Assholes making trouble in Oregon

[koshergrl]

The ranchers, most of them, do not have enough land to run a successful ranching operation without the cheap federal grazing. When the land passed to private ownership, their financial base would be gone, and the people that bought up those lands would then be able to pick up these ranches for pennies on the dollar. Oh yes, Kosher is really looking out for the interests of the Eastern Oregon Ranchers. I bet that she, like the Bundy's, is a parasite living off the rest of us that pay taxes. Remember, Ammon Bundy has this very large outstanding loan from the federal government, that he has no intention of paying back. And who is financing these fellows? Even those of us making good wages don't take this kind of time off without financial repercussions. And there is a bunch of them out there. Where are they getting their money?

What happened is the feds have stolen their water, then used it to flood their land, which they then declare as WETLANDS, and then take that too. They close roads that make it impossible for the ranchers to access the lands they own, and when the ranchers can't get their cattle to it, they also take those lands, based on the fact that they are no longer using them.

You see how this works? Of course you do. You're a liar, and a statist puke.

 

[koshergrl]

c"

The one they're begging for.

I don't agree with Bundy's approach, but his goal is to highlight the Obama regimes' war on ranchers, which is part of the greater war on food by the democrats.

No one but the MSNBC hosts want a gunfight.

The greatest factor in food cost increases began long ago with ethanol subsidies that gave feed corn a higher value as a fuel supplement. Cattle grazed on public lands, especially the ones being disputed on the poorest quality grasslands on arid desert land have little impact on the overall food prices.

Er..the grass is high quality, dumbass.

That is not how grazing land is judged, dumbass. It does not matter how high the nutritional quality grass is if it takes large amounts of acreage to feed one cow. Plus, I did not specify a particular region or area. I spoke of disputed lands in general.

Oh. Yeah. Right.

Dumbass.

 

[Uncensored2008]

They are none of the below... They are a group of armed thugs. I think we should call them the Marlboro Men. And while you're at it, please send your donations of 12 cartons of Marlboro menthol 100's to

Malheur National Wildlife Refuge
36391 Sodhouse Ln, Princeton, OR 97721

But don't use that affordable/reliable Gubmint postal service, ya hear!!!


mi·li·tia
məˈliSHə/
noun

1. a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.
   • a military force that engages in rebel or terrorist activities, typically in opposition to a regular army.
   • all able-bodied civilians eligible by law for military service.

{
(a)
The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1)
the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2)
the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
}

10 U.S. Code § 311 - Militia: composition and classes

They are indeed a militia.

Now why has your little tin god not ordered a drone strike on them, Cruella? Everyone hates them and wants them dead, according to you democratic - socialists....

 

[Uncensored2008]

[
oh well, it is what they are willing to do for their businesses and fellow citizens. Is it legal to rearrest the Hammonds or whatever their name was?

No, that is double-jeopardy and violates the Constitution. But there are two issues, the BLM land and grazing, and the terrorist kidnapping of the Hammonds.

Bundy is taking a bad approach in regard to the BLM, breaking the law destroys his position.

For the Hammonds, 10,000 armed men should storm the 9th circus clowns and demand the immediate release of the hostages these terrorists are holding.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Cruella lies, get's caught, and marks the post where she is busted as "funny."

Cruella DeVille is truly deranged...

 

[Camp]

Over 80% of Oregon BLM lands are dedicated to cattle grazing

What "terrorists?"

You're deranged, filled with bloodlust and bile.

They are a militia. I think their approach is wrong, but their position is right. Obama is waging war on the food supply, ranchers are caught in the cross-fire of the administration dedicated to making food too expensive for people to afford.

if what they are doing is unconstitutional, then the feds should go in and take them out. The funny thing is the locals are using them for their position and back them, and with that, the feds are at a crossroads. I think the militia folks would need some lawyers to move forward, not sure their plan though. As does no one.

