to pressure people for land. The same government that was founded to be of the people, for the people and by the people.
The jury also convicted Steven Hammond of using fire to destroy federal property regarding a 2006 arson known as the Krumbo Butte Fire located in the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge and Steen Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area.
While the Hammonds have distanced themselves from the takeover and the Bundy's it was the very act of putting the Hammonds back in jail and requiring them to pay the BLM 400,000 for damage to federal land that caused the takeover of the refuge. Lock up two of the Hammond family reducing the workfoce and income - hit them with a hefty fine with a short deadline to pay - and have a docement signed that you have first right of refusal. Is this the way citizens who provide for this country's need as to be treated? LaVoy, the Bundy's, the Hammonds and others live this day in and day out. This is why what really happened to LaVoy Finecum matters.
What is to stop it from happening to anyone when government overreaches bounds?
Edited by cruise 2016-02-04 11:07 AM
| |
| | |
Nicknameless
Posts: 4565
Location: I can see the end of the world from here! | MS2011 - 2016-02-04 8:31 AM I'm going to have to research this some more....but here's a video of Cruz discussing returning the land to the states. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EzjE2OrM5MI&feature=youtu.be[/qu...
Cruz's stance on the public lands is why he lost my vote! He continued on to say that the federal gov't shouldn't own more than 50% of any state! Hellloooo...the fed shouldn't own ANY of it not specified in Art.1, s 8, c 17...including parks and monuments.
Did you know that the only National Park that the United States actually, legally, owns is Yellowstone? Wyoming ceded the land which is a requirement. No other state has done so and I fervently hope they do not.
It justifies the creation of a bureaucracy that is not constitutional...they do not need that 'toe hold' in any state.
Central Park in NYC isn't 'owned' by the fed...why should any other park be owned by an outside organization? We can still have our parks...they'll just be state parks. We already have state parks...they work! They make money! And the states need the resources to keep it all working without begging for PILT funding. | |
| | |
Elite Veteran
Posts: 695
Location: Windoming | Yep, the government owns more land in Wyoming than private landowners. | |
| | |
Nicknameless
Posts: 4565
Location: I can see the end of the world from here! | E.T. Williams...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fff_NFMb9zs&feature=youtube_gdata_player
| |
| | |
Nicknameless
Posts: 4565
Location: I can see the end of the world from here! | Wow...a 'shot by shot' look at the murder...and an agent flipping Lavoy off as he died????
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jG3O5wA4o7g&sns=fb
| |
| | |
  Champ
Posts: 19623
Location: Peg-Leg Julia Grimm | cruise - 2016-02-04 8:47 AM
The below text in red was copied from an article shared on the first page of this thread. To me this and the fact that the Hammonds had to sign a legal document giving the BLM firt right of refusal for their ranch shows the Hammond Ranch is hindering the federal government from securing their farm as part of the Malheur Refuge. A refuge that was ordered by Roosevelt and started as 87,000 something acreas and has know grown to over 187,000 acres. It was started to protect birds from plum hunters that were harvesting plums from the birds of that area for womens hats. This has been a refuge for the birds since 1908 - was 87,000 not enough to insure the birds had a refuge? The federal government wants the Hammond Ranch - pure and simple. If this was something new I think peoples point of view may be different. Clearly the federal goverment has taken to amassing large amounts of land - reseach how much they own in states like Nevads and sorrounding states.  It has been documented time after time where the government uses tactics to pressure people for land. The same government that was founded to be of the people, for the people and by the people.  Â
The jury also convicted Steven Hammond of using fire to destroy federal property regarding a 2006 arson known as the Krumbo Butte Fire located in the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge and Steen Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area.
