# Oregon Occupation:  Protesting A Tyrannical Regime



## Mrs. M.

In 2001 and 2006, Oregon rancher Dwight Hammond and his son, Steven Hammond requested permission to do a controlled burn in order to reduce the growth of invasive plants and the possibility of wildfires. Mrs. Hammond called the proper authorities prior to the burn and recieved permission to proceed. Although permission was granted, the fire reportedly spread to land that was under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management. A controlled burn actually benefits the land by introducing new growth and preventing wildfires. The Bureau of Land Management uses the same method and has lost control of their own fires before but has never been put on trial for it.

In the case of Dwight Hammond and his son, they were convicted of arson three years ago and served their time but now a judge has ruled that the time they served is insufficient and ordered them back to prison for four more years.

According to one legal definition of arson, the Hammond ranchers are innocent:
The main elements necessary to prove arson are evidence that a criminal act caused the fire. The accused must intend to burn a building or other structure.


There were no structures or other real property involved. There was no evidence of malicious intent. The Bureau of Land Management wants the land that the Hammond ranchers own and they are using the federal government to help them steal it. The Bundy Ranchers, who are close friends of the Hammond family have the motive for this land grab on their website: Bundy Ranch

One patriot shared the following information,

In 1976 Federal Land Policy Management Act, Congress declares that it is the policy of the US that the public lands be retained in Federal ownership. Article IV, Section 3, cl.2 states, “The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States.” Congress can only dispose, not retain public lands, indefinitely. Congress can make needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory, temporally held and properties defined in Article 1, Sec.8 cl.17, places purchased by the consent of the state legislature for Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-yards and other needful buildings.

The 10th Amendment states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” The Constitution doesn't say anything about the power to retain Federal ownership of public lands in the states. This is not a delegated power to the US by the Constitution but it's a power prohibited by the Constitution to the States. The 1976 Federal Land Policy Management Act is unconstitutional. These public lands are retained by the States, in this case, the State of Oregon.

Why is the Federal government conspiring with the Federal Land Bureau of Management against the Hammond ranchers? Is B.L.M. a governmental agency?

According to one source, B.L.M.(Bureau of Land Management) is a Foreign Corporation. He states that they are actually a sub-corporation of US Inc., a private foreign off-shore corporation since its last incorporation in 1925, copyrighted, trademarked and registered in Puerto Rico. Under the Reorganization Act of Washington District of Columbia, by it's own private business charter, neither the B.L.M., nor any other federal / corporate agency has lawful/legal authority, jurisdiction or interstate nexus within the 50 state geographical landmass. B.L.M. is actually classified as an “Agent of Foreign Principle” under the intergovernmental Personnel Act.

In other words, he states, they don't represent the Constitutional Republic or the interests of the American people, but rather, a foreign owned principle – the international banking/military corporate cartel of London City, England know as the Crown Corporation as their supreme authority.

Apparently this has been openly admitted in Supreme Court cases heard before and after 1938.

According to Ammon Bundy, the Hammond family lawyer was contacted and informed that if the Hammond ranchers continued to talk, federal agents were going to put a bullet in their heads. Is this the America our founding fathers envisioned?

Bundy Ranch: Violations, Corruptions and Abuses in the Hammond Case (Bill of Rights)

150 armed Militia men have taken over the Malheur Wildlife Refuge headquarters (a federal building) in protest.  Meanwhile,  American patriots have joined them in holding peaceful protests against tyranny.

It looks as if the fight has only just begun.


----------



## Moonglow

Which tyrannical regime are they protesting?


----------



## TheOldSchool

Has the national guard been deployed yet?


----------



## Hossfly

Moonglow said:


> Which tyrannical regime are they protesting?


Can't you guess? It sure as hell ain't the Vatican.


----------



## Moonglow

TheOldSchool said:


> Has the national guard been deployed yet?


Only when the go word Godzilla is mentioned...


----------



## Moonglow

Hossfly said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which tyrannical regime are they protesting?
> 
> 
> 
> Can't you guess? It sure as hell ain't the Vatican.
Click to expand...

No, he was convicted in a GOP regime..was suppose to live by a rule of law created during a GOP regime.....Yet only this regime is getting the heat..


----------



## NLT

any stoneings, beheadings, drownings, rape yet? Oh yea these guys are not muslims.


----------



## Moonglow

NLT said:


> any stoneings, beheadings, drownings, rape yet? Oh yea these guys are not muslims.


They are faking it for good publicity...The Muslim stuff will come later..


----------



## TheOldSchool

NLT said:


> any stoneings, beheadings, drownings, rape yet? Oh yea these guys are not muslims.


They've captured more federal buildings in the homeland than Muslims.


----------



## Moonglow

Bundy is walking free from his clash on taxes last year..Such tyranny...


----------



## Statistikhengst

TheOldSchool said:


> NLT said:
> 
> 
> 
> any stoneings, beheadings, drownings, rape yet? Oh yea these guys are not muslims.
> 
> 
> 
> They've captured more federal buildings in the homeland than Muslims.
Click to expand...



Bundies 2: muzzies 0


----------



## Moonglow

Statistikhengst said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NLT said:
> 
> 
> 
> any stoneings, beheadings, drownings, rape yet? Oh yea these guys are not muslims.
> 
> 
> 
> They've captured more federal buildings in the homeland than Muslims.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Bundies 2: muzzies 0
Click to expand...

Welcome back...


----------



## Statistikhengst

Moonglow said:


> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NLT said:
> 
> 
> 
> any stoneings, beheadings, drownings, rape yet? Oh yea these guys are not muslims.
> 
> 
> 
> They've captured more federal buildings in the homeland than Muslims.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Bundies 2: muzzies 0
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Welcome back...
Click to expand...

Was I gone?

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk


----------



## Compost

Let's see if I understand the details.  They had permission to burn the area.  Therefore it was not arson.  Still, not only did they serve time in prison for a crime they didn't commit they are now supposed to return to prison because it's been decided the prison term wasn't enough?!  Meanwhile, there is government skullduggery involving an elastic definition of "public land".. 

And some people can't fathom why anyone would object to this?  If this isn't tyranny, what is?


----------



## Statistikhengst

Compost said:


> Let's see if I understand the details.  They had permission to burn the area.  Therefore it was not arson.  Still, not only did they serve time in prison for a crime they didn't commit they are now supposed to return to prison because it's been decided the prison term wasn't enough?!  Meanwhile, there is government skullduggery involving an elastic definition of "public land"..
> 
> And some people can't fathom why anyone would object to this?  If this isn't tyranny, what is?


Which crime did they not commit?

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk


----------



## 9thIDdoc

Moonglow said:


> Which tyrannical regime are they protesting?



How many do we have?


----------



## Dante

"The Bureau of Land Management uses the same method and has lost control of their own fires before but has never been put on trial for it."

Google: "bureau land management Lewiston residents  sued"

and ask that this thread be moved to conspiracy forum. far too many factual errors posing as opinions. see 1 example above



> *Red River Landowners Take Battle with Feds to Court | The ...*
> www.texastribune.org/.../red-river-*land*owners-take-b...
> The Texas Tribune
> Nov 17, 2015 - Red River Landowners _Lawsuit_ Against Feds: PDF (565.6 KB) download ... Seven families are _suing_ the U.S. _Bureau_ of _Land Management_ in federal ... _management_ scheme by 2018 at the earliest, frustrating _residents_ who ...
> Missing: lewiston
> *BLM Forecloses Oil Leasing, Utah Sues | The Daily Caller*
> dailycaller.com/.../*bureau*-of-*land*-*management*-foreclos...
> The Daily Caller
> Jun 11, 2014 - Utah is _suing_ the federal _Bureau_ of _Land Management_ after it ... the _Bureau_ of _Land Management_ and _residents_ of a western state, Utah is ...
> Missing: lewiston
> *BLM sued for documents on Bundy standoff | Las Vegas ...*
> www.reviewjournal.com/...*blm*/*blm*-*sued*-doc...
> Las Vegas Review‑Journal
> Jun 12, 2014 - PEER _lawsuit_ seeks _BLM_ documents on Bundy incidents ... Don't you remember _residents_ of Mesquite posting on this very site about how they ...
> Missing: lewiston
> *Widow of firefighter sues BLM - The Lewiston Tribune ...*
> lmtribune.com/...*sues*-*blm*/article_240a7698-b4fc-5a68-a981-31298bc61b...
> Jul 28, 1996 - ... by a blaze last summer is _suing_ the U.S. _Bureau_ of _Land Management_. ... ARTICLE: Guardians of disabled _residents sue_ over forced moves ...
> *Errors Caused Lewiston Fire / Trainee planned controlled ...*
> www.sfgate.com/.../Errors-Caused-*Lewiston*-Fire...
> San Francisco Chronicle
> Jul 27, 1999 - _BLM_ officials are seeking to increase the maximum amount of $25000 for ... so claims (from _Lewiston residents_) can exceed that," Dearing said.
> *[PDF]Glossaries of BLM surveying and mapping terms - Bureau of ...*
> www.*blm*.gov/or/gis/.../*BLM*glossary.pdf
> Bureau of Land Management
> ABSENTEE OWNER – By law, one cannot be both a _resident_ and an absentee of a given area, state or .... common _BLM_ usage, alienated lands are lands that have been patented. ... nontechnically, the term includes one who _sues_ out a writ of error. ...... Montana – Billings, Dillon, _Lewiston_, Malta, Miles City and Missoula.
> *Small Claims - Nez Perce County*
> https://www.co.nezperce.id.us/.../SmallClaims.aspx
> Nez Perce County
> The small claims departments are informal courts which people can use to _sue_ for small amounts of money or to recover personal property, up to $5,000 without ...
> *Fires reignite burnout controversy*
> www.redding.com › News
> Redding Record Searchlight
> May 1, 2009 - He said _residents_ told him that burnout operations in the Trinity County fires last ... and firefighters to form Concerned Citizens for Responsible Fire _Management_. ... The Lowden Fire in _Lewiston_ in 1999, an escaped _Bureau_ of _Land_ ... He's contemplating a _lawsuit_ against the federal government, but he's ...
> *Lawsuits - Noise Pollution Clearinghouse*
> www.nonoise.org/news/law.htm
> ... decision by the Bureau of Land Management (_BLM_) and Fallon Naval Station to place ... Stuart, Florida Attorney Wants to Land Private 737 at County Airport Despite ... Virginia Beach _Residents_ Contemplate _Lawsuit_ Against Government for Jet .... Department Reluctant to Approve Noise Mitigation Along a _Lewiston_ Road; ...
> *Local & Regional | KLEW CBS 3 - News, Weather and ...*
> www.klewtv.com/news/local?pg=65&m=y
> KLEW‑TV
> Local · _Bureau_ of _Land Management_ pull permit from controversial Wolf Derby ... Local · Lohman Helicopter wants city council to rectify issue with _Lewiston_-Nez Perce Co. ... Local · “Festival of Trees” is holiday tradition for many valley _residents_ (Video) ... Environmental groups and the Nez Perce Tribe are _suing_ to prevent ...