The locals are not backing them and the feds are not at a crossroads. Both the locals and the feds are keeping the crisis is perspective and steering away from violence or an attitude that immediate action must be taken. It is the middle of winter and the Wildlife Refuge complex is closed for the winter. There is no rush to remove the trespassers and a strategy of waiting out the situation is preferred by both locals and feds.

there you go, nothing.

This thread is full of links to support my thread. They include statements from the local mayor, sheriff, Governor of Oregon, a town hall meeting with a show of hands vote asking the militia to leave, and numerous local news editorials and opinion articles.
It is you side that lacks backup for your claims. No matter how often those links are posted you just ignore them.
Here is one from Oregon State University confirming that over 80% of BLM lands in Oregon are dedicated and leased for cattle grazing, leaving only 20% to be used for other purposes. Yet the ranchers want more. They have 80% but want more, and now they want other lands like wildlife refuges.

people.oregonstate.edu/~muirp/wpubland.htm

The show of hands wasn't for asking them to leave. The sheriff asked how many were from Harney county, and while the hands were still up, he asked how many would like them to leave, and the Oregonian reported that as the same. In reality, a guy immediately took the mic and stated what had just happened and said that he absolutely had no problem with them being there.

Which is the stance of most of the locals.

He objected to them taking over the wildlife refuge. So do the vast majority of the locals. If you had a strong case you would not have to lie so consistently. The focus is not on the cause or complaints so much as it is on the method of protest. People can support the cause or be willing to debate it and be against the method of protest. Civil disobedience is breaking a law and willingly and peacefully being arrested. Bringing weapons to a protest isn't civil disobedience. It is criminal at best and terrorism at worst. It should never be accepted as legal or appropriate in American culture.

 

[koshergrl]

Over 80% of Oregon BLM lands are dedicated to cattle grazing

if what they are doing is unconstitutional, then the feds should go in and take them out. The funny thing is the locals are using them for their position and back them, and with that, the feds are at a crossroads. I think the militia folks would need some lawyers to move forward, not sure their plan though. As does no one.

The locals are not backing them and the feds are not at a crossroads. Both the locals and the feds are keeping the crisis is perspective and steering away from violence or an attitude that immediate action must be taken. It is the middle of winter and the Wildlife Refuge complex is closed for the winter. There is no rush to remove the trespassers and a strategy of waiting out the situation is preferred by both locals and feds.

there you go, nothing.

This thread is full of links to support my thread. They include statements from the local mayor, sheriff, Governor of Oregon, a town hall meeting with a show of hands vote asking the militia to leave, and numerous local news editorials and opinion articles.
It is you side that lacks backup for your claims. No matter how often those links are posted you just ignore them.
Here is one from Oregon State University confirming that over 80% of BLM lands in Oregon are dedicated and leased for cattle grazing, leaving only 20% to be used for other purposes. Yet the ranchers want more. They have 80% but want more, and now they want other lands like wildlife refuges.

people.oregonstate.edu/~muirp/wpubland.htm

The show of hands wasn't for asking them to leave. The sheriff asked how many were from Harney county, and while the hands were still up, he asked how many would like them to leave, and the Oregonian reported that as the same. In reality, a guy immediately took the mic and stated what had just happened and said that he absolutely had no problem with them being there.

Which is the stance of most of the locals.

He objected to them taking over the wildlife refuge. So do the vast majority of the locals. If you had a strong case you would not have to lie so consistently. The focus is not on the cause or complaints so much as it is on the method of protest. People can support the cause or be willing to debate it and be against the method of protest. Civil disobedience is breaking a law and willingly and peacefully being arrested. Bringing weapons to a protest isn't civil disobedience. It is criminal at best and terrorism at worst. It should never be accepted as legal or appropriate in American culture.

Lol. I haven't lied about anything. You, on the other hand, have been outed over...and over...and over...and over.....



You hear those cheers?