While the Hammonds have distanced themselves from the takeover and the Bundy's it was the very act of putting the Hammonds back in jail and requiring them to pay the BLM 400,000 for damage to federal land that caused the takeover of the refuge.  Lock up two of the Hammond family reducing the workfoce and income - hit them with a hefty fine with a short deadline to pay - and have a docement signed that you have first right of refusal. Is this the way citizens who provide for this country's need as to be treated? LaVoy, the Bundy's, the Hammonds and others live this day in and day out. This is why what really happened to LaVoy Finecum matters.Â
What is to stop it from happening to anyone when government overreaches bounds?Â
Â
It's not about birds. It's about minerals. http://farmwars.info/?p=14391
| |
| | |
 Expert
Posts: 1898
|
I am not buying the whole gun in the pocket thing. I haven't from the beginning. First off, why would you put a gun in that inside pocket any way? It's barely big enough to hold a snuff can. | |
| | |
 Toastest with the Mostest
Posts: 5712
Location: That part of Texas | FinneyQuarterHorses - 2016-02-03 9:25 PM As usual, you miss the point. I said this was an excerpt from an ad posted on www.ranchworldads.com for employment. I included the part about the property to emphasize what happens when billionaires are given the opportunity to purchase vast tracts of land. Quoting all of their "good works" does not take away the fact that one family controls land that numerous families used to make a living on. If you choose to be willfully ignorant to the consequences of privatization, so be it.
I wouldn't exactly consider the Matador Ranch as the best example to prove that point, especially when you look at the history of how it evolved in Texas. That ranch has always belonged to a select few people from the original land purchase and because of their actions, people came to work there and settle the land because of the ranch. They didn't come in and take things away from "families who used to make a living on" the land -- they always owned the operation in that manner. It's not much different from the other big ranches in that part of Texas who have been run in the same manner for generations and owned by families who practically made that part of the state what it is. If not for the ranches, there wouldn't be much of anything -- schools, businesses, and employers -- in those areas because they are so remote. So if you want to talk about what happens when billionaires are given the opportunity to purchase vast tracts of land = in that part of the world it means people living there could establish communities, churches and schools because of what the ranches brought in and provided for them in that area. | |
| | |
 I Prefer to Live in Fantasy Land
Posts: 64864
Location: In the Hills of Texas | cyount2009 - 2016-02-04 12:54 PM I am not buying the whole gun in the pocket thing. I haven't from the beginning. First off, why would you put a gun in that inside pocket any way? It's barely big enough to hold a snuff can.
And McCain selling mining rights to a foreign country from the Tonto National Forest, still has my head spinning. Some say the government did this to help pay off the debt they have to China. No matter the reason..It's not just wrong..but it's dead wrong. McCain was a champion to the Native Americans a few decades ago and then turns around and slits their throats. Makes me want to puke. | |
| | |
I Prefer to Live in Fantasy Land
Posts: 64864
Location: In the Hills of Texas | Red Raider - 2016-02-04 2:45 PM FinneyQuarterHorses - 2016-02-03 9:25 PM As usual, you miss the point. I said this was an excerpt from an ad posted on www.ranchworldads.com for employment. I included the part about the property to emphasize what happens when billionaires are given the opportunity to purchase vast tracts of land. Quoting all of their "good works" does not take away the fact that one family controls land that numerous families used to make a living on. If you choose to be willfully ignorant to the consequences of privatization, so be it. I wouldn't exactly consider the Matador Ranch as the best example to prove that point, especially when you look at the history of how it evolved in Texas. That ranch has always belonged to a select few people from the original land purchase and because of their actions, people came to work there and settle the land because of the ranch. They didn't come in and take things away from "families who used to make a living on" the land -- they always owned the operation in that manner. It's not much different from the other big ranches in that part of Texas who have been run in the same manner for generations and owned by families who practically made that part of the state what it is. If not for the ranches, there wouldn't be much of anything -- schools, businesses, and employers -- in those areas because they are so remote. So if you want to talk about what happens when billionaires are given the opportunity to purchase vast tracts of land = in that part of the world it means people living there could establish communities, churches and schools because of what the ranches brought in and provided for them in that area.
