Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Conservatives -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D. Long who wrote (28033)	4/11/2014 11:55:31 AM
From: Blasher	Respond to of 125152

I think Bundy is referring to "his land" because he pays taxes and the land is owned by the government of the people. He is of the people. This current government just does not want to be part of anything successful.

To: D. Long who wrote (28033)	4/11/2014 12:14:34 PM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 125152

I'm starting to think this one may be more nuanced than we thought at first.

To: D. Long who wrote (28033)	4/11/2014 12:43:13 PM
From: Neeka	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 125152

His clear issue is with Federal ownership of a vast majority (84.5%) of Nevada. And evidently he's been paying grazing fees to Clark County. I don't claim to fully understand the issue of Federal Public Land Grazing Fees, but it appears Bundy is taking full advantage of the confusion over grazing fees. westernwatersheds.org I also believe he believes he's fighting a [principled] multi-front battle against environmentalists, and a sympathetic bureaucracy that claims there is no public benefit associated with free range leases. Tensions are escalating and the public outrage over the tactics being used by federal agents against the Bundy family is building. I wonder what the BLM is doing with the confiscated cattle?

To: D. Long who wrote (28033)	4/11/2014 2:39:56 PM
From: sense	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 125152

That's a wonderful 1950's era Ozzie and Harriet view of things... that presumes we should trust that all the products of the courts are unerringly legitimate, and not all and only a product of politics and self aggrandizing government ? The same issue with politicization that we see in the IRS... are seen in spades on the Supreme Court, with four out of five Justices advocating we eviscerate the First Amendment. Where do you think those Judges came from ? You see the issues in the NSA riding rough shod over the Constitution... but, we shouldn't worry about it... because a SECRET court... says whatever they want is OK ? Yeah, what could possibly go wrong in a Federal court run by one judge... who is part of a system that is as deeply corrupt as the system we have has become ? The only way you can fail to understand the depth of the problem... is to be ignorant of the nature of the problem... and to believe, right along with John Boehner... that "we can and should trust them" ? thematrixhasyou.org The courts are corrupt. You cannot trust that they are not. They view their role, today... as the enforcers of the government... presuming the government is right, and anyone the government challenges is wrong until proven otherwise... while procedure is managed to ensure that won't be allowed to happen. Reality is that there is no longer any such thing as a reasonable expectation of fairness in the courts. The bias you see in the media... is exactly what you get on the bench... with an intrinsic, implicit presumption that the Feds are always right... with judicial control over procedure being applied to ensure that no one is allowed to show that they are not... and the lawyers also not willing to stand up to the courts usurpations. Eric Holder... was a judge ? I'm not willing to assume that Bundy is wrong... because some Judge got his marching orders to say that. I do find it remarkable... that people can recognize that the nation is in a fight for its survival... with those seeking to subvert what's left of the Founder's vision... and, in the "big picture" fully comprehend that "the rule of law" has been made a fiction... and yet, confronted with a choice at that boundary in awareness... will still choose to believe that the court system is a bastion of impenetrable truth and justice... when reality is that the courts are just another government agency operated for the benefit of the government. Specifically... take it on yourself... and investigate for yourself the way the courts have dealt with ANY issue that is of core concern to the "powers that be" ? I'd suggest... an easy choice... to look at the way courts have dealt with the implosion of the mortgage market... because of BANK FRAUD... but, not in court... where the banks are presumed innocent until... well, really, there is no until... and anyone else is presumed to be, and is treated as... the banks property. The courts are deeply CORRUPT... Bundy's claims to his origins in interest in the land... do not appear to be in dispute. That means... everything ELSE being claimed... is dependent on PROCESS ? So, do not assume he's wrong... rather than wronged ? That a judge ruled him wrong... doesn't mean the judge was right... it probably means only that the judge excluded any consideration that would likely weigh in favor of Bundy, and narrowed his consideration of any presentment made to the procedural limits required to ensure he could justify finding as he did... That's how they do it...

To: D. Long who wrote (28033)	4/12/2014 3:57:14 PM
From: sense	2 Recommendations Recommended By Neeka prometheus1976 Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 125152

I would like to ask you to revisit your post to which this is a reply. Not because I question your sincerity... rather than the opposite ? Obviously, there has been significant evolution in the awareness of the issue over the last few days... including not only shifting lines in the taking of sides... but shifting awareness in the quality of information about the specific instance. Of course, range wars of the sort you see in old westerns might often enough include corrupt judges and senators... who pair up with corrupt financiers to try to run some rancher off the land in order to grab his water rights. Today, I suspect people who ARE paying close attention to the evolution of this story... are surprised that the story has taken the turns that it has ? Harry Reid... couldn't be working at kicking all the ranchers out of Clark County... stealing their ranches, and stealing their water rights... without "help" from others ? Those others include JUDGES... who are just as corrupt as everyone else involved in prosecuting a STRATEGY intended to IMPLEMENT policies... that are WHOLLY ILLEGITIMATE ? In the specific instance... the usurpation that was occurring depended on people NOT figuring out the connections between the TAKING of Bundy's rights... and the GRANTING of those rights to others... And, the success of that effort... depended on the MEDIA NOT LOOKING... to keep the public in the dark, as the effort was prosecuted to a conclusion... ONE MAN prevented that from succeeding... because he stood on principle. He had help. Not only did neighbors and friends come to aid his resistance... but, a handful of people over at Free Republic, many of whom are veterans of these sorts of conflicts... knew where to look for the "smoking gun" ? This story isn't over... because the questions haven't been answered... about how it was that a couple of judges happened to ignore the facts while working to enable the government backed scheme to defraud Bundy out of his rights ? There are a couple of relevant points that should emerge from an analysis, conducted after the fact, considering how various assumptions made in an information vacuum "worked" or did not... to enable justice being done... or to enable the opposite ? So, I'm genuinely interested in learning how your opinion has evolved... as the amount and focus of the information has changed ? I would find it enormously helpful... if you'd tell us what of the information that has been presented here you've considered... and how it has influenced your opinion... assuming it has changed at all ?