----------



## Moonglow

Statistikhengst said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NLT said:
> 
> 
> 
> any stoneings, beheadings, drownings, rape yet? Oh yea these guys are not muslims.
> 
> 
> 
> They've captured more federal buildings in the homeland than Muslims.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Bundies 2: muzzies 0
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Welcome back...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Was I gone?
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Only in my mind...


----------



## Moonglow

The OP author has jumped ship....


----------



## Dante

Moonglow said:


> The OP author has jumped ship....


Jumped ship? An illegal entry into usmb?


----------



## midcan5

What would be the reaction of the armed militia if the  Cliven Bundy family were Black? A Hispanic? A Muslim?  Funny that scofflaws on the right are somehow OK guys but minority protesters criminals. Criminals are criminals and these armed scumbags are criminals. Laws exist for a reason.


----------



## boedicca

TheOldSchool said:


> Has the national guard been deployed yet?




I'm pretty sure Loretta Lynch is getting some tips from Janet Reno on how to handle this.


----------



## depotoo

Actually, his harassment qnd first arrest  happened under the Clinton regime.





Moonglow said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which tyrannical regime are they protesting?
> 
> 
> 
> Can't you guess? It sure as hell ain't the Vatican.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, he was convicted in a GOP regime..was suppose to live by a rule of law created during a GOP regime.....Yet only this regime is getting the heat..
Click to expand...


----------



## boedicca

midcan5 said:


> What would be the reaction of the armed militia if Cliven Bundy family were Black? A Hispanic? A Muslim?  Funny that scofflaws on the right are somehow OK guys but minority protesters criminals. Criminals are criminals and these armed scumbags are criminals. Laws exist for a reason.




What specious nonsense.

I suggest you read up on the facts and then try to think about it.  The timeline of events is quite telling regarding the abuse of power by the Feds.

Full Story on What's Going on In Oregon - Militia Take Over Malheur National Wildlife Refuge In Protest to Hammond Family Persecution...


----------



## TheOldSchool

boedicca said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> 
> Has the national guard been deployed yet?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm pretty sure Loretta Lynch is getting some tips from Janet Reno on how to handle this.
Click to expand...


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

"Oregon Occupation: Protesting A Tyrannical Regime"

A ridiculous lie. 

The Hammonds were afforded full and comprehensive due process. 

They were found guilty in a court of law by a jury of their peers, and sentenced in accordance with the law.

Again, the fires they started were on public land, unauthorized by the BLM, and endangered the lives of firefighters battling other fires in the area.

This 'occupation' of Federal property is unjustified, unwarranted, illegal, and devoid of merit – no one has been subject to any 'abuse' on the part of the Federal government, no rights 'abridged' by the Federal government, no law 'violated' by the Federal government.


----------



## depotoo

Being sued vs imprisoned?  Please.





Dante said:


> "The Bureau of Land Management uses the same method and has lost control of their own fires before but has never been put on trial for it."
> 
> Google: "bureau land management Lewiston residents  sued"
> 
> and ask that this thread be moved to conspiracy forum. far too many factual errors posing as opinions. see 1 example above
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Red River Landowners Take Battle with Feds to Court | The ...*
> www.texastribune.org/.../red-river-*land*owners-take-b...
> The Texas Tribune
> Nov 17, 2015 - Red River Landowners _Lawsuit_ Against Feds: PDF (565.6 KB) download ... Seven families are _suing_ the U.S. _Bureau_ of _Land Management_ in federal ... _management_ scheme by 2018 at the earliest, frustrating _residents_ who ...
> Missing: lewiston
> *BLM Forecloses Oil Leasing, Utah Sues | The Daily Caller*
> dailycaller.com/.../*bureau*-of-*land*-*management*-foreclos...
> The Daily Caller
> Jun 11, 2014 - Utah is _suing_ the federal _Bureau_ of _Land Management_ after it ... the _Bureau_ of _Land Management_ and _residents_ of a western state, Utah is ...
> Missing: lewiston
> *BLM sued for documents on Bundy standoff | Las Vegas ...*
> www.reviewjournal.com/...*blm*/*blm*-*sued*-doc...
> Las Vegas Review‑Journal
> Jun 12, 2014 - PEER _lawsuit_ seeks _BLM_ documents on Bundy incidents ... Don't you remember _residents_ of Mesquite posting on this very site about how they ...
> Missing: lewiston
> *Widow of firefighter sues BLM - The Lewiston Tribune ...*
> lmtribune.com/...*sues*-*blm*/article_240a7698-b4fc-5a68-a981-31298bc61b...
> Jul 28, 1996 - ... by a blaze last summer is _suing_ the U.S. _Bureau_ of _Land Management_. ... ARTICLE: Guardians of disabled _residents sue_ over forced moves ...
> *Errors Caused Lewiston Fire / Trainee planned controlled ...*
> www.sfgate.com/.../Errors-Caused-*Lewiston*-Fire...
> San Francisco Chronicle
> Jul 27, 1999 - _BLM_ officials are seeking to increase the maximum amount of $25000 for ... so claims (from _Lewiston residents_) can exceed that," Dearing said.
> *[PDF]Glossaries of BLM surveying and mapping terms - Bureau of ...*
> www.*blm*.gov/or/gis/.../*BLM*glossary.pdf
> Bureau of Land Management
> ABSENTEE OWNER – By law, one cannot be both a _resident_ and an absentee of a given area, state or .... common _BLM_ usage, alienated lands are lands that have been patented. ... nontechnically, the term includes one who _sues_ out a writ of error. ...... Montana – Billings, Dillon, _Lewiston_, Malta, Miles City and Missoula.
> *Small Claims - Nez Perce County*
> https://www.co.nezperce.id.us/.../SmallClaims.aspx
> Nez Perce County
> The small claims departments are informal courts which people can use to _sue_ for small amounts of money or to recover personal property, up to $5,000 without ...
> *Fires reignite burnout controversy*
> www.redding.com › News
> Redding Record Searchlight
> May 1, 2009 - He said _residents_ told him that burnout operations in the Trinity County fires last ... and firefighters to form Concerned Citizens for Responsible Fire _Management_. ... The Lowden Fire in _Lewiston_ in 1999, an escaped _Bureau_ of _Land_ ... He's contemplating a _lawsuit_ against the federal government, but he's ...
> *Lawsuits - Noise Pollution Clearinghouse*
> www.nonoise.org/news/law.htm
> ... decision by the Bureau of Land Management (_BLM_) and Fallon Naval Station to place ... Stuart, Florida Attorney Wants to Land Private 737 at County Airport Despite ... Virginia Beach _Residents_ Contemplate _Lawsuit_ Against Government for Jet .... Department Reluctant to Approve Noise Mitigation Along a _Lewiston_ Road; ...
> *Local & Regional | KLEW CBS 3 - News, Weather and ...*
> www.klewtv.com/news/local?pg=65&m=y
> KLEW‑TV
> Local · _Bureau_ of _Land Management_ pull permit from controversial Wolf Derby ... Local · Lohman Helicopter wants city council to rectify issue with _Lewiston_-Nez Perce Co. ... Local · “Festival of Trees” is holiday tradition for many valley _residents_ (Video) ... Environmental groups and the Nez Perce Tribe are _suing_ to prevent ...
Click to expand...


----------



## depotoo

BLM is doing everything in their imaginary play book to try to take away rights that had been afforded ranchers for more than a century.  They  could care less about the family businesses they are destroying.   It is sickening.


----------



## TheOldSchool

depotoo said:


> BLM is doing everything in their imaginary play book to try to take away rights that had been afforded ranchers for more than a century.  They  could care less about the family businesses they are destroying.   It is sickening.


Do you mean the massive subsidies?


----------



## pismoe

TheOldSchool said:


> NLT said:
> 
> 
> 
> any stoneings, beheadings, drownings, rape yet? Oh yea these guys are not muslims.
> 
> 
> 
> They've captured more federal buildings in the homeland than Muslims.
Click to expand...

------------------  well , at least these Americans doing the protests pay the taxes to build the 'blm' buildings that they occupy  OldSchool .


----------



## TheOldSchool

pismoe said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NLT said:
> 
> 
> 
> any stoneings, beheadings, drownings, rape yet? Oh yea these guys are not muslims.
> 
> 
> 
> They've captured more federal buildings in the homeland than Muslims.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ------------------  well , at least these Americans doing the protests pay the taxes to build the 'blm' buildings that they occupy  OldSchool .
Click to expand...

Uh... no they don't.  That's sort of Bundy's whole thing...


----------



## CremeBrulee

Since when have the Hammonds and Bundys been close friends?  Most of the articles I have read indicate the Hammonds and Burns community in general don't want the Bundys and militias there.  The outsiders are making an already unfortunate situation worse.  Schools have been closed and the local law enforcement is receiving death threats.