The King Ranch is sure a great example of that. There was a whole town built because of that ranch. | |
| | |
Nicknameless
Posts: 4565
Location: I can see the end of the world from here! | This is so very well said:
https://www.facebook.com/CitizensForConstitutionalFreedom.NEWS/photos/a.1649978758609487.1073741830.1648792115394818/1658723654401664/?type=3&theater
| |
| | |
Nicknameless
Posts: 4565
Location: I can see the end of the world from here! | This is getting scary...I haven't been following exactly thier 'train of thought' as I'm reluctant to even click on things that may be 'out there'...however, I have looked up the various laws pertaining to the constitution and laws that have since passed, such as Obama's executive decision to create a 'Council of Governors' in 2010 which supports this..is it really going to get crazy? I hope and pray it does not.
¦ ¦ ¦ CONVO BETWEEN HARNEY COUNTY JUDGE AND ARMY GENERALS OFFICE:
Harney county Judge asking for Military intervention ASAP. The General replied Dual Status commander protocol must be invoked to deploy troops to protect American Citizens. He also said only the president and the governor can call out the troops. Only the governor can call out the national guard. This means this attempt to get the military to stabilize the problem has currently failed. That means this issue to bring lawful remedy in Harney county is up to the citizens which means we are looking at CIVIL WAR as the only remaining remedy available to the citizens.
Edited by musikmaker 2016-02-04 3:46 PM
| |
| | |
Toastest with the Mostest
Posts: 5712
Location: That part of Texas | Nevertooold - 2016-02-04 3:08 PM Red Raider - 2016-02-04 2:45 PM FinneyQuarterHorses - 2016-02-03 9:25 PM As usual, you miss the point. I said this was an excerpt from an ad posted on www.ranchworldads.com for employment. I included the part about the property to emphasize what happens when billionaires are given the opportunity to purchase vast tracts of land. Quoting all of their "good works" does not take away the fact that one family controls land that numerous families used to make a living on. If you choose to be willfully ignorant to the consequences of privatization, so be it. I wouldn't exactly consider the Matador Ranch as the best example to prove that point, especially when you look at the history of how it evolved in Texas. That ranch has always belonged to a select few people from the original land purchase and because of their actions, people came to work there and settle the land because of the ranch. They didn't come in and take things away from "families who used to make a living on" the land -- they always owned the operation in that manner. It's not much different from the other big ranches in that part of Texas who have been run in the same manner for generations and owned by families who practically made that part of the state what it is. If not for the ranches, there wouldn't be much of anything -- schools, businesses, and employers -- in those areas because they are so remote. So if you want to talk about what happens when billionaires are given the opportunity to purchase vast tracts of land = in that part of the world it means people living there could establish communities, churches and schools because of what the ranches brought in and provided for them in that area.
Ranches that border or otherwise are in close proximity to the Matador Ranch include the 6666 Ranch, JA Ranch, Waggoner Ranch and a little bit up the road you have the XIT Ranch. All three of those ranches were started by "billionaires" of that day and age who purchased hundreds of thousands of acres of land to establish them. At the time that they were established, they were about the only thing out here on the plains other than smaller settlements that had previously been old army forts on the border fighting the indians, a few other small towns that supported trade for the local buffalo hunters and/or the cattle trail riders and passers through on their way out west. The only reason why you would travel to those areas was to work for one of those ranches because there was nothing else out there. Those ranches made it possible for people to settle here, eventually establish towns separate from them but they still play a huge part in being big employers/community supporters in this day and age.
Edited by Red Raider 2016-02-04 3:51 PM
| |
| | |
 I Don't Brag
Posts: 6960
| The video of the shooting makes me sick to my stomach.
We have POTUS and government that refused to classify the Fort Hood shooter as a terrorist (workplace violence) yet call these men who LEGALLY carried arms as terrorist. Not one of them has fired a shot, I have not seen any evidence that they ever threatened anyone with a gun, yet they are terrorists. They chose an isolated area, NOT downtown Portland, to stage their protest. They did not endanger anyone but themselves, yet they are terrorists?
Because they were defending their (OUR) Constitutional rights and were getting press they needed to be silenced before more people listened and began to understand.
