Nevada ranching family claims victory as government releases cattle

[MindMover]

Source: Reuters

(Reuters) - U.S. officials ended a stand-off with hundreds of armed protesters in the Nevada desert on Saturday, calling off the government's roundup of cattle it said were illegally grazing on federal land and giving about 300 animals back to the rancher who owned them.

The dispute less than 80 miles northeast of Las Vegas between rancher Cliven Bundy and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management had simmered for days. Bundy had stopped paying fees for grazing his cattle on the government land and officials said he had ignored court orders.

Anti-government groups, right-wing politicians and gun-rights activists camped around Bundy's ranch to support him in a standoff that tapped into long-simmering anger in Nevada and other Western states, where vast tracts of land are owned and governed by federal agencies.

The bureau had called in a team of armed rangers to Nevada to seize the 1,000 head of cattle on Saturday but backed down in the interests of safety.

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/14/us-usa-ranchers-nevada-idUSBREA3B03Q20140414?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&dlvrit=992637

[PoliticAverse]

1. The statement the BLM released...

http://www.blm.gov/nv/st/en/info/newsroom/2014/april/national_office__statement.html

Statement from Director of the Bureau of Land Management Neil Kornze on the Cattle Gather in Nevada

As we have said from the beginning of the gather to remove illegal cattle from federal land consistent with court orders, a safe and peaceful operation is our number one priority. After one week, we have made progress in enforcing two recent court orders to remove the trespass cattle from public lands that belong to all Americans.

Based on information about conditions on the ground, and in consultation with law enforcement, we have made a decision to conclude the cattle gather because of our serious concern about the safety of employees and members of the public.

We ask that all parties in the area remain peaceful and law-abiding as the Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service work to end the operation in an orderly manner.

Ranching has always been an important part of our nation’s heritage and continues throughout the West on public lands that belong to all Americans. This is a matter of fairness and equity, and we remain disappointed that Cliven Bundy continues to not comply with the same laws that 16,000 public lands ranchers do every year. After 20 years and multiple court orders to remove the trespass cattle, Mr. Bundy owes the American taxpayers in excess of $1 million. The BLM will continue to work to resolve the matter administratively and judicially.

[Cha]

91. Thank you for that, PA.. exactly.

[Brigid]

2. I think Bundy and his allies are in for a rude awakening . . .

If they think this is over.

[cheapdate]

29. Yes, I certainly hope so.

This kind of pisses me off. I understand the BLM chief not wanting to see his employees get killed trying to do their jobs, but this kind of pisses me off.

It's completely justified to require people who use public land, public infrastructure, or public resources to compensate the public for that use.

[snooper2]

53. How hard would it be for the BLM to get a hold of a couple of drones?

[cheapdate]

77. I don't have any idea how difficult it would be for the BLM

to acquire and operate military style, armed, aerial drones.

I don't know if they would have the financial resources or the legal authority to do so, or if they possess the technical knowledge and command and control infrastructure required to use advanced missile systems to assist them in rounding up cattle in Nevada.

A federal land management agency using armed aerial drones as an enforcement tool would obviously be a pretty big step.

I hope that this guy Bundy loses in the end. Despite Bundy's ludicrous beliefs that the government of the United States is a fictional entity, that the federal courts have no authority over him, that Article 2 of the US Constitution -- which grants that "[t]he 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" -- doesn't apply to federal land in Nevada, whatever he believes, he can't simply go on ignoring the law and using public land as if it was solely his own without regard to what the law, the public, or the authorities have to say. There is nothing unjust about requiring someone who uses public land, public infrastructure, or public resources to compensate the public for that use. And no one can simply use public land however he wishes.

As much as I'd love to simply move into one of the empty cabins in Cade's Cove in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park and start grazing sheep there, I can't simply declare that I don't recognize the authority of the Park Service or the federal courts and then move in without expecting to be forcibly removed.

I'm disappointed that the BLM backed down but I don't have nearly enough knowledge of the situation to offer a truly informed criticism of their decision. My hope is that the government will simply use another tactic that will accomplish the objective of enforceing the orders of the court without unnecssary bloodshed.

[AnalystInParadise]

112. Yes

because assassinating American citizens is such a progressive belief.....Some of you make me want to vomit, if this what I spent twenty years defending, this ease to want to slaughter our own citizens, I am ashamed. I have no sympathy for Bundy, but this is a matter for the police to arrest him, not fucking kill him.

[blkmusclmachine]

4. And a roaring cheer goes tearing throughout Teabagistan

[Cryptoad]

40. The Tea Baggers thought the same thing,,,

after the first confrontations at Waco and Ruby Ridge. This is not over.

[former9thward]

45. It seems you are rooting for another Waco.

Maybe you should go there and show the BLM how to do it.

[Cryptoad]

49. Im not rootin

for anything. ------ just stating the facts that when these Tea Party Thugs have tried before to trash our Constitution by confronting Law enforcement authorities with violence , it did not end well, even though they thought they had won after they first confrontation.

Maybe you should join them on the Bundy Ranch, heh?

[former9thward]

50. Waco had nothing to do with the Tea Party or any other political group.

But keep on cheering on bloodshed from behind your keyboard.