 

[jc456]

Over 80% of Oregon BLM lands are dedicated to cattle grazing

The locals are not backing them and the feds are not at a crossroads. Both the locals and the feds are keeping the crisis is perspective and steering away from violence or an attitude that immediate action must be taken. It is the middle of winter and the Wildlife Refuge complex is closed for the winter. There is no rush to remove the trespassers and a strategy of waiting out the situation is preferred by both locals and feds.

there you go, nothing.

This thread is full of links to support my thread. They include statements from the local mayor, sheriff, Governor of Oregon, a town hall meeting with a show of hands vote asking the militia to leave, and numerous local news editorials and opinion articles.
It is you side that lacks backup for your claims. No matter how often those links are posted you just ignore them.
Here is one from Oregon State University confirming that over 80% of BLM lands in Oregon are dedicated and leased for cattle grazing, leaving only 20% to be used for other purposes. Yet the ranchers want more. They have 80% but want more, and now they want other lands like wildlife refuges.

people.oregonstate.edu/~muirp/wpubland.htm

The show of hands wasn't for asking them to leave. The sheriff asked how many were from Harney county, and while the hands were still up, he asked how many would like them to leave, and the Oregonian reported that as the same. In reality, a guy immediately took the mic and stated what had just happened and said that he absolutely had no problem with them being there.

Which is the stance of most of the locals.

He objected to them taking over the wildlife refuge. So do the vast majority of the locals. If you had a strong case you would not have to lie so consistently. The focus is not on the cause or complaints so much as it is on the method of protest. People can support the cause or be willing to debate it and be against the method of protest. Civil disobedience is breaking a law and willingly and peacefully being arrested. Bringing weapons to a protest isn't civil disobedience. It is criminal at best and terrorism at worst. It should never be accepted as legal or appropriate in American culture.

Lol. I haven't lied about anything. You, on the other hand, have been outed over...and over...and over...and over.....



You hear those cheers?

shit, look at all the cameras

 

[koshergrl]

That isn't even the one I was looking for. It's a different guy standing up and supporting the refuge takeover.

 

[jc456]

[
oh well, it is what they are willing to do for their businesses and fellow citizens. Is it legal to rearrest the Hammonds or whatever their name was?

No, that is double-jeopardy and violates the Constitution. But there are two issues, the BLM land and grazing, and the terrorist kidnapping of the Hammonds.

Bundy is taking a bad approach in regard to the BLM, breaking the law destroys his position.

For the Hammonds, 10,000 armed men should storm the 9th circus clowns and demand the immediate release of the hostages these terrorists are holding.

they said they didn't want the help and why Bundy backed off..

 

[koshergrl]

Over 80% of Oregon BLM lands are dedicated to cattle grazing

there you go, nothing.

This thread is full of links to support my thread. They include statements from the local mayor, sheriff, Governor of Oregon, a town hall meeting with a show of hands vote asking the militia to leave, and numerous local news editorials and opinion articles.
It is you side that lacks backup for your claims. No matter how often those links are posted you just ignore them.
Here is one from Oregon State University confirming that over 80% of BLM lands in Oregon are dedicated and leased for cattle grazing, leaving only 20% to be used for other purposes. Yet the ranchers want more. They have 80% but want more, and now they want other lands like wildlife refuges.

people.oregonstate.edu/~muirp/wpubland.htm

The show of hands wasn't for asking them to leave. The sheriff asked how many were from Harney county, and while the hands were still up, he asked how many would like them to leave, and the Oregonian reported that as the same. In reality, a guy immediately took the mic and stated what had just happened and said that he absolutely had no problem with them being there.

Which is the stance of most of the locals.

He objected to them taking over the wildlife refuge. So do the vast majority of the locals. If you had a strong case you would not have to lie so consistently. The focus is not on the cause or complaints so much as it is on the method of protest. People can support the cause or be willing to debate it and be against the method of protest. Civil disobedience is breaking a law and willingly and peacefully being arrested. Bringing weapons to a protest isn't civil disobedience. It is criminal at best and terrorism at worst. It should never be accepted as legal or appropriate in American culture.

