BLM controversy in Southern Utah

[cchoc]

If only they were undocumented workers trying to farm, this would be done, written off and rewarded.

I'm guessing an armed rabble wouldn't show up to support migrant workers, documented or not.

There seems to be no comparison too silly or conspiracy theory too complex to daunt a dedicated wingnut.

[oldno7]

Except if we call them "the previous administration". But what's a few war crimes among Heads of State??

Umm--to be fair---which of these war crimes you speak of, haven't been continued under the current administration?

paraphrasing--once I'm elected, I will shut down Guantanamo(bho)

No fan of bush here, just trying to clarify, cause I know you like to be clear.

[cchoc]

You seem to have forgotten (or choose to ignore) the hue and cry when talk of moving the Gitmo prisoners to US prisons came up. I assume, to be fair, that you'd be happy if they were housed in Utah?

[ratagonia]

Umm--to be fair---which of these war crimes you speak of, haven't been continued under the current administration?

War of Aggression is really the main War Crime of the previous administration.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_aggression

Also prosecuteable as First Degree Murder under the laws of the United States, without need of international law.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Prosecutio...tion+of+George

Tom

[Scott P]

Sticking to the topic, it sounds like things are really complicated. I didn't know of the past bombings of the BLM and Forest Service Offices.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...al-government/

Anyway, to be quite honest I can sympathize with the ranchers (or the other side as well). While the vast majority of cattle are raised on private lands, in the desert it takes a huge amount of land to support a cow. If cattle is all you know, it would probably be hard to give up.

One thing I don't understand however is the following:

One protester, a former Arizona sheriff named Richard Mack, told Fox News about the militia's plans if violence broke out in Bunkerville. “We were actually strategizing to put all the women up at the front. If they are going to start shooting, it’s going to be women that are going to be televised all across the world getting shot by these rogue federal officers.”

Um, really, why would anyone do something like this (even if you thought that you were right)? It sounds like a tactic that is used in shielding terrorist in Iraq or something.

I assume that this would be done to gain sympathy, and incite anger among an opposition, but it seems if they intentionally did something like this (throw all the women up front) that it would backfire. If this were a real war as they perceive, then it would seem that they would get more sympathy if they gave their lives to protect the women (I don't mean to be sexist though).

[oldno7]

War of Aggression is really the main War Crime of the previous administration.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_aggression

Also prosecuteable as First Degree Murder under the laws of the United States, without need of international law.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Prosecutio...tion+of+George

Tom

Oh--my bad--I thought you used to be opposed to torture and considered it a war crime.

Of course with the shutdown of gitmo----oh, wait.........

[nelsonccc]

Interesting article on the relationships between the Reid's and the BLM and the Bundy's. Even the BLM's page (now taken down) shows reference of the bundy cattle and the solar farm;

"Non-Governmental Organizations have expressed concern that the regional mitigation strategy for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone utilizes Gold Butte as the location for offsite mitigation for impacts from solar development, and that those restoration activities are not durable with the presence of trespass cattle."

In any case, it's clear to me that their is far too much involvement between Reid, his family, and the BLM. Too many coincidences to ignore. Even the Washington Times thinks so;

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...utm_medium=RSS

I agree that it was likely pressure from higher up the ladder that killed this and not so much the protestors. Coming into an election season is the wrong time for Reid to be associated with back room dealings.

[ratagonia]

In any case, it's clear to me that their is far too much involvement between Reid, his family, and the BLM. Too many coincidences to ignore. Even the Washington Times thinks so;

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...utm_medium=RSS

"Even the Washington Times thinks so"

The Washington Times is a thinly-disguised propaganda machine with a get-the-Democratic party mission.

Now, you get the Washington POST on the bandwagon, then you got something.

Otherwise, you are just working with paranoid delusions.

Tom

[nelsonccc]

Fixed it for you.

The Washington Post is a thinly-disguised propaganda machine with a get-the-Republican party mission.

Now, you get the Washington TIMES on the bandwagon, then you got something.

Otherwise, you are just working with paranoid delusions.

Tom

I'd consider the Washington Post a very liberal propaganda machine with a specific liberal anti-conservative agenda. In fact this is, as I understand it, why the Washington Times came into existence.

[cchoc]

WTF is a liberal anti-conservative agenda anyway? The words as you use them have no meaning other than to cart around a lot of emotional baggage.

I support the Constitution and even the dimmest bulbs out there should know that the ACLU does more to defend their constitutional rights than the NRA or any militia group. Yet they would all claim that the ACLU is a bunch of liberals because that's what they have been told to believe by people who call themselves conservative. Libertarians are in fact liberals in the truest sense of the word, yet they are viewed as conservative. The goal of liberalism is to protect and enhance the rights of the individual, and yet you seem to be against liberals. Is it a Fox News thing or something?

I know some folks who worked for Newt when he was engineering his plan to further polarize this country, and they weren't allowed to use the word liberal in a positive context and the word conservative in a negative one - a propaganda more that would have made Goebbels proud. I think that is amongst the worst things that has been done to our country in my lifetime, yet is a source of pride to the manipulators. When I see people bandying these terms around I am saddened that the Newt/Rove crowd was correct in their assessment that the general public is dumb enough to believe anything that is repeated often enough.

[hank moon]

When I see people bandying these terms around I am saddened that the Newt/Rove crowd was correct in their assessment that the general public is dumb enough to believe anything that is repeated often enough.

Dumb enough? No. It's just a fact of the human brain/condition. We thrive on illusions and they are easily created and sustained through repetition. Labels such as "liberal" and "conservative" (and "dumb") are great lubricant for the process.

[Bluff-Canyoneer]

Fixed it for you.



I'd consider the Washington Post a very liberal propaganda machine with a specific liberal anti-conservative agenda. In fact this is, as I understand it, why the Washington Times came into existence.