[Cryptoad]

69. What is your problem,,,,

I havent cheered on any bloodshed..... GFY.
btw,,,, Waco , Ruby Ridge, Tea Party are all part of a larger Subset of Idiots, geez

[AnalystInParadise]

111. Wow

So now the Teabaggers are the same as the Branch Davidians, a CULT? Yeah ok, I may dislike the Tea Baggers and their beliefs, but this is in no way comparable to WACO, get over yourself and your desire for blood lust against your fellow citizens.

[el scorcho]

5. Delusional

The court order prohibited Bundy from interfering with the roundup. He did exactly that and more. Bundy will get hauled into a contempt of court hearing soon. Hopefully he gets tossed in the slammer and his assets seized to pay off his 20+ years of freeloading.

[SunSeeker]

18. +1

[freshwest]

34. Nope. But they can freeze his bank accounts if his money's not overseas already. The RWNJs aren't

going anywhere, next they'll move onto the ranch as another wingnut paradise, armed to the teeth and ready to shoot. The country is so overrun with gun nuts promising to fight the government that any use of force will get Obama shot or impeached.

The Koch brothers have won this one. The only way is to get this millionaire to obey the law is to garnish his accounts. If that happens, I will expect movement, but not until then.

[jmowreader]

6. Unfortunately, Bundy and his allies will lose in the end

They wanted to start the Second American Revolution, and the black guy in the White House foiled them.

They're still facing contempt-of-court charges, and I'm pretty sure the Internal Revenue Service will be at his place soon. Bundy claims to obey "almost no" federal laws; how much would you like to wager that the laws requiring you to pay taxes are not among the ones he obeys?

[Nobel_Twaddle_III]

7. Unfortunately ?

[jmowreader]

20. Unfortunately for them

I don't know if it's fortunate or unfortunate for the rest of us - in the great pond of life, Mr. Bundy and all his armed-to-the-teeth friends are little more than a smear of shit stuck to a frog's ass. No one ever heard of him before, and after this blows over no one will ever hear of him again. But the government is going to pound on their heads for a while, which is always fun.

[JimDandy]

66. I doubt Bundy has been claiming the free use of the land as income

so the IRS actually might be interested in looking at his finances.

[Capt.Rocky300]

8. Liens, bank account freezes, foreclosure and contempt of court........

are all tools available administratively and judicially to the federal government. This rube's celebration will be short lived.

[2banon]

9. Did I read somewhere that Bundy does business "off the grid" ?

no bank accounts to seize.. foreclosure will eventually be another show down, because I'm sure he won't physically vacate property willingly. So any showdown that's forestalled at this time, is likely to ensue further down the line. If the KOCH brothers are involved, they'll have big guns in terms of lawyers and such. I'm wondering if it'll be tied up in court before the Feds will be able to see this through before 2016. hmm..

[Capt.Rocky300]

17. Silly me thinking he'd do anything conventional........

I still believe the government has ways to make his life pretty uncomfortable. To paraphrase George Washington, government is about force.

[former9thward]

46. The voice of the Authoritarians speaks ...

This dispute has been going on for 20 years. The federal government has had 20 years to make his "life pretty uncomfortable".

[freshwest]

35. The KOCH brothers are deeply involved:

The Nevada Standoff Has Nothing To Do With "Tyranny," "Sovereignty," "Freedom," or Cows.

It's about money for two Billionaires with whom we're all familiar.

Two affiliates of the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity are helping conservative media promote the cause of a Nevada rancher who has made violent threats against the federal government.

...

Legal scholars have largely concluded that these laws are unconstitutional. But with a fanatical, Federalist-society indoctrinated Supreme Court Majority bending over backwards to accommodate corporate interests in every conceivable manner, the Constitution has proved to be a flimsy protection against virulent greed. By milking and stoking the controversy, the Kochs seek to galvanize public opinion against the federal government, delegitimize the Bureau of Land Management that oversees public lands, and thereby impugn its stewardship of lands that Koch-run industries want to get their hands on. These include lands in Nevada, Utah and pretty much anywhere else they can dig, frack or mine. This isn't about some silly rancher's "grazing fees," to the Kochs and their business pals. It's about their desire to exploit, despoil and pollute lands that we, the public, own by virtue of our citizenship. That's not "freedom." It's greed.

In fact, it's almost tragic to see how the "militia groups" that pride themselves on their purported "independence" and "freedom" so willingly allow themselves to be duped by people whose only interest is to exploit the land for their own purposes. Whose self-serving greed wouldn't hesitate to gin up an armed confrontation in which people could conceivably die, simply for the purpose of lining their own pockets.