The man was out of the truck WITH HIS ARMS IN THE AIR, for all to see by the released video, when he was shot, then he was shot 4 more times. He may have been armed but LEGALLY ARMED. Just because a person carries does NOT give law enforcement the right to shoot them. Had he different skin color the hue and cry would be raised by the left, who stand by and not only watch but applaud the rioting and destruction such as we witnessed in Missouri and other places. Those are just unhappy, underemployed folks making their feelings known.
Sigh.....I fear common sense and straight clear thinking for oneself is disappearing from the population at large.
As to whom ever said that the States rights battle has already been fought, maybe had schools taught what the South was really fighting for, many might have a different view of the Civil War. I didn't understand why the South is still "fighting" that war, being that slavery is unconscionable (what we were taught the war was ALL about), now I understand the issue of States rights and why they were/are so important.
edited to add: The
Edited by rodeoveteran 2016-02-04 4:11 PM
| |
| | |
 Semper Fi
Location: North Texas | Please read completely:
An Open Letter to the FBI and Other Federal Agencies
By: Jake Morphonios, ETNR
February 4, 2016
Over the years, I have had both good and bad interactions with the FBI. I've had friendships with agents in the CIA and the FBI while maintaining an ardent opposition to the agencies themselves. These connections have proven valuable, especially with regard to my reporting. Just this week, I was able to visit with a friend of mine in the FBI and ask some questions about FBI operations (see photo). I disagree with the sentiment that all federal employees are villains. Some of the people in these services share many of the same concerns that I do regarding the constitutionality of their operations. They see the rapid militarization of various federal bureaucracies into a very large, centrally-controlled standing army and it causes them alarm. These individuals are decent people - patriotic Americans who, like many of us, want what is best for our nation, though we differ in opinion on how to achieve our goals. It is to those individuals that this message is written.
I do not believe that it is justifiable to shoot an innocent man in cold blood, while he has his hands in the air, to silence his political speech - especially when the warrant for his arrest says that his "crime" is nothing more than hindering a few workers in a bird sanctuary from going about their daily routine. What the FBI did to LaVoy was atrocious and I want you to understand why.
The "crime" that LaVoy Finicum engaged in is called “civil disobedience,” and it is a very important type of free speech. I can see how some people with different perspectives might think that he should be arrested for participating in an act of civil disobedience.
But I cannot see how the situation in Oregon could justify:
• using armed drones and reconnaissance planes;
• FBI surveillance of the phones and computers of hundreds of people (including people not even at the refuge);
• acts of malicious intimidation by filling the town to the brim with over a hundred heavily armed agents and scores of government vehicles;
• posting heavily armed militarized goons around the public courthouse who refuse repeatedly to identify who they work for to the public;
• monitoring the online activities of citizens who are talking about the issue in social media;
• using undercover agents to pose as protesters to infiltrate and harass the local population to try to turn them against the protesters;
• creating a no-fly zone over the area;
* engaging in false negotiations;
• using an entire convoy of federal vehicles to shut down a vast stretch of highway without the consent of the local sheriff;
• shooting at LaVoy's vehicle twice to make him unwittingly flee for safety toward a pre-determined kill zone;
• firing at him during the chase;
• setting up a roadblock with federal agents, state police and Blackstone mercenaries;
• posting multiple snipers in the woods, some with snowmobiles;
• jumping out from behind cover to try to shoot him through his windshield;
• pumping him full of bullets after he got out with his hands up to try to draw fire away from his fellow passengers;
• flipping him the bird and withholding medical treatment while he lay dying in the snow;
• terrorizing three innocent people in the vehicle by firing flash grenades, bullets and tear gas pellets at them for 10 minutes (putting a bullet into the arm of one of the passengers and emotionally scarring a teenage girl for the rest of her life);
• and, on top of it all, releasing a video to justify the murder by claiming that LaVoy was "going for a gun", when in fact he was reaching down to clutch at a bullet wound he had just received.