As always, the OP leaves out information that doesn't fit her conspiratorial hyper-partisan narrative.  The sentences stem from incidents in 2001 and 2006.  They were appealed to the 9th Circuit and vacated for re-sentencing. The Supreme Court upheld this decision by refusing to hear the case.  The pair have been re-sentenced with credit for time served. 

Even the circumstances of these fires is questionable. The first fire is suspected of being a cover up for deer poaching on federal lands.

  "Jurors were told that Steven Hammond handed out “Strike Anywhere” matches with instructions that they be lit and dropped on the ground because they were going to “light up the whole country on fire.”  One witness testified that he barely escaped the eight to ten foot high flames caused by the arson.  The fire consumed 139 acres of public land and destroyed all evidence of the game violations.  After committing the arson, Steven Hammond called the BLM office in Burns, Oregon and claimed the fire was started on Hammond property to burn off invasive species and had inadvertently burned onto public lands."

The second fire, good intentions or not, was reckless.

"An August lightning storm started numerous fires and a burn ban was in effect while BLM firefighters fought those fires.  Despite the ban, without permission or notification to BLM, Steven Hammond started several “back fires” in an attempt save the ranch’s winter feed.  The fires burned onto public land and were seen by BLM firefighters camped nearby.  The firefighters took steps to ensure their safety and reported the arsons."
Eastern Oregon Ranchers Convicted of Arson Resentenced to Five Years in Prison | USAO-OR | Department of Justice

Add the Bundys to this event and it suddenly becomes a conspiracy in which the players are publicly claiming they will be assassinated if the subject is discussed in public.  This editorial could have been done in a way that would have evoked some sympathy for the Hammond family in general.  Instead, you cast an allusion to the President and supported it with  wild conspiracies about federal agencies being unable to operate within the borders of the US and the BLM being a "Crown Corporation".

And please, please stop calling armed anti government militias and their supporters American patriots.


----------



## Compost

Statistikhengst said:


> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's see if I understand the details.  They had permission to burn the area.  Therefore it was not arson.  Still, not only did they serve time in prison for a crime they didn't commit they are now supposed to return to prison because it's been decided the prison term wasn't enough?!  Meanwhile, there is government skullduggery involving an elastic definition of "public land"..
> 
> And some people can't fathom why anyone would object to this?  If this isn't tyranny, what is?
> 
> 
> 
> Which crime did they not commit?
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You are unable to read English?


----------



## pismoe

ALL Americans pay some taxes to build the government building that this group is occupying OldSchool !!


----------



## Compost

midcan5 said:


> What would be the reaction of the armed militia if the  Cliven Bundy family were Black? A Hispanic? A Muslim?  Funny that scofflaws on the right are somehow OK guys but minority protesters criminals. Criminals are criminals and these armed scumbags are criminals. Laws exist for a reason.


Who said skin color makes a difference?  Oh yeah.  Just you.


----------



## Statistikhengst

Compost said:


> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's see if I understand the details.  They had permission to burn the area.  Therefore it was not arson.  Still, not only did they serve time in prison for a crime they didn't commit they are now supposed to return to prison because it's been decided the prison term wasn't enough?!  Meanwhile, there is government skullduggery involving an elastic definition of "public land"..
> 
> And some people can't fathom why anyone would object to this?  If this isn't tyranny, what is?
> 
> 
> 
> Which crime did they not commit?
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are unable to read English?
Click to expand...

It's my mother-tongue, idiot. You made a claim. Onus is on you to back it up.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk


----------



## Compost

Statistikhengst said:


> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's see if I understand the details.  They had permission to burn the area.  Therefore it was not arson.  Still, not only did they serve time in prison for a crime they didn't commit they are now supposed to return to prison because it's been decided the prison term wasn't enough?!  Meanwhile, there is government skullduggery involving an elastic definition of "public land"..
> 
> And some people can't fathom why anyone would object to this?  If this isn't tyranny, what is?
> 
> 
> 
> Which crime did they not commit?
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are unable to read English?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's my mother-tongue, idiot. You made a claim. Onus is on you to back it up.
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You claim it's your mother tongue but your comprehension is woefully lacking.  They had permission to burn.  Arson is the crime they did not commit.


----------



## CremeBrulee

Compost said:


> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's see if I understand the details.  They had permission to burn the area.  Therefore it was not arson.  Still, not only did they serve time in prison for a crime they didn't commit they are now supposed to return to prison because it's been decided the prison term wasn't enough?!  Meanwhile, there is government skullduggery involving an elastic definition of "public land"..
> 
> And some people can't fathom why anyone would object to this?  If this isn't tyranny, what is?
> 
> 
> 
> Which crime did they not commit?
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are unable to read English?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's my mother-tongue, idiot. You made a claim. Onus is on you to back it up.
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You claim it's your mother tongue but your comprehension is woefully lacking.  They had permission to burn.  Arson is the crime they did not commit.
Click to expand...

The offenders in question claim they had permission.  The government maintains the first fire was set to cover a crime and the second was done without permission.  There was a burn ban in effect while crews were fighting wildfires.  It doesn't seem likely anyone would have given them permission to do a controlled burn.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

CremeBrulee said:


> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's see if I understand the details.  They had permission to burn the area.  Therefore it was not arson.  Still, not only did they serve time in prison for a crime they didn't commit they are now supposed to return to prison because it's been decided the prison term wasn't enough?!  Meanwhile, there is government skullduggery involving an elastic definition of "public land"..
> 
> And some people can't fathom why anyone would object to this?  If this isn't tyranny, what is?
> 
> 
> 
> Which crime did they not commit?
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are unable to read English?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's my mother-tongue, idiot. You made a claim. Onus is on you to back it up.
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You claim it's your mother tongue but your comprehension is woefully lacking.  They had permission to burn.  Arson is the crime they did not commit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The offenders in question claim they had permission.  The government maintains the first fire was set to cover a crime and the second was done without permission.  There was a burn ban in effect while crews were fighting wildfires.  It doesn't seem likely anyone would have given them permission to do a controlled burn.
Click to expand...

Correct.

In fact they had no such permission, as determined by a jury in a court of law.


----------



## Hossfly

Dante said:


> "The Bureau of Land Management uses the same method and has lost control of their own fires before but has never been put on trial for it."
> 
> Google: "bureau land management Lewiston residents  sued"
> 
> and ask that this thread be moved to conspiracy forum. far too many factual errors posing as opinions. see 1 example above
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Red River Landowners Take Battle with Feds to Court | The ...*
> www.texastribune.org/.../red-river-*land*owners-take-b...
> The Texas Tribune
> Nov 17, 2015 - Red River Landowners _Lawsuit_ Against Feds: PDF (565.6 KB) download ... Seven families are _suing_ the U.S. _Bureau_ of _Land Management_ in federal ... _management_ scheme by 2018 at the earliest, frustrating _residents_ who ...
> Missing: lewiston
> *BLM Forecloses Oil Leasing, Utah Sues | The Daily Caller*
> dailycaller.com/.../*bureau*-of-*land*-*management*-foreclos...
> The Daily Caller
> Jun 11, 2014 - Utah is _suing_ the federal _Bureau_ of _Land Management_ after it ... the _Bureau_ of _Land Management_ and _residents_ of a western state, Utah is ...
> Missing: lewiston
> *BLM sued for documents on Bundy standoff | Las Vegas ...*
> www.reviewjournal.com/...*blm*/*blm*-*sued*-doc...
> Las Vegas Review‑Journal
> Jun 12, 2014 - PEER _lawsuit_ seeks _BLM_ documents on Bundy incidents ... Don't you remember _residents_ of Mesquite posting on this very site about how they ...
> Missing: lewiston
> *Widow of firefighter sues BLM - The Lewiston Tribune ...*
> lmtribune.com/...*sues*-*blm*/article_240a7698-b4fc-5a68-a981-31298bc61b...
> Jul 28, 1996 - ... by a blaze last summer is _suing_ the U.S. _Bureau_ of _Land Management_. ... ARTICLE: Guardians of disabled _residents sue_ over forced moves ...
> *Errors Caused Lewiston Fire / Trainee planned controlled ...*
> www.sfgate.com/.../Errors-Caused-*Lewiston*-Fire...
> San Francisco Chronicle
> Jul 27, 1999 - _BLM_ officials are seeking to increase the maximum amount of $25000 for ... so claims (from _Lewiston residents_) can exceed that," Dearing said.
> *[PDF]Glossaries of BLM surveying and mapping terms - Bureau of ...*
> www.*blm*.gov/or/gis/.../*BLM*glossary.pdf
> Bureau of Land Management
> ABSENTEE OWNER – By law, one cannot be both a _resident_ and an absentee of a given area, state or .... common _BLM_ usage, alienated lands are lands that have been patented. ... nontechnically, the term includes one who _sues_ out a writ of error. ...... Montana – Billings, Dillon, _Lewiston_, Malta, Miles City and Missoula.
> *Small Claims - Nez Perce County*
> https://www.co.nezperce.id.us/.../SmallClaims.aspx
> Nez Perce County
> The small claims departments are informal courts which people can use to _sue_ for small amounts of money or to recover personal property, up to $5,000 without ...
> *Fires reignite burnout controversy*
> www.redding.com › News
> Redding Record Searchlight
> May 1, 2009 - He said _residents_ told him that burnout operations in the Trinity County fires last ... and firefighters to form Concerned Citizens for Responsible Fire _Management_. ... The Lowden Fire in _Lewiston_ in 1999, an escaped _Bureau_ of _Land_ ... He's contemplating a _lawsuit_ against the federal government, but he's ...
> *Lawsuits - Noise Pollution Clearinghouse*
> www.nonoise.org/news/law.htm
> ... decision by the Bureau of Land Management (_BLM_) and Fallon Naval Station to place ... Stuart, Florida Attorney Wants to Land Private 737 at County Airport Despite ... Virginia Beach _Residents_ Contemplate _Lawsuit_ Against Government for Jet .... Department Reluctant to Approve Noise Mitigation Along a _Lewiston_ Road; ...
> *Local & Regional | KLEW CBS 3 - News, Weather and ...*
> www.klewtv.com/news/local?pg=65&m=y
> KLEW‑TV
> Local · _Bureau_ of _Land Management_ pull permit from controversial Wolf Derby ... Local · Lohman Helicopter wants city council to rectify issue with _Lewiston_-Nez Perce Co. ... Local · “Festival of Trees” is holiday tradition for many valley _residents_ (Video) ... Environmental groups and the Nez Perce Tribe are _suing_ to prevent ...
Click to expand...