Did I sound like I feel sorry for the militia groups? I don't. If they were truly patriots I might feel sorry for them, but they aren't. Because true patriots would realize that the federal lands the Kochs, the oil, mining and energy industries are attempting to claim for themselves are:

Owned by every American – all 300-plus million of us. It is a peculiar property right we each have to this commons, as we acquire it simply by dint of citizenship, and what we own is spectacular. The marvel of the federal public-lands system is that it exists at all. During the 19th century and into the early 20th, much of the land was leased and sold off in a frenzy of corrupt dealings. Railroads, corporations, land speculators, mining interests, and livestock barons gorged on the public domain, helped along by the spectacularly pliable General Land Office, which from 1812 until its closure in 1946 privatized more than one billion acres, roughly half the landmass of the nation. The corruption was such that by 1885, The New York Times’ editorial page had denounced the “land pirates” whose “fraud and force” had excluded the citizen settler—the farmer, the homesteader, the cowboy—from “enormous areas of public domain” and “robb him of the heritage to which he was entitled.”



http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/12/1291577/-The-Nevada-Standoff-Has-Nothing-To-Do-With-Tyranny-Sovereignty-Freedom-or-Cows

© Kos Media, LLC
Site content may be used for any purpose without explicit permission unless otherwise specified


"Feds Turn From Landlords To Warlords": Koch Groups Back Rancher Making Violent Threats Against Federal Gov't

In 1993, Bundy declined to pay government fees that are required in order to allow his cattle to graze on the public land. In 1998 a court order told Bundy to remove his cattle as part of an effort to protect an endangered desert tortoise in the area. He refused. In July 2013, a federal court order told Bundy to remove his cattle from the land or they would be confiscated. He disobeyed the order, and confiscation has begun. The government will auction the animals and use the proceeds to pay off the $1 million in fines that Bundy owes the government.

Bundy's ongoing refusal to obey the law and court orders has become a cause célèbre for the conservative media, which has compared the situation to deadly standoffs like Waco and Ruby Ridge.

In recent comments to a conspiracy theorist's radio show, Bundy said, "I haven't called no militia or anything like that, but hey it looks like that's where we're at." He added, "We got a strong army here, we have to fight." Previously Bundy told the Las Vegas Sun that "he keeps firearms at his ranch" and promised to "do whatever it takes" to defend his cattle being seized, adding, "I abide by almost zero federal laws."

...

Americans for Prosperity (AFP), the conservative non-profit group, was founded by and has been largely funded by billionaires Charles and David Koch. The Center for Media and Democracy reported that in its previous incarnation as Citizens for a Sound Economy, AFP received $12 million of its $18 million in funding from the Koch Family Foundation.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/04/11/feds-turn-from-landlords-to-warlords-koch-group/198857

to Sunset Dreams:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024816638

Cliven Bundy is a Big Fat Million Dollar Welfare Dead Beat!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/13/1291642/-Cliven-Bundy-is-a-Big-Fat-Million-Dollar-Welfare-Dead-Beat

BERNIE SANDERS Uncovers 1980 Koch Agenda- "What Do the Koch Brothers Want?"

What else do the Koch brothers want?

In 1980, David Koch ran as the Libertarian Party’s vice-presidential candidate in 1980.
Let’s take a look at the 1980 Libertarian Party platform.

Here are just a few excerpts of the Libertarian Party platform that David Koch ran on in 1980:

“We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”
“We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”
“We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”
“We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”
“We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”
“We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”
“We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”
“We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”
“As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”
“We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”
“We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”
“We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”
“We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”
“We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”
“We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”
“We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”
“We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”
“We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called "self-protection" equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”
“We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”
“We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”
“We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”
“We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”
“We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”
“We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”
“We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”
“We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”

In other words, the agenda of the Koch brothers is not only to defund Obamacare. The agenda of the Koch brothers is to repeal every major piece of legislation that has been signed into law over the past 80 years that has protected the middle class, the elderly, the children, the sick, and the most vulnerable in this country...

Tomorrow it will be Social Security, ending Medicare as we know it, repealing the minimum wage. It seems to me that the Koch brothers will not be content until they get everything they believe they are entitled to.

Our great nation can no longer be hijacked by right-wing billionaires like the Koch brothers.

For the sake of our children and our grandchildren, for the sake of our economy, we have got to let democracy prevail.

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/koch-brothers

http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a7980koch

to kpete:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024806298



They funded ALEC to keep the nation armed to the teeth, the Tea Party, Rand Paul, the Tenthers and the gun nuts. They don't even hide what they're doing anymore.

By spreading their message from the left and right, through the truthers as all of that agenda is promoted with fear and demonization on Infowars, etc, they have mobilized their base and demoralized ours by made up scandals and are telling us to give up on our nation and agree to the neo-feudalism their goals will create.

[2banon]

81. Yes. incredible as this seems, this goes to the origins of "Corporate Personhood" argued by Big Rail

Back in 1880's in the Superior of Santa Clara County, California. Southern Pacific was sued by the Santa Clara County for damages and public property violations, to which S.P. refused to pay, so Santa Clara County brought suit only to have it dismissed by the Court based on discrimination of personhood or S.P.'s claim to the 14th Amendment of all things.. which as turns out, was a clerical error but has held as "case precedent" ever since, none the less. The history of big business usurping public property with impunity as outlined in your post above should have been held to account so long ago, but we continue to be victimised by the corruption of the political toadies beholden to the Big Business along with their useful idiots, like Bundy et al.

