|
jlf1961 -> RE: Militia takes over Malheur National Wildlife Refuge headquarters (1/6/2016 7:32:47 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul
I think the Hammond's royally got the shaft. It makes me angry to learn about their plight, and that of other ranchers in the West. But Bundy is just pushing that shaft in deeper, rather than coming to the Hammond's aid as he claims.
A little background on the Bundy thing.
He told the truth when he said that his family had been ranching the land that is the source of the conflict for generations. However, what he is neglecting to be forthright about is the fact that before the BLM took over the management of that land, he and neighboring ranchers were offered the chance to purchase the land for a fraction of the value.
Some ranchers took the deal, others didnt.
He also claimed he had been paying his fees to the county, the only government authority he claims to recognize, this is partially true. Since it was not county land he was using, but federal public lands, the county was not authorized to take the payments for the BLM so they basically sent the checks back to him.
Over the years, the Bureau of Land Management has tried, unsuccessfully to collect the fees, offering any number of ways to ease the payment and not cause a financial burden.
He turned them down, again because he didnt recognize their authority as a government agency.
Finally, the Bureau of Land Management gave up trying to be nice, understanding and kissing his ass and told him to move his stock off the land or they would.
Suddenly the Bureau of Land Management is picking on the little guy. And every anti government fruit cake that owns a gun comes running to "fight the government screwing the small rancher."
Now we have the Hammonds.
Nice guys, doing nothing more than proper land management, albeit on BLM managed land. Okay, so they did a controlled burn, again on public land they were leasing.
The BLM responded by checking out the fire that occurred on public land, that's their job. They contacted the Hammonds who were honest and told them exactly what happened.
The BLM manager, again doing his job, leveled a fine for unauthorized burning on public land and that should have been the end of it.
But, as per Federal regulations, the results of that inquiry has to be submitted to the Department of Justice since it involved an intentionally set fire.
Now, most federal prosecutors would have looked at the report, shrugged their shoulders, put it in a file for future reference on the offhand chance it happened again with any regularity OR buried the damn report as the meaningless bullshit paper work that the government has a fondness for, and most think is a waste of time.
Not our fearless hero of justice.
He takes an old anti terrorist law that, in light of the ones passed since 9/11, and runs these two poor slobs in for arson.
The difference between the two cases is that the Hammonds cooperated fully during the initial inquiry, proving basically that they were honest, upright, good people.
Bundy, on the other hand, is a jack ass racist fucktard that never had any intention to cooperate with the Bureau, told them to go fuck themselves and did what he damn well pleased on land he didnt own, and made fucking sure that, contrary to the lease agreement which basically said no other rancher could graze livestock on the land, but the general public still had use of it (i.e hiking, general outdoor recreation) kept running them off as trespassers.
Then you throw the Oathtakers and Minutemen into the mix (two groups claiming to support the constitution while their very philosophy denies the right of the Federal Government to govern) who walk in to a federal building and take it over with guns.
To further complicate matters, you got some bleeding heart folks who compare these morons with the other morons of the "Black Lives Matter" bunch, saying that there is a bias against blacks and a kid glove approach to armed idiots taking over a federal building.
Well, yes there is.
The armed idiots have no damaged or destroyed property or shot at or hit anyone with said guns.
During the riots in Ferguson and Baltimore, the armed idiots shot at cops, burned locally owned (i.e neighbor owned businesses) and basically acted like a mob of morons. (for those of the soccer countries, think of the soccer thugs who have rioted after a bad match)
Now, personally, I consider myself a constitutionalist. Meaning there is a three tiered government system, Federal on top, county and municipal on the bottom. And the constitution clearly states who has what authority and when they can use it.
Now, for those who dont live in the US and have no clue as to how the government works, or WHY THE FUCK THE POLICE AINT GONE IN WITH GUNS BLAZING, I will attempt to explain it.
In Oregon the bad guys aint started shooting, and the head good guy aint a moron to tell his people to start shooting at anything that moves that looks like they have a gun.
Now, why do moron cops shoot at unarmed black men or black children that may have a toy gun, the answer is really quite simple.
The fuckwads should not be cops in the first fucking place OR the cops have been working areas where they have no clue as to who to worry about and who not to worry about too fucking long and need to be somewhere else.
There is a term for the second problem, coming straight out of the military.
Oversensitiveness to the environment. It means the trooper has been in a hot zone so damn long he shoots before he actually sees he is in a bad situation. In the case of the military, it means some poor non combatant suddenly popping up with anything remotely resembling a weapon gets stepped on, hard, fast and fatally.
Some call it trigger happy, others call it jumpy, still others call it what it is, situational paranoia.
For cops working in a lot of inner city areas, it means that they have to be concerned with some 13 year old that thinks popping a cop is gonna earn him street cred. So rather than getting killed, he is gonna shoot first. If he is working in a predominately black neighborhood, the poor kid that wasnt out to hurt anyone is gonna get killed.
In parts of the LA metro area, the poor kid is Latino. In parts of New York city, he may be Latino, Chinese, or whatever ethnic group is prominent in that area.
But you dont hear about them. You hear about the African American kid killed by a white cop. Why, because the media knows that with the US history of civil rights fuck ups, it is gonna make news around the world.
Like I said earlier, when someone comes up with a "Any lives matter" movement, I will support it 100%. Until then, as long as the same colored people are killing each other, its just a fucking publicity media circus that dont mean shit.
|
|
|
|