Lol. I haven't lied about anything. You, on the other hand, have been outed over...and over...and over...and over.....



You hear those cheers?

shit, look at all the cameras

And not a word in the Oregonian. I wonder if that's one of oldfag's relatives hahahahaha

 

[koshergrl]

Over 80% of Oregon BLM lands are dedicated to cattle grazing

if what they are doing is unconstitutional, then the feds should go in and take them out. The funny thing is the locals are using them for their position and back them, and with that, the feds are at a crossroads. I think the militia folks would need some lawyers to move forward, not sure their plan though. As does no one.

The locals are not backing them and the feds are not at a crossroads. Both the locals and the feds are keeping the crisis is perspective and steering away from violence or an attitude that immediate action must be taken. It is the middle of winter and the Wildlife Refuge complex is closed for the winter. There is no rush to remove the trespassers and a strategy of waiting out the situation is preferred by both locals and feds.

there you go, nothing.

This thread is full of links to support my thread. They include statements from the local mayor, sheriff, Governor of Oregon, a town hall meeting with a show of hands vote asking the militia to leave, and numerous local news editorials and opinion articles.
It is you side that lacks backup for your claims. No matter how often those links are posted you just ignore them.
Here is one from Oregon State University confirming that over 80% of BLM lands in Oregon are dedicated and leased for cattle grazing, leaving only 20% to be used for other purposes. Yet the ranchers want more. They have 80% but want more, and now they want other lands like wildlife refuges.

people.oregonstate.edu/~muirp/wpubland.htm

The show of hands wasn't for asking them to leave. The sheriff asked how many were from Harney county, and while the hands were still up, he asked how many would like them to leave, and the Oregonian reported that as the same. In reality, a guy immediately took the mic and stated what had just happened and said that he absolutely had no problem with them being there.

Which is the stance of most of the locals.

He objected to them taking over the wildlife refuge. So do the vast majority of the locals. If you had a strong case you would not have to lie so consistently. The focus is not on the cause or complaints so much as it is on the method of protest. People can support the cause or be willing to debate it and be against the method of protest. Civil disobedience is breaking a law and willingly and peacefully being arrested. Bringing weapons to a protest isn't civil disobedience. It is criminal at best and terrorism at worst. It should never be accepted as legal or appropriate in American culture.

 

[Uncensored2008]

He objected to them taking over the wildlife refuge. So do the vast majority of the locals. If you had a strong case you would not have to lie so consistently. The focus is not on the cause or complaints so much as it is on the method of protest. People can support the cause or be willing to debate it and be against the method of protest. Civil disobedience is breaking a law and willingly and peacefully being arrested. Bringing weapons to a protest isn't civil disobedience. It is criminal at best and terrorism at worst. It should never be accepted as legal or appropriate in American culture.

How is it "terrorism?"

Fuckwad Obama claims that a Muzzie Beast slaughtering service men is "workplace violence," but you want to call a peaceful protest "terrorism"

You grasp why normal people think you Communists are fucked up in the brain?

 

[jc456]

Over 80% of Oregon BLM lands are dedicated to cattle grazing

The locals are not backing them and the feds are not at a crossroads. Both the locals and the feds are keeping the crisis is perspective and steering away from violence or an attitude that immediate action must be taken. It is the middle of winter and the Wildlife Refuge complex is closed for the winter. There is no rush to remove the trespassers and a strategy of waiting out the situation is preferred by both locals and feds.

there you go, nothing.