Owned by every American – all 300-plus million of us. It is a peculiar property right we each have to this commons, as we acquire it simply by dint of citizenship, and what we own is spectacular. The marvel of the federal public-lands system is that it exists at all. During the 19th century and into the early 20th, much of the land was leased and sold off in a frenzy of corrupt dealings. Railroads, corporations, land speculators, mining interests, and livestock barons gorged on the public domain, helped along by the spectacularly pliable General Land Office, which from 1812 until its closure in 1946 privatized more than one billion acres, roughly half the landmass of the nation. The corruption was such that by 1885, The New York Times’ editorial page had denounced the “land pirates” whose “fraud and force” had excluded the citizen settler—the farmer, the homesteader, the cowboy—from “enormous areas of public domain” and “robb him of the heritage to which he was entitled.”

[rocktivity]

15. But why weren't any of those things done sooner?

Last edited Tue Apr 15, 2014, 06:07 PM - Edit history (1)

This is has been going on for twenty years, and he's he run up a bill of a million bucks! Who's been protecting him?


rocktivity

[Capt.Rocky300]

19. I've wondered the same thing.

[McCamy Taylor]

10. Koch Brothers cattle graze of federal land.

[freshwest]

87. The want all national park land sold off, so they can frack, mine and pollute in private without the

'tryannical' government that holds it in trust for all of us, and uses taxes and fees to take care of the 'parasites.'

The Koch brothers want the safety net gone, even if it kills millions. In fact, by their philosophy, that is way things ought to be. Too many people fall for their propaganda when they point their fingers at the government to which they have invested millions to elect people to 'starve the beast.'

They have plans for all of us, and not for our good. It's not about cattle at all, see my reply to 2banon above:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014779601#post35

[Politicalboi]

11. We WON!!!!!

Let's start the cow tipping. Al Bundy is going to get a federal return real soon.

[cosmicone]

12. Like I said earlier

we should have used national guard with helicopter gunships and tanks to mow down the armed teabaggers and NRA types, seize the land and throw the survivors in the slammer -- perhaps Guantánamo.

This sets a very very bad precedence and any rancher from Washington state to Texas can now pull this crap every time.

[Cheerful Charlie]

22. Helicopter gunships and tanks to mow them down?

Last edited Sun Apr 13, 2014, 11:21 PM - Edit history (1)

Then it would be worse than Ruby Ridge, Waco or Kent State.

[CreekDog]

23. Oh please. Quit trying so hard.

not impressed.

[treestar]

24. How many people are out there who would really do this?

[7962]

26. Just like your friend Vladimir would do, right?

[cosmicone]

36. You're making friends for me? Goody! n/t

[leftynyc]

39. You are deranged

Pres Obama is not Putin and if you think mowing down Americans with tanks is a dandy idea, you live in the wrong country. Try Russia.

[cosmicone]

41. No. I think that

you live in the republic of utopia or Idealistan.

A country governed by laws enforces them rather than negotiate the rights of the people away. Mr. Bundy has defrauded all of us not just the BLM. Court orders to that effect should be enforced with the full participation of law enforcement for the benefit of the people.

What next? Jailors letting prisoners go after riots in order to save lives? Cops letting drunk drivers go because they are heavily armed?

[leftynyc]

48. You're a clown

And this site is much poorer for having you part of it. Go take your fantasy about tanks and gunships mowing down fellow Americans someplace else.

[cosmicone]

61. wow .. your maturity is astounding

did you have a bad day in kindergarten today? Did the mean boys give you a booboo?

[NealK]

94. +1

That poster made a rather psychotic "suggestion".

[former9thward]

47. Grab your gun and show them how to do it.

Or are you just going to sit at your keyboard and cheer bloodshed on?

[cosmicone]

63. Naw

It is the job of law enforcement. I am against private citizens owning firearms.

[Marrah_G]

60. Mowed them down? These are human beings!!!!!!!!!

What is wrong with you?

[cosmicone]

62. It is a euphemism

similar to "give them a haircut"

Those "human beings" are involved in a de facto armed insurrection against the federal law enforcement and judiciary.

[Xithras]

64. That's among the nuttiest things I've ever read on DU.

A mass slaughter of American citizens by the military, when those citizens are simply exercising their right to protest under the laws of this land, would be justification for at least an impeachment followed by a long imprisonment for Obama, at at the worst would be justification for a general uprising against the U.S. government. Unless the protest turns into a full scale armed rebellion, there is ZERO justification for the use of force against them.

Understand that these protesters are breaking no laws. You and I might not like or agree with their positions, but they are there to support a political clause, and are complying with all of the laws of this country (it's perfectly legal to carry a gun to a protest in Nevada). To advocate that the government murder them is astonishing.

Luckily, President Obama is smarter than you are, and isn't going to make a move that would not only be unconstitutional on several points and would not only violate multiple federal laws, but that would constitute a fundamental human rights violation and a crime against humanity under international law. The right to protest against your government without being mowed down by attack helicopters and tanks has long been recognized as a fundamental human right, and leaders who have violated that right have rightly been overthrown, imprisoned, or isolated on the world stage.