The OP meant that the federal government has never sued or punished the Bureau of Land Management.Get with the program and keep up with the grownups. Why do you want this thread put in the FZ or Conspiracy Theories? You're in the real world now.


----------



## 9thIDdoc

_he Hammonds were afforded full and comprehensive due process. 

They were found guilty in a court of law by a jury of their peers, and sentenced in accordance with the law
_
And they paid their debt to society in full accordance with the law. You don't have a problem with courts adding to a sentence after the fact? You're good with the whole double jeopardy thing without even the benefit of a new trial? Not too big on the concept of justice are you?

_
_


----------



## theDoctorisIn

I've heard a lot of truly ridiculous conspiracy theories floated on this message board, but the claim that Bureau of Land Management is a "foreign corporation" is one of the most bonkers.


----------



## depotoo

II. Convictions. On June 17, 2010, the government charged the Hammonds in a 19-count indictment with conspiracy, arson and other charges involving numerous range fires occurring in a 24-year period from August 1982 to August 2006. ER-1273. On May 17, 2012, less than 30 days before trial, the government filed a 9-count superseding indictment focusing on four separate fires. SER-137. Steven Hammond had acknowledged starting two of the fires, and those were the fires upon which
the jury returned guilty verdicts. Both petitioners were convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. § 844(f)(1) in connection with a 2001 range fire known as the Hardie-Hammond Fire. Steven Hammond was also convicted of violating § 844(f)(1) because he started a back burn during the 2006 Krumbo Butte Fire. The jury found that neither fire had caused more than $1,000 in damages. ER-35, 41. The Ninth Circuit described the 2006 fire as follows: In August 2006, a lightning storm kindled several fires near where the Hammonds grew their winter feed. Steven responded by attempting back burns near the boundary of his land. Although a burn ban was in effect, Steven did not seek a waiver. His fires burned about an acre of public land. App. 3. As for the 2001 fire, there were several facts petitioners had acknowledged at trial: Petitioners had been warned after a 1999 prescribed burn on their private land had spread to public land that they would face serious consequences should a similar event occur again. Id. On September 30, 2001, after the Hammonds and their invited guests finished a day of hunting on their private land, Steven Hammond called the BLM to see if burning was per- mitted. After being told there was no burn ban in effect, he informed the BLM that the Hammonds would be setting a fire on a section of their private
land. ER-234; ER-306. The Hammonds then set a fire intended to burn off invasive species; the fire spread to approximately 139 acres of adjacent public land on the Hardie-Hammond Allotment. ER-287; ER-243; ER-54-64. Some of the circumstances of the 2001 fire were disputed at trial. The government’s main witness on the 2001 fire was Dwight Hammond’s grandson, Dusty Hammond, who asserted that the fire had placed him in physical danger. App. 3. The defense presented substantial evidence contradicting Dusty Hammond’s version of the events. See SER-11-22. At sentencing, the trial judge rejected Dusty’s version of what had happened, based on his age and bias. App. 14. The trial judge found that the 2001 fire had, at most, temporarily damaged sagebrush and that, while those damages might have technically been greater than $100, “mother nature” had remedied any harm. App. 14. The judge’s conclusion was supported by the BLM, which had determined that the 2001 fire improved that portion of the federal land to which the fire spread. ER-305. Having listened to all of the evidence and testimony at trial, the trial court succinctly summarized the basis for the convictions as follows: With regard to the sufficiency of the jury verdicts, they were sufficient. And what happened here, if you analyze this situation, if you listened to the trial as I did and looked
at the pretrial matters, there was a – there were statements that Mr. Steven Hammond had given that indicated he set some fires [after he had been warned about the consequences if they spread], and the jury accepted that for what it was. App. 13. III. District Court’s Sentences. The trial court’s advisory guidelines calculations were undisputed on appeal. The advisory range for Dwight Hammond was 0 to 6 months imprisonment, App. 15; the advisory range for Steven Hammond was 8 to 14 months imprisonment, App. 16. Prior to sentencing, petitioners filed a memorandum seeking less than the five-year mandatory minimum provided for under 18 U.S.C. § 844(f)(1) on the grounds that such sentences would be disproportionate to their criminal conduct and, thus, would violate the Eighth Amendment. ECF-205. At sentencing, the prosecutor addressed petitioners’ Eighth Amendment argument as follows: Perhaps the best argument, Judge, the defendants have in this case is the proportionality of what they did to what their sentence is. Perhaps that’s the most troubling for the court. It is for the prosecutor who tried the case. . . . * * *
The proportionality issue is one, however, that I think our constitution gives to our courts. Congress has told you what they think the mandatory sentence should be. I have done my job as the prosecutor trying the case and presenting the evidence the best way I could, and now it’s the judiciary’s job to impose a sentence that it thinks just. We have made our recommendation of five years as the statute says. ER-9-10. The court responded to the prosecutor’s comments: [T]he argument [the prosecutor] made on proportionality was highly moral. I appreciate that. ER-18. The trial court concluded that petitioners’ offense conduct was not that contemplated by Congress when it added a five-year mandatory minimum sentence to 18 U.S.C. § 844 under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-132 (1996). App. 17. Considering the nature of the arson statute, the purpose of the penalty provision added to that statute, the nature of the conduct underlying the petitioners’ convictions, their personal characteristics, and the advisory guidelines, the trial court indicated that it would not impose the five-year mandatory minimum sentence because “to do so under the Eighth Amendment would result in a sentence which is grossly disproportionate to the severity of the offenses here.” App. 17.


----------



## depotoo

Hammond v. United States
the above post is from this link.


----------



## JQPublic1

Compost said:


> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's see if I understand the details.  They had permission to burn the area.  Therefore it was not arson.  Still, not only did they serve time in prison for a crime they didn't commit they are now supposed to return to prison because it's been decided the prison term wasn't enough?!  Meanwhile, there is government skullduggery involving an elastic definition of "public land"..
> 
> And some people can't fathom why anyone would object to this?  If this isn't tyranny, what is?
> 
> 
> 
> Which crime did they not commit?
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are unable to read English?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's my mother-tongue, idiot. You made a claim. Onus is on you to back it up.
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You claim it's your mother tongue but your comprehension is woefully lacking.  They had permission to burn.  Arson is the crime they did not commit.
Click to expand...

I guess you missed post #32...read it and weep!


----------



## depotoo

I guess you missed post 43/44.  Read it and weep.





JQPublic1 said:


> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's see if I understand the details.  They had permission to burn the area.  Therefore it was not arson.  Still, not only did they serve time in prison for a crime they didn't commit they are now supposed to return to prison because it's been decided the prison term wasn't enough?!  Meanwhile, there is government skullduggery involving an elastic definition of "public land"..
> 
> And some people can't fathom why anyone would object to this?  If this isn't tyranny, what is?
> 
> 
> 
> Which crime did they not commit?
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are unable to read English?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's my mother-tongue, idiot. You made a claim. Onus is on you to back it up.
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You claim it's your mother tongue but your comprehension is woefully lacking.  They had permission to burn.  Arson is the crime they did not commit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I guess you missed post #32...read it and weep!
Click to expand...


----------



## ogibillm

Compost said:


> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's see if I understand the details.  They had permission to burn the area.  Therefore it was not arson.  Still, not only did they serve time in prison for a crime they didn't commit they are now supposed to return to prison because it's been decided the prison term wasn't enough?!  Meanwhile, there is government skullduggery involving an elastic definition of "public land"..
> 
> And some people can't fathom why anyone would object to this?  If this isn't tyranny, what is?
> 
> 
> 
> Which crime did they not commit?
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are unable to read English?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's my mother-tongue, idiot. You made a claim. Onus is on you to back it up.
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You claim it's your mother tongue but your comprehension is woefully lacking.  They had permission to burn.  Arson is the crime they did not commit.
Click to expand...

no, they didn't


----------



## ogibillm

9thIDdoc said:


> _he Hammonds were afforded full and comprehensive due process.
> 
> They were found guilty in a court of law by a jury of their peers, and sentenced in accordance with the law
> _
> And they paid their debt to society in full accordance with the law.


no, they didn't


----------



## Hossfly

theDoctorisIn said:


> I've heard a lot of truly ridiculous conspiracy theories floated on this message board, but the claim that Bureau of Land Management is a "foreign corporation" is one of the most bonkers.


Here's an interesting claim about BLM.

TOTAL LIES BY THE BLM TO STEAL THE BUNDY'S LAND, WHICH BY THE WAY THE BLM IS A FOREIGN OWNED-- ASSET

THe BLM did the same thing to the OX Ranch in the California new York mountains.....I used to live near the ivanpah valley and near the molycorp mine....they had a big waste water pipe blow up and they sent in "the turtle lady" I got to know her and she said the desert tortoise was doing much better around the cows....good food partly digested.......her name was patty......another bit of information that is just something to think about.....on the clean-up of the "radioactive waste" that cost them about 13 million.....I was invited to a BLM and molycorp meeting, at the end they ask if there were any questions.....I questioned why the people cleaning up the waste were storing it in 55 gallon drums right next to the three trailers they were living in if was that dangerous.....typical answer was we will investigate the problem.....a couple days latter clean up was terminated(BLM is actually a sub-corporation of UNITED STATES INCORPORATED, a private foreign owned off-shore corporation since its last incorporation in 1925, copyrighted, trademarked and registered in Puerto Rico).Under the Reorganization Act of Washington District of Columbia, by it's
own private business charter, neither the BLM, nor any other
federal/corporate agency has lawful/legal authority, jurisdiction or
interstate nexus within the 50 state geographical landmass.