This thread is full of links to support my thread. They include statements from the local mayor, sheriff, Governor of Oregon, a town hall meeting with a show of hands vote asking the militia to leave, and numerous local news editorials and opinion articles.
It is you side that lacks backup for your claims. No matter how often those links are posted you just ignore them.
Here is one from Oregon State University confirming that over 80% of BLM lands in Oregon are dedicated and leased for cattle grazing, leaving only 20% to be used for other purposes. Yet the ranchers want more. They have 80% but want more, and now they want other lands like wildlife refuges.

people.oregonstate.edu/~muirp/wpubland.htm

The show of hands wasn't for asking them to leave. The sheriff asked how many were from Harney county, and while the hands were still up, he asked how many would like them to leave, and the Oregonian reported that as the same. In reality, a guy immediately took the mic and stated what had just happened and said that he absolutely had no problem with them being there.

Which is the stance of most of the locals.

He objected to them taking over the wildlife refuge. So do the vast majority of the locals. If you had a strong case you would not have to lie so consistently. The focus is not on the cause or complaints so much as it is on the method of protest. People can support the cause or be willing to debate it and be against the method of protest. Civil disobedience is breaking a law and willingly and peacefully being arrested. Bringing weapons to a protest isn't civil disobedience. It is criminal at best and terrorism at worst. It should never be accepted as legal or appropriate in American culture.

nice beard.

 

[koshergrl]

He objected to them taking over the wildlife refuge. So do the vast majority of the locals. If you had a strong case you would not have to lie so consistently. The focus is not on the cause or complaints so much as it is on the method of protest. People can support the cause or be willing to debate it and be against the method of protest. Civil disobedience is breaking a law and willingly and peacefully being arrested. Bringing weapons to a protest isn't civil disobedience. It is criminal at best and terrorism at worst. It should never be accepted as legal or appropriate in American culture.

How is it "terrorism?"

Fuckwad Obama claims that a Muzzie Beast slaughtering service men is "workplace violence," but you want to call a peaceful protest "terrorism"

You grasp why normal people think you Communists are fucked up in the brain?

Terrorism requires someone to be terrified. In this case, nobody's terrified, the locals are thankful and pleased that the feds are getting some push back, after being terrorized, robbed, and imprisoned without redress for the last century or so.

 

[Seawytch]

Can't you answer or are you just being a lying libturd?

That's rich coming from the guy who won't answer my question despite me answering yours TWICE now.

What do the ranchers stand to gain if the land is turned over to the state?

they get rid of the feds.

seems simple to me, and yet you can't figure that out.

what does the fed get out of keeping ownership of the land over the state?

What is there to "get rid of" beyond really cheap grazing fees? Do you think the state will lease that same land for less than the Feds?

 

[jc456]

Can't you answer or are you just being a lying libturd?

That's rich coming from the guy who won't answer my question despite me answering yours TWICE now.

What do the ranchers stand to gain if the land is turned over to the state?

they get rid of the feds.

seems simple to me, and yet you can't figure that out.

what does the fed get out of keeping ownership of the land over the state?

What is there to "get rid of" beyond really cheap grazing fees? Do you think the state will lease that same land for less than the Feds?

it isn't what the folks want at all. They want the state to own it since it is land in the state and used by the citizens of the state.

 

[bodecea]

It would help. At the very least, they would make sure the fodder was kept down, reducing the intensity and destruction of wildfires.

I don't know. Jerry Brown has vowed to drive the farmers out of California. Oregon is almost as far left as California. I'm not sure the state would be any more in favor of affordable food than Obama is. The goal is to make food too costly for people to buy directly, ensuring that the masses are dependant on the rulers in Washington to get a meal.

That's a cold hard lie.

 

[bodecea]

[ It's also a tactic used to force self sufficient people who are armed and can subsist without outside assistance, into the cities.

The goal is to create dependency.

They're already there since they can't seem to get by without cheap federal land for grazing.

 

[bodecea]

But they did do it, and they are doing it now. They have brought children to a gun fight, or at least, a potential gunfight. Those women and children are being used as shields. It is amazing how the terrorist supporters will twist and distort reality.

What Gunfight?

What are you Communists planning?

I wonder why this moron made a "goodbye" video? lol Doesn't sound like the poor thing is planning on returning home.

His family's probably grateful.