[cosmicone]

67. They are obstructing justice

and violating court orders. "Not breaking any laws" is untrue. The issue is hardly political -- it is an open and shut case of theft of federal resources.

These people are no different from tax protesters who believe income taxes are illegal and are routinely jailed.

It is a de facto armed insurrection against federal authority and prima facie treasonous conduct. Their only proper way of getting justice is to use the court system -- not take up arms against agents of the United States.

[Xithras]

70. You seem to be confused here....

The protesters, whom you advocated "mowing down", aren't violating ANY court orders. The owner of the cattle is violating a court order, which is a misdemeanor, but the protesters supporting him certainly are NOT. And the last time I checked, we don't execute people with tanks and helicopter gunships over misdemeanors. In fact, the last time I checked, we don't execute people for stealing federal resources or not paying their taxes either.

And your improper use of Latin does not make your failed argument that it's an "armed rebellion" any more valid. And it certainly doesn't meet any definition of treason that I've ever read (unless you're one of those kooks who believes that ANY resistance to the government is "treason", though tha's a belief generally held by Teabagger types, and not liberals). These people are out there protesting. It is perfectly legal to open-carry in Nevada. It is perfectly legal to open carry at a protest in Nevada. It is perfectly legal to open carry at a protest of the police in Nevada. Nobody has fired a shot. Nobody has aimed a gun at a ranger. There is no "rebellion". It's a loud and aggressive protest, but nobody has crossed any lines that would have made it into something more serious.

The sky is not falling. The teabaggers are not rebelling. And NOBODY has done anything that would justify the use of force...much less tanks and attack helicopters. The suggestion that we do so is nuts.

[cosmicone]

75. Thank you for calling me a teabagger

but I'll ignore that for a moment.

Ever heard of "aiding and abetting a criminal" and "accessory after the fact?" These people are not "protesting" - they are engaged in a show of force to defeat administration of justice. They didn't have to be on that ranch to protest. They could have gathered in front of the BLM offices carrying placards to protest correct? They were there to "defend" the ranch against lawful exercise by law enforcement to carry out the laws of the land.

For your information, I don't consider "any resistance to the government" as treason because I have been a major supporter of OWS movement.

Finally, the "mow them down" was simply a euphemism and I know that it would never come to that ... however, I am all for a show of force by the people (as in people vs Bundy) to not let the intimidation stand. Would you be against a SWAT team's show of force against hostage takers or holed-up armed fugitives? This situation is no different except that it is magnified by a thousand fold.

[Xithras]

76. No, I merely pointed out that one of your beliefs is shared by the 'baggers.

Did you never visit Freeperland during the OWS protests? The idea that the government should shoot protesters is certainly not a "liberal" belief, and it's one that is generally held by the right wing. Lots of 'baggers were advocating that the OWS protesters be shot. I'm not saying that you're a teabagger, but I AM saying that you should reexamine your perspective on this issue, because it's inconsistent with beliefs generally expected of those on the "left".

Twenty four years ago I, and a lot of other people, chained myself across a roadway in order to save some redwood trees from loggers. The loggers told us to move. They had every legal right to the trees. The police ordered us to move. There were court orders and government rulings declaring that the loggers could log that area. But we chained ourselves across those roadways anyway. We impeded the government, interrupted private commerce, and defied the courts. And in the end...we won.

Civil disobedience has been a cornerstone of American protesting since before America existed as a nation. Henry David Thoreau wrote about it. Abolitionists engaged in it regularly. Desegregationists embraced it wherever they could. OWS was built on it. Outside of America, Gandhi freed an entire nation using nonviolent civil disobedience.

These idiots in Nevada were engaging in an act of protest and civil disobedience. The fact that they had guns, which were legally carried in accordance with the laws of this country and that state, do not change anything. The right to nonviolently protest, even when that protest impedes business or the government, is not held solely by those we agree with politically.

If these guys were digging foxholes and taking potshots at police officers, I'd agree with you that force is justified. But they weren't, and didn't. They protested. They impeded. They engaged in acts of protest and civil disobedience. NONE of those things warrant a violent response. Would I advocate that SWAT be used against people engaged in acts of civil disobedience? Never.

[cosmicone]

80. Aiding and abetting a criminal (alleged or real) is not a protest

I am against the imprisonment of Mumia Abu Jamal. I've and will protest it in front of a courthouse or prosecutor's office. However, I won't gather a bunch of buddies with automatic weapons and physically rescue him from prison.

Calling these people as engaging in a protest is like saying Usama bin Laden was protesting US policy in Israel.

[Xithras]

82. Your argument falls flat for one simple reason.

"Aiding and abetting", under U.S. law, requires that those charged perform acts that directly support the commission of the crime.

There is no crime in this scenario. United States v. Bundy was a civil matter, and not a criminal one. He committed a civil offense by not paying the fees.The protesters did not aid him in not paying the fees. You might argue that he violated an injunction, which may be a criminal act depending on how it was worded...but again, the protesters action did not aid that violation because they did not place the violating cattle on the land.

Without a criminal act, you cannot have a principal criminal. Without a principal criminal, you cannot have aiders and abettors. You can only be considered an aider and abettor if your actions specifically enable a criminal act to occur.