Alerts


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Hossfly said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard a lot of truly ridiculous conspiracy theories floated on this message board, but the claim that Bureau of Land Management is a "foreign corporation" is one of the most bonkers.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's an interesting claim about BLM.
> 
> TOTAL LIES BY THE BLM TO STEAL THE BUNDY'S LAND, WHICH BY THE WAY THE BLM IS A FOREIGN OWNED-- ASSET
> 
> THe BLM did the same thing to the OX Ranch in the California new York mountains.....I used to live near the ivanpah valley and near the molycorp mine....they had a big waste water pipe blow up and they sent in "the turtle lady" I got to know her and she said the desert tortoise was doing much better around the cows....good food partly digested.......her name was patty......another bit of information that is just something to think about.....on the clean-up of the "radioactive waste" that cost them about 13 million.....I was invited to a BLM and molycorp meeting, at the end they ask if there were any questions.....I questioned why the people cleaning up the waste were storing it in 55 gallon drums right next to the three trailers they were living in if was that dangerous.....typical answer was we will investigate the problem.....a couple days latter clean up was terminated(BLM is actually a sub-corporation of UNITED STATES INCORPORATED, a private foreign owned off-shore corporation since its last incorporation in 1925, copyrighted, trademarked and registered in Puerto Rico).Under the Reorganization Act of Washington District of Columbia, by it's
> own private business charter, neither the BLM, nor any other
> federal/corporate agency has lawful/legal authority, jurisdiction or
> interstate nexus within the 50 state geographical landmass.
> 
> Alerts
Click to expand...


I know how hard it is for you guys to recognize bullshit, but here's a little lesson for you.

You see that above? That's bullshit.


----------



## Hossfly

theDoctorisIn said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard a lot of truly ridiculous conspiracy theories floated on this message board, but the claim that Bureau of Land Management is a "foreign corporation" is one of the most bonkers.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's an interesting claim about BLM.
> 
> TOTAL LIES BY THE BLM TO STEAL THE BUNDY'S LAND, WHICH BY THE WAY THE BLM IS A FOREIGN OWNED-- ASSET
> 
> THe BLM did the same thing to the OX Ranch in the California new York mountains.....I used to live near the ivanpah valley and near the molycorp mine....they had a big waste water pipe blow up and they sent in "the turtle lady" I got to know her and she said the desert tortoise was doing much better around the cows....good food partly digested.......her name was patty......another bit of information that is just something to think about.....on the clean-up of the "radioactive waste" that cost them about 13 million.....I was invited to a BLM and molycorp meeting, at the end they ask if there were any questions.....I questioned why the people cleaning up the waste were storing it in 55 gallon drums right next to the three trailers they were living in if was that dangerous.....typical answer was we will investigate the problem.....a couple days latter clean up was terminated(BLM is actually a sub-corporation of UNITED STATES INCORPORATED, a private foreign owned off-shore corporation since its last incorporation in 1925, copyrighted, trademarked and registered in Puerto Rico).Under the Reorganization Act of Washington District of Columbia, by it's
> own private business charter, neither the BLM, nor any other
> federal/corporate agency has lawful/legal authority, jurisdiction or
> interstate nexus within the 50 state geographical landmass.
> 
> Alerts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I know how hard it is for you guys to recognize bullshit, but here's a little lesson for you.
> 
> You see that above? That's bullshit.
Click to expand...

Are you sure?


----------



## theDoctorisIn

Hossfly said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard a lot of truly ridiculous conspiracy theories floated on this message board, but the claim that Bureau of Land Management is a "foreign corporation" is one of the most bonkers.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's an interesting claim about BLM.
> 
> TOTAL LIES BY THE BLM TO STEAL THE BUNDY'S LAND, WHICH BY THE WAY THE BLM IS A FOREIGN OWNED-- ASSET
> 
> THe BLM did the same thing to the OX Ranch in the California new York mountains.....I used to live near the ivanpah valley and near the molycorp mine....they had a big waste water pipe blow up and they sent in "the turtle lady" I got to know her and she said the desert tortoise was doing much better around the cows....good food partly digested.......her name was patty......another bit of information that is just something to think about.....on the clean-up of the "radioactive waste" that cost them about 13 million.....I was invited to a BLM and molycorp meeting, at the end they ask if there were any questions.....I questioned why the people cleaning up the waste were storing it in 55 gallon drums right next to the three trailers they were living in if was that dangerous.....typical answer was we will investigate the problem.....a couple days latter clean up was terminated(BLM is actually a sub-corporation of UNITED STATES INCORPORATED, a private foreign owned off-shore corporation since its last incorporation in 1925, copyrighted, trademarked and registered in Puerto Rico).Under the Reorganization Act of Washington District of Columbia, by it's
> own private business charter, neither the BLM, nor any other
> federal/corporate agency has lawful/legal authority, jurisdiction or
> interstate nexus within the 50 state geographical landmass.
> 
> Alerts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I know how hard it is for you guys to recognize bullshit, but here's a little lesson for you.
> 
> You see that above? That's bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you sure?
Click to expand...


Yes, as is anyone else with functioning cognitive faculties.

Do you believe everything you read on the internet? I've seen some good deals on bridges.


----------



## Hossfly

theDoctorisIn said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard a lot of truly ridiculous conspiracy theories floated on this message board, but the claim that Bureau of Land Management is a "foreign corporation" is one of the most bonkers.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's an interesting claim about BLM.
> 
> TOTAL LIES BY THE BLM TO STEAL THE BUNDY'S LAND, WHICH BY THE WAY THE BLM IS A FOREIGN OWNED-- ASSET
> 
> THe BLM did the same thing to the OX Ranch in the California new York mountains.....I used to live near the ivanpah valley and near the molycorp mine....they had a big waste water pipe blow up and they sent in "the turtle lady" I got to know her and she said the desert tortoise was doing much better around the cows....good food partly digested.......her name was patty......another bit of information that is just something to think about.....on the clean-up of the "radioactive waste" that cost them about 13 million.....I was invited to a BLM and molycorp meeting, at the end they ask if there were any questions.....I questioned why the people cleaning up the waste were storing it in 55 gallon drums right next to the three trailers they were living in if was that dangerous.....typical answer was we will investigate the problem.....a couple days latter clean up was terminated(BLM is actually a sub-corporation of UNITED STATES INCORPORATED, a private foreign owned off-shore corporation since its last incorporation in 1925, copyrighted, trademarked and registered in Puerto Rico).Under the Reorganization Act of Washington District of Columbia, by it's
> own private business charter, neither the BLM, nor any other
> federal/corporate agency has lawful/legal authority, jurisdiction or
> interstate nexus within the 50 state geographical landmass.
> 
> Alerts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I know how hard it is for you guys to recognize bullshit, but here's a little lesson for you.
> 
> You see that above? That's bullshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you sure?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, as is anyone else with functioning cognitive faculties.
> 
> Do you believe everything you read on the internet? I've seen some good deals on bridges.
Click to expand...

"All I know is what I read on the Internet"
~~Mark Twain


----------



## Compost

JQPublic1 said:


> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's see if I understand the details.  They had permission to burn the area.  Therefore it was not arson.  Still, not only did they serve time in prison for a crime they didn't commit they are now supposed to return to prison because it's been decided the prison term wasn't enough?!  Meanwhile, there is government skullduggery involving an elastic definition of "public land"..
> 
> And some people can't fathom why anyone would object to this?  If this isn't tyranny, what is?
> 
> 
> 
> Which crime did they not commit?
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are unable to read English?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's my mother-tongue, idiot. You made a claim. Onus is on you to back it up.
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You claim it's your mother tongue but your comprehension is woefully lacking.  They had permission to burn.  Arson is the crime they did not commit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I guess you missed post #32...read it and weep!
Click to expand...

Thank you, JQP.   I have read post 32.  I see no reason to weep.  I'm glad to get more information on this.  What went on is not clear- not all the versions tally.  Obviously something outrageous happened to cause men to take over a fed building in protest.  I intend to follow this story and hopefully learn more.


----------



## JQPublic1

Hossfly said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard a lot of truly ridiculous conspiracy theories floated on this message board, but the claim that Bureau of Land Management is a "foreign corporation" is one of the most bonkers.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's an interesting claim about BLM.
> 
> TOTAL LIES BY THE BLM TO STEAL THE BUNDY'S LAND, WHICH BY THE WAY THE BLM IS A FOREIGN OWNED-- ASSET
> 
> THe BLM did the same thing to the OX Ranch in the California new York mountains.....I used to live near the ivanpah valley and near the molycorp mine....they had a big waste water pipe blow up and they sent in "the turtle lady" I got to know her and she said the desert tortoise was doing much better around the cows....good food partly digested.......her name was patty......another bit of information that is just something to think about.....on the clean-up of the "radioactive waste" that cost them about 13 million.....I was invited to a BLM and molycorp meeting, at the end they ask if there were any questions.....I questioned why the people cleaning up the waste were storing it in 55 gallon drums right next to the three trailers they were living in if was that dangerous.....typical answer was we will investigate the problem.....a couple days latter clean up was terminated(BLM is actually a sub-corporation of UNITED STATES INCORPORATED, a private foreign owned off-shore corporation since its last incorporation in 1925, copyrighted, trademarked and registered in Puerto Rico).Under the Reorganization Act of Washington District of Columbia, by it's
> own private business charter, neither the BLM, nor any other
> federal/corporate agency has lawful/legal authority, jurisdiction or
> interstate nexus within the 50 state geographical landmass.
> 
> Alerts
Click to expand...

I can't call you a liar because you *really believe* BLM is owned by foreigners. Here is a reality check for you. BLM didn't even exist until 1946. Where did you get that 1925 date from? BTW, BLM was a Harry S. Truman initiative, not that of  the queen of England or winston Churchill.