So let's ask ourselves: was the US government justified in this kind of response to an act of civil disobedience? Let's look at how civil disobedience has been handled in the past.
I live in Greensboro, NC - the site of the famous 1960 "Greensboro Sit-In." Four black men entered a Woolworth department store and sat down at the "whites only" lunch counter and asked to be served. Though they were told to leave, the men continued sitting at the counter beyond the store closing time and refused to leave. The next day 20 more blacks joined the sit-in. Then the numbers rose to 60, then to 300, all the way up to nearly 1,400 protesters, both black and white. The sit-in dragged on for months. By the time the sit-in was finished, the store claimed nearly $200,000 in losses ($1.6 million today). The Greensboro sit-in sparked other protests, sit-ins, and acts of civil disobedience around the country. The lunch counter employees were not able to go about their work routines and both customers and workers reported feeling threatened and intimidated. But at no point did federal agents wiretap them, surround them with light armored tanks or shoot anyone. In fact, not only did federal agents not get involved, but not even local police authorities tried to arrest the activists. The North Carolina History web site says, "The reaction of police departments in the region was, by and large, muted."
How times have changed. And, unfortunately, not for the better.
Since the passage of the USA Patriot Act following the September 11th attacks, civil liberties and constitutional rights have eroded at an astounding pace. It is natural that in the face of ongoing oppression by an out-of-touch, out-of-control, and out-of-its-mind federal government the citizens are going to engage in peaceful resistance. It is not only our right, but it is our duty. Civil disobedience is the act of disobeying a law on justified grounds of moral or political principle. A very common form of civil disobedience is the occupation of property or buildings. We engage in civil disobedience to try to influence society into accepting a point of view that goes against the point of view of the oppressor. In other words, civil disobedience is meant to wake up the sleeping masses and draw their attention to an injustice that is so morally repugnant that they should get involved, even if the problem does not currently affect them personally.
If you're interested in this subject, you may wish to read "On the Duty of Civil Disobedience" by Henry David Thoreau. He reasons that when a person's conscience clashes with existing law, the person has the moral right to follow his conscience rather than the law. A principle of civil disobedience is that when a law genuinely violates a person's conscience, that person has the right to act now - rather than wait for the day when the law might be changed. In fact, the Declaration of Independence proclaimed that government gets its power from the people and if that government misuses its authority it is the right and the duty of the people to fight back - which is exactly what Ammon, Ryan, LaVoy, Shawna and the other Citizens for Constitutional Freedom were doing.
Our nation's history is rife with acts of civil disobedience against government, from the Boston Tea Party where colonists trespassed on government property and destroyed its cargo, to Harriet Tubman's underground railroad to help free slaves, to the Women's Suffrage Movement when thousands of women were arrested and jailed for their acts of civil disobedience designed to secure equal rights, to the anti-war movement during the Vietnam era. On and on the list goes, right down to our day when private property owners in the West are rising up in large numbers to protest the ongoing theft of lands and abuse by the federal government's various agencies.
In all of these various movements, the citizens had first tried to achieve justice through the legal process. They petitioned for a redress of their grievances. They lobbied and petitioned, wrote letters, went to court, tried to work through state legislatures - all for nothing. In each instance, the legitimate demands of every single group were flatly rejected. When justice cannot be obtained through the existing legal and political systems, civil disobedience naturally follows. Engaging in civil disobedience does not mean that a person is immoral or criminal. It means that they have the courage of their convictions to put their own safety and freedom at risk for a cause greater than themselves.
Engaging in civil disobedience should not make an American citizen a target for political assassination by our government. And I hope that my friends and acquaintances who work in the FBI and other federal agencies will, from today forward, have the moral courage to disobey orders that violate the US Constitution or that otherwise violate their conscience. I know some of you, and I know that you do not agree with many of the actions being taken by your superiors. I call on you to either remain within your organizations and actively work to subvert efforts to harass or harm innocent citizens - or quit.