Committing civil disobedience against their removal is an entirely different legal issue than the original placement of the cattle on the land.

And, considering that bin Laden KILLED PEOPLE, while these people simply performed a bit of nonviolent civil disobedience, I'm a bit stunned that you'd even compare the two.

[cosmicone]

83. Obstruction of Justice n/t

[Xithras]

85. Standard charge in civil disobedience cases.

I'm pretty sure that's what Humboldt County initially charged me with after they got us off the road. That and "Failing to follow the lawful order of a peace officer". Both were dropped the next day when they let us go. Lots of OWS protesters were charged with the same thing.

Those are pretty much "You pissed us off and we're going to arrest you for something" charges. Neither is justification for violence.

[cosmicone]

86. ok ok - you win

Those armed NRA and teabagger protestors in Nevada who were ready to spill the blood of federal agents dong their job were all disciples of Gandhi and Dalai Lama whilst Mr. Bundy is Buddha himself.

Timothy McVeigh was channeling Martin Luther King, Jr. when he blew up the Oklahoma city building -- and stupid people like me didn't see that he was simply protesting.

Those damned jack-booted federal agents were oblivious to how David Koresh was protesting in Waco nor did they see the civil disobedience at Ruby Ridge.

Happy?

[christx30]

95. Like Federal Agents have their hands clean.

There is a reason the US has a reputation for violence, and it's not just the NRA. The Feds will lie, steal, and kill as part of their jobs. Anyone that doesn't think so has just not been paying attention for the last 40 years. They go to this guy's ranch and start stealing his cows, and without those weapons in the hands of the protesters, they would have gotten away with it. This is still the same site that was livid about pat downs at the airport, right? About DHS agents showing up at Occupy protests? About people being put in for writing with chalk on the sidewalk outside banks? About Gitmo? These are all examples of members of the government "just doing their jobs." One of these people that steals from you or kills you is just doing his job. But you are still going to be dead. Your property is still going to be gone.
The Feds push their weight around all the time. This group gave a little push back. Compared to the crimes of the federal government, it was a infinitesimally minor push back. There were no shots fired. There was no deaths. Just a message from the protesters that any violence and theft from the Feds would be a bad idea. It kept things civil.
Just because some jerkoff in a black robe says the theft is ok, that it's the right thing to do, and that this guy owes money, doesn't make it true.

[cosmicone]

98. I'm amused when the Gunliban on DU

supports the teabagistan.

[christx30]

100. And I'm amused to see

someone on a progressive website in favor of the murder of an American citizen for administration violations and refusal to pay a fine.
Wait. Not amused. Nauseated. That's a better description.

[cosmicone]

109. I suggest Dramamine or Phenergan ... n/t

[christx30]

110. I'd just prefer to stop seeing

people get erections for the death of someone that had the gall to thumb his nose at a judge. It's disgusting. Whether Bundy is right or wrong, it's disgusting.

[Socal31]

116. well...

Both sides were aiming at each other, although none of the protesters directly infront of the fed agents were.

[Psephos]

68. A well-reasoned post - astonishing that it needs to be made here. n/t

[Codeine]

72. God, that's just fucking stupid.

Not how thins are done in a democracy, dude. Not everybody can be your beloved Putin.

[AnalystInParadise]

113. Make sure to polish your jackboots

to a high shine. Fortunately the military would turn its guns on anyone who ordered it to kill civilians.

[SoapBox]

13. Wow...what an asshole.

...he thinks he's "entitled" to free use of OUR lands?

No.

[StarryNite]

31. Apparently he is.

[Lasher]

14. What's the rush, it's only been a couple of decades so far.

He's only 67 years old, so he'll be just 87 in another 20 years. Plenty of time for justice to run its course. Some judge should send him another stern letter. That would show him and all his sovereign citizen pals.

[gratuitous]

16. So, can Occupy use these tactics and get the same kid-glove treatment?

I suspect we all know the answer to that.

[Cheerful Charlie]

21. So why is the government afraid of the right but not the left?

Is it because it takes the left for granted?

[Marrah_G]

27. They did not want anyone getting killed.

[Marrah_G]

58. Are you saying that a bloodbath would have been aceptable to prove a point?

[tazkcmo]

78. He's saying

compared to the treatment of OWS, these folks are being coddled. I agree while at the same time do not call for "mowing them down", a "blood bath" or any other tactic that results in the death of people protesting, even if I disagree with them.

Has our government handled this whole situation poorly? I think yes. After all, this parasite has been doing this for 20 years. Administrative action should have been swift and severe. The folks that came to his aid broke no laws as has been pointed out up thread. Having said this, the actions of law enforcement, when compared to their actions in response to OWS where nobody was mowed down or any blood baths ensued, seem to exhibit a disdain for the left and a coddling of the right.