----------



## ogibillm

Compost said:


> JQPublic1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which crime did they not commit?
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> You are unable to read English?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's my mother-tongue, idiot. You made a claim. Onus is on you to back it up.
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You claim it's your mother tongue but your comprehension is woefully lacking.  They had permission to burn.  Arson is the crime they did not commit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I guess you missed post #32...read it and weep!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you, JQP.   I have read post 32.  I see no reason to weep.  I'm glad to get more information on this.  What went on is not clear- not all the versions tally.  Obviously something outrageous happened to cause men to take over a fed building in protest.  I intend to follow this story and hopefully learn more.
Click to expand...

crazy people doing crazy things isn't evidence something actually happened


----------



## Compost

ogibillm said:


> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JQPublic1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are unable to read English?
> 
> 
> 
> It's my mother-tongue, idiot. You made a claim. Onus is on you to back it up.
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You claim it's your mother tongue but your comprehension is woefully lacking.  They had permission to burn.  Arson is the crime they did not commit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I guess you missed post #32...read it and weep!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you, JQP.   I have read post 32.  I see no reason to weep.  I'm glad to get more information on this.  What went on is not clear- not all the versions tally.  Obviously something outrageous happened to cause men to take over a fed building in protest.  I intend to follow this story and hopefully learn more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> crazy people doing crazy things isn't evidence something actually happened
Click to expand...

Of course not.  However, crazy people doing crazy things *is* something happening.


----------



## miketx

Moonglow said:


> Which tyrannical regime are they protesting?



The one the libtard collective voted for, of which you are a card carrying member.


----------



## ogibillm

Compost said:


> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JQPublic1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Statistikhengst said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's my mother-tongue, idiot. You made a claim. Onus is on you to back it up.
> 
> Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> You claim it's your mother tongue but your comprehension is woefully lacking.  They had permission to burn.  Arson is the crime they did not commit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I guess you missed post #32...read it and weep!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you, JQP.   I have read post 32.  I see no reason to weep.  I'm glad to get more information on this.  What went on is not clear- not all the versions tally.  Obviously something outrageous happened to cause men to take over a fed building in protest.  I intend to follow this story and hopefully learn more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> crazy people doing crazy things isn't evidence something actually happened
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course not.  However, crazy people doing crazy things *is* something happening.
Click to expand...

Yes, but it doesn't mean their reasons are valid


----------



## Moonglow

miketx said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which tyrannical regime are they protesting?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The one the libtard collective voted for, of which you are a card carrying member.
Click to expand...

I'm not a libertarian..


----------



## miketx

Yes, you are a libtard. Part of the collective of encased mind imbeciles that refuse thought and reason and fact, apparently every few seconds.


----------



## Compost

ogibillm said:


> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JQPublic1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> You claim it's your mother tongue but your comprehension is woefully lacking.  They had permission to burn.  Arson is the crime they did not commit.
> 
> 
> 
> I guess you missed post #32...read it and weep!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thank you, JQP.   I have read post 32.  I see no reason to weep.  I'm glad to get more information on this.  What went on is not clear- not all the versions tally.  Obviously something outrageous happened to cause men to take over a fed building in protest.  I intend to follow this story and hopefully learn more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> crazy people doing crazy things isn't evidence something actually happened
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course not.  However, crazy people doing crazy things *is* something happening.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, but it doesn't mean their reasons are valid
Click to expand...

It doesn't mean their reasons are invalid either.


----------



## ogibillm

Compost said:


> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JQPublic1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess you missed post #32...read it and weep!
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, JQP.   I have read post 32.  I see no reason to weep.  I'm glad to get more information on this.  What went on is not clear- not all the versions tally.  Obviously something outrageous happened to cause men to take over a fed building in protest.  I intend to follow this story and hopefully learn more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> crazy people doing crazy things isn't evidence something actually happened
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course not.  However, crazy people doing crazy things *is* something happening.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, but it doesn't mean their reasons are valid
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It doesn't mean their reasons are invalid either.
Click to expand...

no. but the lack of valid reasoning is apparent


----------



## Compost

ogibillm said:


> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, JQP.   I have read post 32.  I see no reason to weep.  I'm glad to get more information on this.  What went on is not clear- not all the versions tally.  Obviously something outrageous happened to cause men to take over a fed building in protest.  I intend to follow this story and hopefully learn more.
> 
> 
> 
> crazy people doing crazy things isn't evidence something actually happened
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course not.  However, crazy people doing crazy things *is* something happening.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, but it doesn't mean their reasons are valid
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It doesn't mean their reasons are invalid either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no. but the lack of valid reasoning is apparent
Click to expand...

I've looked into it further, have you?  It seems that one group, the Bundys got in trouble for setting fires on their own property.  Meanwhile, another group, the Hammonds are attempting to dovetail their own land issues with that of the Bundys'.  The Bundys say they are NOT part of the Hammond sit-in at Bureau of Land Mgt. Furthermore, the Bundys intend to cooperate and go back to prison.....   Until I fully understand what is going on, I'm not going to dismiss the occupiers *or* the jailbirds.  I know this much.  I'm inclined to trust them more than I trust our federal government.


----------



## Hossfly

JQPublic1 said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard a lot of truly ridiculous conspiracy theories floated on this message board, but the claim that Bureau of Land Management is a "foreign corporation" is one of the most bonkers.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's an interesting claim about BLM.
> 
> TOTAL LIES BY THE BLM TO STEAL THE BUNDY'S LAND, WHICH BY THE WAY THE BLM IS A FOREIGN OWNED-- ASSET
> 
> THe BLM did the same thing to the OX Ranch in the California new York mountains.....I used to live near the ivanpah valley and near the molycorp mine....they had a big waste water pipe blow up and they sent in "the turtle lady" I got to know her and she said the desert tortoise was doing much better around the cows....good food partly digested.......her name was patty......another bit of information that is just something to think about.....on the clean-up of the "radioactive waste" that cost them about 13 million.....I was invited to a BLM and molycorp meeting, at the end they ask if there were any questions.....I questioned why the people cleaning up the waste were storing it in 55 gallon drums right next to the three trailers they were living in if was that dangerous.....typical answer was we will investigate the problem.....a couple days latter clean up was terminated(BLM is actually a sub-corporation of UNITED STATES INCORPORATED, a private foreign owned off-shore corporation since its last incorporation in 1925, copyrighted, trademarked and registered in Puerto Rico).Under the Reorganization Act of Washington District of Columbia, by it's
> own private business charter, neither the BLM, nor any other
> federal/corporate agency has lawful/legal authority, jurisdiction or
> interstate nexus within the 50 state geographical landmass.
> 
> Alerts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I can't call you a liar because you *really believe* BLM is owned by foreigners. Here is a reality check for you. BLM didn't even exist until 1946. Where did you get that 1925 date from? BTW, BLM was a Harry S. Truman initiative, not that of  the queen of England or winston Churchill.
Click to expand...

Do some digging if you don't believe it. It's the same as the Federal Reserve which is also part of the Government but was formed and operated to this day by private enterprises.


----------



## ogibillm

Compost said:


> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> crazy people doing crazy things isn't evidence something actually happened
> 
> 
> 
> Of course not.  However, crazy people doing crazy things *is* something happening.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, but it doesn't mean their reasons are valid
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It doesn't mean their reasons are invalid either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no. but the lack of valid reasoning is apparent
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've looked into it further, have you?  It seems that one group, the Bundys got in trouble for setting fires on their own property.  Meanwhile, another group, the Hammonds are attempting to dovetail their own land issues with that of the Bundys'.  The Bundys say they are NOT part of the Hammond sit-in at Bureau of Land Mgt. Furthermore, the Bundys intend to cooperate and go back to prison.....   Until I fully understand what is going on, I'm not going to dismiss the occupiers *or* the jailbirds.  I know this much.  I'm inclined to trust them more than I trust our federal government.
Click to expand...

you have the bundys and the hammonds backwards. 

you are also mistaken about why the hammonds were in trouble. they burned federal lands, not their own and were found guilty of arson by a jury of their peers

so you tell me, what possible reason is there for this 'protest'?


----------



## Luddly Neddite

Moonglow said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which tyrannical regime are they protesting?
> 
> 
> 
> Can't you guess? It sure as hell ain't the Vatican.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, he was convicted in a GOP regime..was suppose to live by a rule of law created during a GOP regime.....Yet only this regime is getting the heat..
Click to expand...



She also forgot the part about them confessing and leaving tied up bunches of matches. 

How come arsonists, poachers and deadbeats stealing from the tax payer are always heroes to right wingers?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JQPublic1

Hossfly said:


> JQPublic1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard a lot of truly ridiculous conspiracy theories floated on this message board, but the claim that Bureau of Land Management is a "foreign corporation" is one of the most bonkers.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's an interesting claim about BLM.
> 
> TOTAL LIES BY THE BLM TO STEAL THE BUNDY'S LAND, WHICH BY THE WAY THE BLM IS A FOREIGN OWNED-- ASSET
> 
> THe BLM did the same thing to the OX Ranch in the California new York mountains.....I used to live near the ivanpah valley and near the molycorp mine....they had a big waste water pipe blow up and they sent in "the turtle lady" I got to know her and she said the desert tortoise was doing much better around the cows....good food partly digested.......her name was patty......another bit of information that is just something to think about.....on the clean-up of the "radioactive waste" that cost them about 13 million.....I was invited to a BLM and molycorp meeting, at the end they ask if there were any questions.....I questioned why the people cleaning up the waste were storing it in 55 gallon drums right next to the three trailers they were living in if was that dangerous.....typical answer was we will investigate the problem.....a couple days latter clean up was terminated(BLM is actually a sub-corporation of UNITED STATES INCORPORATED, a private foreign owned off-shore corporation since its last incorporation in 1925, copyrighted, trademarked and registered in Puerto Rico).Under the Reorganization Act of Washington District of Columbia, by it's
> own private business charter, neither the BLM, nor any other
> federal/corporate agency has lawful/legal authority, jurisdiction or
> interstate nexus within the 50 state geographical landmass.
> 
> Alerts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I can't call you a liar because you *really believe* BLM is owned by foreigners. Here is a reality check for you. BLM didn't even exist until 1946. Where did you get that 1925 date from? BTW, BLM was a Harry S. Truman initiative, not that of  the queen of England or winston Churchill.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do some digging if you don't believe it. It's the same as the Federal Reserve which is also part of the Government but was formed and operated to this day by private enterprises.
Click to expand...

uh, I don't dig in shit piles.... there is nothing under all that shit but more shit.


