• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Feds move in on Nevada rancher's herd over illegal grazing

It's his land because you decided to say any government owned land actually belongs to the people okay, I'm going to go to area 51 this summer and stake out my claim on what I think I own. :lamo

just f*&^%$g sickening.
 
What's sovereign citizens?
'Sovereign citizens are extremists that Bundy called to come help him fight the federal government.

You make it out like an insult? If a citizen is not sovereign it means they are a subject, or perhaps a Slave.
Why don't you look up what 'sovereign' means? The FBI considers them to be domestic terrorists and rightly so....

Sovereign Citizen Movement -- Extremism in America

A look at the "sovereign citizen" movement - CBS News

FBI — Sovereign Citizens


How so?
You said the government loses street cred (not in those words), if it does not enforce the law against bundy. My point was that they already lost that credibility by not enforcing immigration laws, I also added not enforcing Obama care equally, and I also left open for the litany of other examples of corrupt government that show the us to be a joke on the world stage... A joke with lots of guns mind you, but all the same.
Aside from being factually wrong your points have nothing to do with the topic....hence a red herring.
 
Probably been posted already but read the Washington Post's timeline, which gives a good explanation of why the BLM might have been "heavy handed," as some would say:
Everything you need to know about the long fight between Cliven Bundy and the federal government

So he threatens resistance, sends a letter to the sheriff about a range war (and demands protection), BLM is already concerned about safety in general in the area/nearby areas (and has been for quite awhile if the timeline is true). Yeah, can't see at all why they bring so much force...
 
The fly swatter should have applied 20 years ago....but now its time for a sledge hammer or the federal government will some lose credibility. If it can't or won't enforce the laws then what is the point?

Well, you're right that reg's should have been complied with in the 90s, but to wait 20 years then respond with such a display of force is stupid unless you as the government are trying to show the public that it is now under authoritarian rule. There were less heavy handed ways to proceed and save face. But progressives hate the military approach unless they can use it against their political opposition.
 
Probably been posted already but read the Washington Post's timeline, which gives a good explanation of why the BLM might have been "heavy handed," as some would say:
Everything you need to know about the long fight between Cliven Bundy and the federal government

So he threatens resistance, sends a letter to the sheriff about a range war (and demands protection), BLM is already concerned about safety in general in the area/nearby areas (and has been for quite awhile if the timeline is true). Yeah, can't see at all why they bring so much force...

People talk out of their ass all the time. Just take a look around the board in here and take note of all the progressives with emboldened extreme rhetoric...yeah they were the same ones screaming murder at military force being used a decade ago...I guess it's fine when you threaten to kill your neighbors.
 
People talk out of their ass all the time. Just take a look around the board in here and take note of all the progressives with emboldened extreme rhetoric...yeah they were the same ones screaming murder at military force being used a decade ago...I guess it's fine when you threaten to kill your neighbors.

I'm a newbie here myself.

Check out the link that member posted. In it, it says how Forest Service offices as well as BLM offices were bombed, one forest supervisor's vehicle was also bombed. Check out the part where the feds arrested some person for allowing his cattle to graze illegally, and see what penalty he is or has paid for his refusal to follow court orders. I've posted the link in more than one thread regarding Bundy too.

I'll give you sort of an idea of what federal workers are up against.

What I find amazing is that right wingers and some conservatives supported this guy, even prominent politicians supported this guy until his latest gaffe.

This story, and these threads have more to do with what has to do with disobedience of court orders (contempt), and payment of fees than it does partisan hackery.
 
I'm a newbie here myself.

Check out the link that member posted. In it, it says how Forest Service offices as well as BLM offices were bombed, one forest supervisor's vehicle was also bombed. Check out the part where the feds arrested some person for allowing his cattle to graze illegally, and see what penalty he is or has paid for his refusal to follow court orders. I've posted the link in more than one thread regarding Bundy too.

I'll give you sort of an idea of what federal workers are up against.

What I find amazing is that right wingers and some conservatives supported this guy, even prominent politicians supported this guy until his latest gaffe.

This story, and these threads have more to do with what has to do with disobedience of court orders (contempt), and payment of fees than it does partisan hackery.

Do you have any proof that Bundy was behind the bombing, other than a specious inference?

Because if so, then arrest the man. If not it's irrelevant.
 
People talk out of their ass all the time. Just take a look around the board in here and take note of all the progressives with emboldened extreme rhetoric...yeah they were the same ones screaming murder at military force being used a decade ago...I guess it's fine when you threaten to kill your neighbors.

There are also posts that have been made on here regarding the Bundy situation where some posters have advocated the use of drones on Bundy and his supporters. If that isn't scary, I don't know what is.
 
Has the shootout begun yet?
 
Well, you're right that reg's should have been complied with in the 90s, but to wait 20 years then respond with such a display of force is stupid unless you as the government are trying to show the public that it is now under authoritarian rule. There were less heavy handed ways to proceed and save face. But progressives hate the military approach unless they can use it against their political opposition.

They were overly patient, that's for sure. They should have taken over this freeloader's operation a long time ago.

Better late than never.
 
Do you have any proof that Bundy was behind the bombing, other than a specious inference?

Because if so, then arrest the man. If not it's irrelevant.

When did I say he or his followers were? How about NO.

I think it's relevant, after all, the militias supporting Bundy were armed. Makes the US government wonder what else they're capable of. It makes me suspicious of his followers.
 
There are also posts that have been made on here regarding the Bundy situation where some posters have advocated the use of drones on Bundy and his supporters. If that isn't scary, I don't know what is.
If you look at the top right of the thread, you'll see three buttons. The middle one is search this thread. You are the only person to mention drone in this thread. (okay, well now I just did, so that's two)

Care to point out where anyone has "advocated the use of drones on Bundy and his supporters"
 
When did I say he or his followers were? How about NO.