[1Greensix]

25. Separate Constitution for conservatives

We seem to have two or more Constitutions in this nation. One for conservatives and the Rich, and one for everyone else. Those cattle should Never been allowed to graze on federal land. In the mountains they pollute all the surface water that the rest of us drink at lower elevations. If the ranchers don't want to follow federal laws then confiscate their cattle on federal land and sell at auction, just like the Same Ranchers would want done with anyone breaking any other Federal Laws. Follow the laws, or lose your property and go to jail. Pretty simple. The same deal the government gives to drug dealers.
That is, unless their Are two Constitutions in this country.

[PumpkinAle]

28. Bundy has been defrauding the tax-payers for years

he and his militia buddies need to be shown some "shock and awe" treatment and then rounded up and sent somewhere nice at the government's pleasure - I am sure somewhere there is a prison cell that could accommodate them.

[Sunlei]

30. not sure why the rancher thinks he 'won' he will never get to use that public land again.

He can not bring a suit in Federal court for his rights being violated, because the round-up was 'canceled' The courts will declare any civil rights case brought 'moot' because the BLM canceled. The Gov. already stated he owes a million in fines,fees...they will take his private property someday. Or just wait until he dies of old age then his family will never pass any probate court to gain ownership.

Fracking has already started up major on our public lands in that area. Any water in that desert land will go for fracking, gold mines and keep water flowing to, the Las Vegas gambling state revenue. This was really about the last 'old school' ranch in that Las Vegas area county. The family could always relocate to Utah where most of their rural 'supporters' were from.

[StarryNite]

38. They're already using the public land again.

"Wild west: The Bundy family and their supporters drive their cattle back onto public land outside of Bunkerville, Nev. after they were released by the Bureau of Land Management on Saturday"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2603026/Senator-speaks-favor-Nevada-rancher-militias-join-battle-federal-agents-accused-acting-like-theyre-Tienanmen-Square-fight-disputed-ranch-land.html

[Harcourdt Fenton Mud]

44. I don't understand the logic

of flying the American flag while going up against the federal government. Shouldn't they get their own flag?

[Inkfreak]

51. I think you hit upon a good point there.

These guys drape themselves in the flag while shitting all over the government. They love the idea of patriotism, but hate following the rules/laws of the very same government.

Democracy!! But only if it's my way!

[StarryNite]

65. Great point!

Maybe somebody here on DU who has some artistic talent could come up with a flag for them. Maybe it should be a contest or something.

[KansDem]

99. Something like this?

Or this?

[StarryNite]

115. LOL!

Those would work!

[Paladin]

71. Or pledging allegiance to the 2nd Amendment, while denying the government exists.

Hey, you don't have to be logically consistent to cheat the government out of money, or to own all the assault rifles you want.

[christx30]

73. To me it's similar to

"I love my country, but I hate my government."

I love the state of Texas. But I'm opposed to Rick Perry.
You can love the United States, but hate the people that have been elected, and most of the laws those people have enacted. That's not treason against the US.

[StarryNite]

74. It's not treason to hate it

but it is if you have a weapon and you're taking aim on federal agents.

[AnalystInParadise]

114. Until violence is committed

you would be hard pressed to prove it is treason.

[Half-Century Man]

32. We do not need another Ruby Ridge or Waco.

The old saying that "violence never solves anything" is not right. Violence always changes the situation, but the long term consequences are nearly impossible to predict. The world's image of the USA as the leading war monger is due to our over use of violence.
How many times have we, the DU, aired grievances over police brutality? Law enforcement over reacting to the situation? Our insanely militarized police are a common thread.

OTOH, it was nice of the nut cases to gather so they could be filmed by predator drones. And the communication traffic linked to the photos of those license plates now have a real reason for subpoenas for the NSA wire tapping data base. How many will get stopped somewhere on their way home and get their cars tossed for weapons? How did the money flow? Will a freedom of information act request let some intrepid reporter see?

Think, wait, plan, then act. This is far from over.

[MindMover]

33. EXACTLY ... nt

[JoeyT]

37. Violence rarely solves anything, but it is

a bit suspicious how judicious we are in our use of violence.

Had this been anything but old Christian right wing white dudes, instead of deference shown, their bullet riddled bodies would already be cold. Failing on any part of that would've ended badly for them. It's gotta be the full Fox or it doesn't help.

[Jackpine Radical]

43. Ya damn right.

As I said below, I'm proud of how the Government handled this one.

[Jackpine Radical]

42. The Gov't did absolutely the right thing here. I'm proud of them.

We did not need another Wac(k)o.

There are other ways to handle the situation.

What is it about the name "Bundy" anyway that brings out the lunacy?

[hollowdweller]

52. Eventually we will see gunfire

Not here maybe, but somewhere.

The gov't may be smart enough not to provoke a Ruby Ridge or Waco.

However the nutty people we have now are not smart enough not to provoke another Oklahoma City or something similar.

The people on the right that were truly delusional during the Clinton administration were a smaller segment of the population than now.

Plus since Clinton the truly crazy people who were once the fringe of the republican party actually have representatives at all levels of government egging them on. At the time of Clinton the NRA and gun manufacturers were really not pushing the whole idea that you needed military style guns in order to fight off the government as a way to gain members and sell guns. Now it's actually part of the whole marketing of firearms that you are going to use them for some showdown with the gov't. Or black people.