Hossfly said:


> JQPublic1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard a lot of truly ridiculous conspiracy theories floated on this message board, but the claim that Bureau of Land Management is a "foreign corporation" is one of the most bonkers.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's an interesting claim about BLM.
> 
> TOTAL LIES BY THE BLM TO STEAL THE BUNDY'S LAND, WHICH BY THE WAY THE BLM IS A FOREIGN OWNED-- ASSET
> 
> THe BLM did the same thing to the OX Ranch in the California new York mountains.....I used to live near the ivanpah valley and near the molycorp mine....they had a big waste water pipe blow up and they sent in "the turtle lady" I got to know her and she said the desert tortoise was doing much better around the cows....good food partly digested.......her name was patty......another bit of information that is just something to think about.....on the clean-up of the "radioactive waste" that cost them about 13 million.....I was invited to a BLM and molycorp meeting, at the end they ask if there were any questions.....I questioned why the people cleaning up the waste were storing it in 55 gallon drums right next to the three trailers they were living in if was that dangerous.....typical answer was we will investigate the problem.....a couple days latter clean up was terminated(BLM is actually a sub-corporation of UNITED STATES INCORPORATED, a private foreign owned off-shore corporation since its last incorporation in 1925, copyrighted, trademarked and registered in Puerto Rico).Under the Reorganization Act of Washington District of Columbia, by it's
> own private business charter, neither the BLM, nor any other
> federal/corporate agency has lawful/legal authority, jurisdiction or
> interstate nexus within the 50 state geographical landmass.
> 
> Alerts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I can't call you a liar because you *really believe* BLM is owned by foreigners. Here is a reality check for you. BLM didn't even exist until 1946. Where did you get that 1925 date from? BTW, BLM was a Harry S. Truman initiative, not that of  the queen of England or winston Churchill.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do some digging if you don't believe it. It's the same as the Federal Reserve which is also part of the Government but was formed and operated to this day by private enterprises.
Click to expand...

You might be wondering why someone put a  after your assertion that the Federal Reserve is a Private entity. A little fact checking on the Federal Reserve website might have saved you from the embarrassment i am about to heap upon you. Open your eyes and read carefully, make sure your pupils are fully dilated so that you don't miss anything:

*Who owns the Federal Reserve?*
"The Federal Reserve System fulfills its public mission as an independent entity within government. * It is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution.*

As the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the Congress of the United States. It is considered an independent central bank because its monetary policy decisions do not have to be approved by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by the Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.

However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by the Congress, which often reviews the Federal Reserve's activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Therefore, the Federal Reserve can be more accurately described as "independent within the government" rather than "independent of government."

The 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by the Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, *are organized similarly to private corporations--possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership."* For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year."

Hostly, I am not going to be mean spirited and derisive. You made an honest mistake and I hope you learned something. Now, there is no need to  "DIG" deeper into the shit pile you obviously have been digging in to find erroneous information on the BLM... zip you are wrong about the Federal Reserve you are wrong about the BLM.


----------



## Hossfly

JQPublic1 said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JQPublic1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard a lot of truly ridiculous conspiracy theories floated on this message board, but the claim that Bureau of Land Management is a "foreign corporation" is one of the most bonkers.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's an interesting claim about BLM.
> 
> TOTAL LIES BY THE BLM TO STEAL THE BUNDY'S LAND, WHICH BY THE WAY THE BLM IS A FOREIGN OWNED-- ASSET
> 
> THe BLM did the same thing to the OX Ranch in the California new York mountains.....I used to live near the ivanpah valley and near the molycorp mine....they had a big waste water pipe blow up and they sent in "the turtle lady" I got to know her and she said the desert tortoise was doing much better around the cows....good food partly digested.......her name was patty......another bit of information that is just something to think about.....on the clean-up of the "radioactive waste" that cost them about 13 million.....I was invited to a BLM and molycorp meeting, at the end they ask if there were any questions.....I questioned why the people cleaning up the waste were storing it in 55 gallon drums right next to the three trailers they were living in if was that dangerous.....typical answer was we will investigate the problem.....a couple days latter clean up was terminated(BLM is actually a sub-corporation of UNITED STATES INCORPORATED, a private foreign owned off-shore corporation since its last incorporation in 1925, copyrighted, trademarked and registered in Puerto Rico).Under the Reorganization Act of Washington District of Columbia, by it's
> own private business charter, neither the BLM, nor any other
> federal/corporate agency has lawful/legal authority, jurisdiction or
> interstate nexus within the 50 state geographical landmass.
> 
> Alerts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I can't call you a liar because you *really believe* BLM is owned by foreigners. Here is a reality check for you. BLM didn't even exist until 1946. Where did you get that 1925 date from? BTW, BLM was a Harry S. Truman initiative, not that of  the queen of England or winston Churchill.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do some digging if you don't believe it. It's the same as the Federal Reserve which is also part of the Government but was formed and operated to this day by private enterprises.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> uh, I don't dig in shit piles.... there is nothing under all that shit but more shit. The Federal reserve is indeed a private entity so any employee of thereof are not government employees.
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JQPublic1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard a lot of truly ridiculous conspiracy theories floated on this message board, but the claim that Bureau of Land Management is a "foreign corporation" is one of the most bonkers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Here's an interesting claim about BLM.
> 
> TOTAL LIES BY THE BLM TO STEAL THE BUNDY'S LAND, WHICH BY THE WAY THE BLM IS A FOREIGN OWNED-- ASSET
> 
> THe BLM did the same thing to the OX Ranch in the California new York mountains.....I used to live near the ivanpah valley and near the molycorp mine....they had a big waste water pipe blow up and they sent in "the turtle lady" I got to know her and she said the desert tortoise was doing much better around the cows....good food partly digested.......her name was patty......another bit of information that is just something to think about.....on the clean-up of the "radioactive waste" that cost them about 13 million.....I was invited to a BLM and molycorp meeting, at the end they ask if there were any questions.....I questioned why the people cleaning up the waste were storing it in 55 gallon drums right next to the three trailers they were living in if was that dangerous.....typical answer was we will investigate the problem.....a couple days latter clean up was terminated(BLM is actually a sub-corporation of UNITED STATES INCORPORATED, a private foreign owned off-shore corporation since its last incorporation in 1925, copyrighted, trademarked and registered in Puerto Rico).Under the Reorganization Act of Washington District of Columbia, by it's
> own private business charter, neither the BLM, nor any other
> federal/corporate agency has lawful/legal authority, jurisdiction or
> interstate nexus within the 50 state geographical landmass.
> 
> Alerts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I can't call you a liar because you *really believe* BLM is owned by foreigners. Here is a reality check for you. BLM didn't even exist until 1946. Where did you get that 1925 date from? BTW, BLM was a Harry S. Truman initiative, not that of  the queen of England or winston Churchill.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do some digging if you don't believe it. It's the same as the Federal Reserve which is also part of the Government but was formed and operated to this day by private enterprises.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You might be wondering why someone put a  after your assertion that the Federal Reserve is a Private entity. A little fact checking on the Federal Reserve website might have saved you from the embarrassment i am about to heap upon you. Open your eyes and read carefully, make sure your pupils are fully dilated so that you don't miss anything:
> 
> *Who owns the Federal Reserve?*
> "The Federal Reserve System fulfills its public mission as an independent entity within government. * It is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution.*
> 
> As the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the Congress of the United States. It is considered an independent central bank because its monetary policy decisions do not have to be approved by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by the Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.
> 
> However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by the Congress, which often reviews the Federal Reserve's activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Therefore, the Federal Reserve can be more accurately described as "independent within the government" rather than "independent of government."
> 
> The 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by the Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, *are organized similarly to private corporations--possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership."* For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year."
> 
> Hostly, I am not going to be mean spirited and derisive. You made an honest mistake and I hope you learned something. Now, there is no need to  "DIG" deeper into the shit pile you obviously have been digging in to find erroneous information on the BLM... zip you are wrong about the Federal Reserve you are wrong about the BLM.
Click to expand...

This is where 2 wrongs make a right. Along with the sheeple you are being hoodwinked.


----------



## JQPublic1

Hossfly said:


> JQPublic1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JQPublic1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard a lot of truly ridiculous conspiracy theories floated on this message board, but the claim that Bureau of Land Management is a "foreign corporation" is one of the most bonkers.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's an interesting claim about BLM.
> 
> TOTAL LIES BY THE BLM TO STEAL THE BUNDY'S LAND, WHICH BY THE WAY THE BLM IS A FOREIGN OWNED-- ASSET
> 
> THe BLM did the same thing to the OX Ranch in the California new York mountains.....I used to live near the ivanpah valley and near the molycorp mine....they had a big waste water pipe blow up and they sent in "the turtle lady" I got to know her and she said the desert tortoise was doing much better around the cows....good food partly digested.......her name was patty......another bit of information that is just something to think about.....on the clean-up of the "radioactive waste" that cost them about 13 million.....I was invited to a BLM and molycorp meeting, at the end they ask if there were any questions.....I questioned why the people cleaning up the waste were storing it in 55 gallon drums right next to the three trailers they were living in if was that dangerous.....typical answer was we will investigate the problem.....a couple days latter clean up was terminated(BLM is actually a sub-corporation of UNITED STATES INCORPORATED, a private foreign owned off-shore corporation since its last incorporation in 1925, copyrighted, trademarked and registered in Puerto Rico).Under the Reorganization Act of Washington District of Columbia, by it's
> own private business charter, neither the BLM, nor any other
> federal/corporate agency has lawful/legal authority, jurisdiction or
> interstate nexus within the 50 state geographical landmass.
> 
> Alerts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I can't call you a liar because you *really believe* BLM is owned by foreigners. Here is a reality check for you. BLM didn't even exist until 1946. Where did you get that 1925 date from? BTW, BLM was a Harry S. Truman initiative, not that of  the queen of England or winston Churchill.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do some digging if you don't believe it. It's the same as the Federal Reserve which is also part of the Government but was formed and operated to this day by private enterprises.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> uh, I don't dig in shit piles.... there is nothing under all that shit but more shit.
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JQPublic1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've heard a lot of truly ridiculous conspiracy theories floated on this message board, but the claim that Bureau of Land Management is a "foreign corporation" is one of the most bonkers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Here's an interesting claim about BLM.
> 
> TOTAL LIES BY THE BLM TO STEAL THE BUNDY'S LAND, WHICH BY THE WAY THE BLM IS A FOREIGN OWNED-- ASSET
> 
> THe BLM did the same thing to the OX Ranch in the California new York mountains.....I used to live near the ivanpah valley and near the molycorp mine....they had a big waste water pipe blow up and they sent in "the turtle lady" I got to know her and she said the desert tortoise was doing much better around the cows....good food partly digested.......her name was patty......another bit of information that is just something to think about.....on the clean-up of the "radioactive waste" that cost them about 13 million.....I was invited to a BLM and molycorp meeting, at the end they ask if there were any questions.....I questioned why the people cleaning up the waste were storing it in 55 gallon drums right next to the three trailers they were living in if was that dangerous.....typical answer was we will investigate the problem.....a couple days latter clean up was terminated(BLM is actually a sub-corporation of UNITED STATES INCORPORATED, a private foreign owned off-shore corporation since its last incorporation in 1925, copyrighted, trademarked and registered in Puerto Rico).Under the Reorganization Act of Washington District of Columbia, by it's
> own private business charter, neither the BLM, nor any other
> federal/corporate agency has lawful/legal authority, jurisdiction or
> interstate nexus within the 50 state geographical landmass.
> 
> Alerts
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I can't call you a liar because you *really believe* BLM is owned by foreigners. Here is a reality check for you. BLM didn't even exist until 1946. Where did you get that 1925 date from? BTW, BLM was a Harry S. Truman initiative, not that of  the queen of England or winston Churchill.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do some digging if you don't believe it. It's the same as the Federal Reserve which is also part of the Government but was formed and operated to this day by private enterprises.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You might be wondering why someone put a  after your assertion that the Federal Reserve is a Private entity. A little fact checking on the Federal Reserve website might have saved you from the embarrassment i am about to heap upon you. Open your eyes and read carefully, make sure your pupils are fully dilated so that you don't miss anything:
> 
> *Who owns the Federal Reserve?*
> "The Federal Reserve System fulfills its public mission as an independent entity within government. * It is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution.*
> 
> As the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the Congress of the United States. It is considered an independent central bank because its monetary policy decisions do not have to be approved by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by the Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.
> 
> However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by the Congress, which often reviews the Federal Reserve's activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Therefore, the Federal Reserve can be more accurately described as "independent within the government" rather than "independent of government."
> 
> The 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by the Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system, *are organized similarly to private corporations--possibly leading to some confusion about "ownership."* For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year."
> 
> Hostly, I am not going to be mean spirited and derisive. You made an honest mistake and I hope you learned something. Now, there is no need to  "DIG" deeper into the shit pile you obviously have been digging in to find erroneous information on the BLM... zip you are wrong about the Federal Reserve you are wrong about the BLM.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This is where 2 wrongs make a right. Along with the sheeple you are being hoodwinked.
Click to expand...


Hoodwinked by the Federal Reserve?  go back to sleep.... I know ...you are tired...get some rest....


----------



## Compost

ogibillm said:


> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course not.  However, crazy people doing crazy things *is* something happening.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but it doesn't mean their reasons are valid
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It doesn't mean their reasons are invalid either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no. but the lack of valid reasoning is apparent
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've looked into it further, have you?  It seems that one group, the Bundys got in trouble for setting fires on their own property.  Meanwhile, another group, the Hammonds are attempting to dovetail their own land issues with that of the Bundys'.  The Bundys say they are NOT part of the Hammond sit-in at Bureau of Land Mgt. Furthermore, the Bundys intend to cooperate and go back to prison.....   Until I fully understand what is going on, I'm not going to dismiss the occupiers *or* the jailbirds.  I know this much.  I'm inclined to trust them more than I trust our federal government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you have the bundys and the hammonds backwards.
> 
> you are also mistaken about why the hammonds were in trouble. they burned federal lands, not their own and were found guilty of arson by a jury of their peers
> 
> so you tell me, what possible reason is there for this 'protest'?
Click to expand...

Uh huh.  Juries are always right!


----------



## Compost

Luddly Neddite said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which tyrannical regime are they protesting?
> 
> 
> 
> Can't you guess? It sure as hell ain't the Vatican.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, he was convicted in a GOP regime..was suppose to live by a rule of law created during a GOP regime.....Yet only this regime is getting the heat..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> She also forgot the part about them confessing and leaving tied up bunches of matches.
> 
> How come arsonists, poachers and deadbeats stealing from the tax payer are always heroes to right wingers?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Who said they are heroes?  You are making stuff up.


----------



## Geaux4it

TheOldSchool said:


> Has the national guard been deployed yet?



No, they are likely inside as supporters.

-Geaux


----------



## Geaux4it

Moonglow said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which tyrannical regime are they protesting?
> 
> 
> 
> Can't you guess? It sure as hell ain't the Vatican.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, he was convicted in a GOP regime..was suppose to live by a rule of law created during a GOP regime.....Yet only this regime is getting the heat..
Click to expand...


History has no precedent. It's all about what have you done for me lately in America these days

-Geaux


----------



## Geaux4it

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> "Oregon Occupation: Protesting A Tyrannical Regime"
> 
> A ridiculous lie.
> 
> The Hammonds were afforded full and comprehensive due process.
> 
> They were found guilty in a court of law by a jury of their peers, and sentenced in accordance with the law.
> 
> Again, the fires they started were on public land, unauthorized by the BLM, and endangered the lives of firefighters battling other fires in the area.
> 
> This 'occupation' of Federal property is unjustified, unwarranted, illegal, and devoid of merit – no one has been subject to any 'abuse' on the part of the Federal government, no rights 'abridged' by the Federal government, no law 'violated' by the Federal government.



The OP states they asked permission for the burn and it was given. In addition, being called back after release because a judge thinks you did not serve enough time initially is concerning.

-Geaux


----------



## TheProgressivePatriot

Oregon Considers Wall to Keep Out Angry White Men - The New Yorker

BURNS, OREGON —A majority of Oregonians favor building a twenty-foot wall along the border of their state to prevent angry white men from getting in, a poll released on Monday shows.

The survey indicates that Oregonians are fed up with irate male Caucasians pouring into their state and bringing with them guns, violence, and terrorism.  Oregon Considers Wall to Keep Out Angry White Men - The New Yorker

“This used to be such a nice state,” said Oregon State Senator Carol Foyler, a pro-wall lawmaker. “Since the angry white men came here, parts of it are unrecognizable.”


----------



## depotoo

They were found guilty because they never denied it-they admitted their guilt.  One was a controlled burn for invasive species that ,spilled onto 136 acres of federal land.  The second was to stop a fire caused by lightning, by back burning, which burned one acre  of  federal land.  They admitted to them.  Damages were determined to be less  than $1000 for both, yet the feds charged them with terrorism.  Ridiculous.





ogibillm said:


> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course not.  However, crazy people doing crazy things *is* something happening.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but it doesn't mean their reasons are valid
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It doesn't mean their reasons are invalid either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no. but the lack of valid reasoning is apparent
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've looked into it further, have you?  It seems that one group, the Bundys got in trouble for setting fires on their own property.  Meanwhile, another group, the Hammonds are attempting to dovetail their own land issues with that of the Bundys'.  The Bundys say they are NOT part of the Hammond sit-in at Bureau of Land Mgt. Furthermore, the Bundys intend to cooperate and go back to prison.....   Until I fully understand what is going on, I'm not going to dismiss the occupiers *or* the jailbirds.  I know this much.  I'm inclined to trust them more than I trust our federal government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you have the bundys and the hammonds backwards.
> 
> you are also mistaken about why the hammonds were in trouble. they burned federal lands, not their own and were found guilty of arson by a jury of their peers
> 
> so you tell me, what possible reason is there for this 'protest'?
Click to expand...


----------



## ogibillm

depotoo said:


> They were found guilty because they never denied it-they admitted their guilt.  One was a controlled burn for invasive species that ,spilled onto 136 acres of federal land.  The second was to stop a fire caused by lightning, by back burning, which burned one acre  of  federal land.  They admitted to them.  Damages were determined to be less  than $1000 for both, yet the feds charged them with terrorism.  Ridiculous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Compost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ogibillm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but it doesn't mean their reasons are valid
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't mean their reasons are invalid either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no. but the lack of valid reasoning is apparent
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've looked into it further, have you?  It seems that one group, the Bundys got in trouble for setting fires on their own property.  Meanwhile, another group, the Hammonds are attempting to dovetail their own land issues with that of the Bundys'.  The Bundys say they are NOT part of the Hammond sit-in at Bureau of Land Mgt. Furthermore, the Bundys intend to cooperate and go back to prison.....   Until I fully understand what is going on, I'm not going to dismiss the occupiers *or* the jailbirds.  I know this much.  I'm inclined to trust them more than I trust our federal government.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> you have the bundys and the hammonds backwards.
> 
> you are also mistaken about why the hammonds were in trouble. they burned federal lands, not their own and were found guilty of arson by a jury of their peers
> 
> so you tell me, what possible reason is there for this 'protest'?
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

The jury agreed with the charges


----------



## Agit8r

The authorities need to bite the bullet and let the pipes freeze, by turning the electricity off.  Once frostbite sets in, they'll surrender, so that doctors can pry their guns from their cold, dead fingers.


----------