The Washington Times is a publication of the Unification Church (aka Moonies). My sister in law is a card carrying fully brainwashed member. Scary stuff they way they treat their kids (shipped to Korea at age 6, later married to a guy she had never met).

Not the kind of folks I would look to for news.

[cchoc]

Dumb enough? No. It's just a fact of the human brain/condition. We thrive on illusions and they are easily created and sustained through repetition. Labels such as "liberal" and "conservative" are great lubricant for the process.

Potato po-ta-to.

[nelsonccc]

The Washington Times is a publication of the Unification Church (aka Moonies). My sister in law is a card carrying fully brainwashed member. Scary stuff they way they treat their kids (shipped to Korea at age 6, later married to a guy she had never met).

Not the kind of folks I would look to for news.

I actually would agree with you on the Times. I'm not really a follower of the Times, but they popped up on my search for Reid and his connections and the article seemed legit enough for me since they were mostly quoting other news sources and when I read something or see something mentioned in the New York Times or the Post I often check the Wash Times and other right leaning news outlets to see the counter perspective.

[nelsonccc]

WTF is a liberal anti-conservative agenda anyway? The words as you use them have no meaning other than to cart around a lot of emotional baggage.

A liberal anti-conservative agenda, to me anyways, is a left leaning, left biased agenda. One I typically associate with a liberal stance on most issues. I think that your refusal to look at the right wing or conservative perspective means you're carrying around a lot of social liberalism baggage, aka, you've been brainwashed by big government and your left leaning news outlets.

I will however agree with the comment above that these labels are really just that, labels. And we know the news loves labels. I wouldn't really consider myself a conservative or republican due to my non-conservative stances on abortion and a few other areas. But I am against big government and heavy handed govt actions. Typically a liberal approach, like the one you've been vying for throughout this thread, is for larger govt intervention and control which I wholeheartedly disagree with.

[nelsonccc]

Sticking to the topic, it sounds like things are really complicated. I didn't know of the past bombings of the BLM and Forest Service Offices.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...al-government/

I read this earlier this morning. One of the better articles on the past of the Bundy episode. I also read, I'll see if I can find where, that there were a lot of ranchers standing in support of Bundy due to the terms and conditions that they sign when they sign a BLM lease. Bundy basically refused to sign the lease since he would be signing away his livelihood by doing so.

[cchoc]

A liberal anti-conservative agenda, to me anyways, is a left leaning, left biased agenda. One I typically associate with a liberal stance on most issues. I think that your refusal to look at the right wing or conservative perspective means you're carrying around a lot of social liberalism baggage, aka, you've been brainwashed by big government and your left leaning news outlets.

I will however agree with the comment above that these labels are really just that, labels. And we know the news loves labels. I wouldn't really consider myself a conservative or republican due to my non-conservative stances on abortion and a few other areas. But I am against big government and heavy handed govt actions. Typically a liberal approach, like the one you've been vying for throughout this thread, is for larger govt intervention and control which I wholeheartedly disagree with.

A liberal approach is about preserving individual rights no matter what you or Fox News say. Bundy's rights weren't being violated, he's just a welfare cheat.

I live in Gingrich's old district and am awash in what you call 'conservative' perspective. Virtually all my friends here call themselves conservative and more than a few of them know what that really means, but it does make them vulnerable to Rush and Beck on occasion. I have no problem with conservatism, but the folks who mindlessly blather on about left wing this and that I consider to be the ones who refuse to think about any of the issues. Conservative here also means anti civil rights, anti women's rights, and minority voting, etc. It's all the social baggage that comes along with the so called conservatives that I can't stand. If the GOP would lose the 'social' conservatives they would be a much stronger and inclusive party. The fact that their major candidates have to pander to those folks makes them weak.

And as far as who has been brainwashed, point your gaze to the mirror. Your phrases "big government" and "heavy handed" are further proof that you are reacting to phrases you have heard without thinking about them. WTF is 'big government'? It's a loaded phrase politicians use to get your knees to jerk.Heavy handed? Get serious.

What I don't do is march in lockstep with any invented political ideology, but as far as this thread goes I side with the BLM. If you think that is vying for more government control then there isn't much I can do about it. As long as we remain polarized and rational conversation is stymied by artificially loaded words and phrases our politics will continue to be marketed like cars and dish soap and we will make poorly informed choices for leadership.

[2065toyota]

This thread has turned pretty pointless


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Byron]

What about Obama. Gotta be Obama's fault somehow.

T

Nah...nobody's brought his name up yet.

I have no idea if Reid or his son or any other conniving member of the Nevada legislature is in on this or not. I just like busting Reid chops because I think he's such of friggin' moron.

He reminds me of Senator Geary from The Godfather Part ll. Just a pure slimeball.

[ratagonia]

Interesting article on the relationships between the Reid's and the BLM and the Bundy's. Even the BLM's page (now taken down) shows reference of the bundy cattle and the solar farm;

"Non-Governmental Organizations have expressed concern that the regional mitigation strategy for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone utilizes Gold Butte as the location for offsite mitigation for impacts from solar development, and that those restoration activities are not durable with the presence of trespass cattle."

In any case, it's clear to me that their is far too much involvement between Reid, his family, and the BLM. Too many coincidences to ignore. Even the Washington Times thinks so;

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...utm_medium=RSS

I agree that it was likely pressure from higher up the ladder that killed this and not so much the protestors. Coming into an election season is the wrong time for Reid to be associated with back room dealings.

Busted!

http://www.snopes.com/politics/conspiracy/nevada.asp

Shown to be paranoid bunkem, but...

But, you know, believing the unbelievable on little to no evidence is a well-respected attribute in some communities. see: "Tea Party"

Tom