I think it's relevant, after all, the militias supporting Bundy were armed. Makes the US government wonder what else they're capable of. It makes me suspicious of his followers.

It makes me ask is the nation headed in the direction of having another constitutional convention or something similar. There's a huge number of people on the right, mostly law abiding and hard working, that think the government is becoming unworkable. How large that number is, who knows but we can't discount them. I saw a map of the western half of our country showing the government owning a huge portion of it. Nothing constitutional about that.
 
There are also posts that have been made on here regarding the Bundy situation where some posters have advocated the use of drones on Bundy and his supporters. If that isn't scary, I don't know what is.

Obama already has killed US citizens using drones. They say that they will kill terrorists no matter the nationality. bundy would qualify as a terrorist.
 
It makes me ask is the nation headed in the direction of having another constitutional convention or something similar. There's a huge number of people on the right, mostly law abiding and hard working, that think the government is becoming unworkable. How large that number is, who knows but we can't discount them. I saw a map of the western half of our country showing the government owning a huge portion of it. Nothing constitutional about that.

I saw the same map.

Fed%u00252BOwned%u00252BLands%u00252BMap.jpg

What's unconstitutional about it?
 
Obama already has killed US citizens using drones. They say that they will kill terrorists no matter the nationality. bundy would qualify as a terrorist.

So....you think it's good that Obama killed US citizens with drones? I don't.

How come we don't kill all terrorists. Like Yousef, who killed 6 people in the WTC in 1993. That would have been nice.
 
Obama already has killed US citizens using drones. They say that they will kill terrorists no matter the nationality. bundy would qualify as a terrorist.

Bundy is a freeloading racist who is about to get taken off of public land he has no right to use. That's all he is. He'll lose his cattle, maybe pay a fine, perhaps even do some jail time, but not likely.

Still, some will see him as some sort of unlikely folk hero, compare him to the Chinese man who stood up to tanks, even to the revolutionaries of '76, when all he really is is a cheater.

A hero he is not, nor is he really a "terrorist". That word has been grossly overused of late.
 
Check out the link that member posted. In it, it says how Forest Service offices as well as BLM offices were bombed, one forest supervisor's vehicle was also bombed.

I'll give you sort of an idea of what federal workers are up against.

Very true, they face alot. Back up is often hours away and I have also heard that some rural Sherrif's offices have been less than helpful in assisting federal officers- even when the federal officers are not enforcing land management laws.

With this in mind, it boggles me that the BLM would even think about pursuing cases like this one:Texas is next! AG warns BLM wants 90,000 acres after Bundy ranch standoff - Washington Times

BLM uses the fact that the Red River has changed course and that there are minor differences in river system terminology in various documents as justification to consider annexing land that has been private for several generations.

All these dumb actions do is fuel Bundy's blind followers. The BLM should publically announce absolutely no annexation actions will be taken against land that is currently private. Then, I hope Bundy gets slammed.
 
Last edited:
I saw the same map.

View attachment 67165405

What's unconstitutional about it?

I replied once but that reply got lost I think. Gotta go now but quick answer is how did the feds come up with land ownership. It's we the people not them the government. Why couldn't land be up for auction at reasonable price or homesteading?
 
Bundy is a freeloading racist who is about to get taken off of public land he has no right to use. That's all he is. He'll lose his cattle, maybe pay a fine, perhaps even do some jail time, but not likely.

Still, some will see him as some sort of unlikely folk hero, compare him to the Chinese man who stood up to tanks, even to the revolutionaries of '76, when all he really is is a cheater.

A hero he is not, nor is he really a "terrorist". That word has been grossly overused of late.

I wouldn't take any bets on that;

Gardner, 63, was sentenced Monday to one month incarceration at a halfway house in Reno followed by three months of house arrest at his ranch in eastern Nevada for refusing to remove his cattle from Forest Service land in a dispute that dates back to 1996.

U.S. District Judge Howard McKibben also fined Gardner $5,000 and placed him on one-year's probation

Rancher says he'll do time to win range war : Uncategorized
 
I replied once but that reply got lost I think. Gotta go now but quick answer is how did the feds come up with land ownership. It's we the people not them the government. Why couldn't land be up for auction at reasonable price or homesteading?

Thanks for map. No wonder califonia is so crowded and expensive. half of it owned by the feds.
 
Very true, they face alot. Back up is often hours away and I have also heard that some rural Sherrif's offices have been less than helpful in assisting federal officers- even when the federal officers are not enforcing land management laws.

With this in mind, it boggles me that the BLM would even think about pursuing cases like this one:Texas is next! AG warns BLM wants 90,000 acres after Bundy ranch standoff - Washington Times

BLM uses the fact that the Red River has changed course and that there are minor differences in river system terminology in various documents as justification to consider annexing land that has been private for several generations.

All these dumb actions do is fuel Bundy's blind followers. The BLM should publically announce absolutely no annexation actions will be taken against land that is currently private. Then, I hope Bundy gets slammed.

In the right wing article, it stated the BLM categorically denied wanting to grab the land the Texas AG said they (BLM) were going to grab.

The problem in Nevada is that the land Bundy's cattle have been grazing on, was government land when Bundy leased it, it wasn't private land at all. Big difference. Right wing media is painting the government as evil ever since the Bundy cattle flap. All the Texas AG is doing is fanning the flames, or, pouring gas on the fire.
 
Last edited:
So....you think it's good that Obama killed US citizens with drones? I don't.

How come we don't kill all terrorists. Like Yousef, who killed 6 people in the WTC in 1993. That would have been nice.

I don't either but we need to be consistent.
 
Back
Top Bottom