However, if you continue "just following orders" to keep earning a paycheck at the expense of the justice and liberty of your fellow man, you should feel shame every day as you look in the mirror at yourself. "I'm just following orders" was the same defense that the Nazis gave during the Nuremberg Trials to justify their assaults on innocent people. The time has come for you to ask yourself where your true loyalties lie and pick a side. You can either stand with the American people and try to protect us, or you can stand with the government that is oppressing us and operate as its hammer to pound the citizens into submission.
Depending on your choice, you determine whether you are my friend - or my enemy.
?#?JusticeForLaVoy? ?#?LibertyRising?
Jake on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/prepare333/subscribe
Jake on Facebook: www.facebook.com/endtimesnewsreport
| |
| | |
Semper Fi
Location: North Texas | I would like for 1DSoon, Vickie and especially FinneyQtrHorses to read this piece! | |
| | |
Nicknameless
Posts: 4565
Location: I can see the end of the world from here! | Dear Friends,
Hundreds of people were freely coming into the refuge to get education on their rights. Many group presentations were given each day. On Saturday, the 24th, ten ranchers from Oregon, Nevada, Utah, and Arizona nullified their grazing contracts with the BLM and U.S. Forest Service. On Saturday, the 24th, grand jury administrators from Nebraska and Florida were forming a grand jury to review the abuses in the Hammond case. Tuesday, the 27th, the day LaVoy was killed, we began releasing documents exposing criminal acts by the government. The evening of the 27th, a meeting was scheduled with Grant County residents to give a presentation with those at the refuge. To give their presentation to hundreds of people in the county, including the county Sheriff.
The FBI attacked those who were to give the presentation on the way to this peaceful meeting, leaving hundreds at the meeting with no speakers. On Wednesday, the 28th, a follow up meeting was scheduled with Harney County residents with those at the refuge to finalize actions to claim back lands that were taken by the BLM, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and United States Forest Service. This included plans to take action to begin logging again in Harney County and to restore the thriving economy once known to the Harney County residents. On Thursday evening, the 29th, a meeting was scheduled with Malheur County residents with those at the refuge to give a presentation on the constitution as it pertained to federal limits to land ownership inside the states. This meeting was to occur in Ontario, Oregon. Hundreds were expected to attend. The sheriff's Department also accepted the invitation and was scheduled to attend.
On Friday afternoon, the 30th, residents surrounding Jordan Valley, Oregon, had scheduled a seminar with those at the refuge to come out and inform them of how they can protect themselves from a national monument that is to be signed in by President Obama this year, 2016. This monument is twice the size of Yellowstone, takes up a third of the county's land mass, and will put over 250 ranchers out of business as they know it. Ranchers from Malheur county were scheduled to nullify their contracts with the U.S. Forest Service.
In the following weeks, meetings were scheduled in Wyoming, Montana, Utah, Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, and the State of Washington. Multiple Skype meetings were also set up throughout the Western U.S. All these meetings were to discuss how they would stand against the unconstitutional land control by the federal government. Those at the refuge collected over 50 testimonies of ranchers who lost their family property to the U.S. Government in Harney and surrounding counties. Hundreds of government documents were compiled by those at the refuge. Many of the documents exposed abusive actions by federal government officials, Judge Grasty, Harney County Sheriff's Department and direct abuses to the Hammond family.
Escalation of force from the FBI, OSP, and the Sheriff's Department incrementally increased as the education from the refuge expanded. Government officials knew that if they did not take forceful preemptive action to stop the expanding the influence of the refuge, many would begin to stand for land rights as protected by the United States Constitution. Make no mistake about it: those that were educating at the refuge and are now suffering in jail at this time are political prisoners.
Those at the refuge never pointed a gun and never pulled a trigger to kill. They chose to educate, giving others the freedom to choose. The government promoted fear and forceful tactics to control and stop this education. And ultimately, they used force by the barrel of the gun.
Please watch the video below.
Sincerely,
Ammon Bundy, 2/4/16
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7U0ssZBU4w&feature=youtu.be
| |
| |
| |
Folks on-line