If you look at Clinton the crazyness kept getting higher and higher and the delusional stuff kept getting deeper and deeper, till Oklahoma City. After that the GOP actually did a reset and realized how serious that some of the stuff they were saying was being taken by some of their followers.

However all those guys, the older republicans are mostly gone and the people replacing them are people who I think really believe that we need a new civil war and that our country should be ruled by little armed groups that basically impose their will on people by force.

When they finally manage to start what they want to truly provoke the gov't would be well served to do exactly what it did here, make sure the gov't does not get the blame for starting it.

However don't worry, it will start and them letting these people get away with it will spur copycats all over the place.

[Jim Lane]

54. I can understand not wanting violence, but why release the cattle already gathered?

Auctioning off those cattle would have produced funds to begin satisfying Bundy's debt to the government (i.e. to the taxpayers). Instead, the cattle have been returned to him so that he can continue to graze them illegally.

[JoeyT]

57. Because when you surrender unconditionally, you meet all the demands, not just the ones you like.

The people that insist this ain't over are living in a fantasy world. The nutjobs won and it's over until the next set of nutjobs decide federal law doesn't apply to them and gather up thar shootin' irons to take back thar freedums.

[Sunlei]

96. released the cattle because that shuts the door for any future legal case against the Gov.

Any legal suit the rancher would file, over any first amendment violations or 'land dispute' during this specific BLM round-up, would be not accepted by the Federal courts. Because the round-up was canceled, the cattle released. The court would declare the case, 'moot'.

The BLM got what they wanted, that public land is cleared of 'illegal' cattle. They can go ahead and lease public land to frackers, oil or mining group.

[Jim Lane]

102. I don't think that's accurate.

First, if the Government illegally infringed upon his freedom of speech, then it couldn't nullify his cause of action for that simply by releasing some cattle. The release would serve only to reduce (not eliminate) his damages under a separate cause of action for illegal seizure, in the unlikely event that he prevailed on the latter argument.

Second, it's not clear to me that the BLM got what they wanted, even to the limited extent of clearing the land of "illegal" cattle. (The cattle did nothing wrong so maybe it would be fair to call them "undocumented" cattle.) It's my understanding that Bundy still has cattle present on public land, in violation of the court orders, and that the cattle now returned to him will probably be added to that group.

[Sunlei]

103. There was no 'illegal seizure' everything the BLM did was legal.

Doubt the ranch owner would ever file a case in Federal court over illegal seizure. Even if he does the courts would rule against him after dragging the case out for several years, as the federal courts do. If the Federal courts would even accept any case without the specific laws the BLM broke documented.

Sure the BLM did what was needed at that time. To clear that 'square' of public land of cattle so whatever other 'use' on that public land can now progress.

The BLM had to pay their regular contractor to do the round-up because the cattle owner 'refused' when he was asked.

It really doesn't even matter that they were cattle. Bundy could have been growing crops or mining gold out there on our public lands without paying for the lease and allowing 'management' by BLM.

[Jim Lane]

104. I think you misunderstood my post.

You defend the BLM against the accusation that it was too harsh, saying in response that "the BLM did what was needed at that time." My criticism, though, was that the BLM was too lenient.

I agree with everything in your post. That's why I said that it would be "unlikely" for Bundy to prevail on a cause of action alleging illegal seizure, if he even asserted such a claim. My point is just that it's a separate legal theory from any violation of his First Amendment rights.

[Sunlei]

106. I think the BLM was to harsh, imo they usually are, especially at the 'round-up' locations.

Their contractors/BLM have never welcomed or made it easy for observers/cameras/documentation at any of their round-ups. They usually fence off (snow fence first amendment area) the couple of observers a mile away with a few armed guards to keep them there along with some BLM clerk to answer questions. They will arrest the lone camera person who steps out of the 'cage'. This time they had hundreds of people to deal with all carrying the dreaded cameras, armed and refusing to stand in the cage.

I agree the cattle issue is a separate legal theory from any violation of his First Amendment rights.

I think any Federal case for any rights violation would be declared moot by the courts because that round-up was 'canceled'. Although the caging and the inability for the public to view our Gov. at work I believe is a rights violation.

Anyway, I think Mr. Bundy has had his 15 minutes of fame. The BLM won't place themselves in a position to have 300 people show-up at any future round-ups of his cattle.

[handmade34]

55. good article...

...a Nevadan's perspective

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/12/1291439/-The-Bundy-Ranch-flashpoint-a-Nevadan-s-perspective

[liberal N proud]

79. So this squatter gets to continue to use public land for his profit

Meanwhile, he probably is a big mouth against people on welfare.

[Sunlei]

97. Not when the Gov. leases that 'square' of public land to some other 'Corp'.

The BLM may already have that land leased to some other group. It is a prime fracking/ gold mine area.

In this map you can see how the entire state of Nevada is set-up like a checkerboard, one mile 'squares' of public/private lands. Ranchers/private land owners are only allowed to lease the adjacent 'squares'.

Plenty of those private lands are now corporate owned. Corp land owners get all the benefits from their adjacent 'public lands'. Of course our Federal money pays for those 'benefits'.

[hollowdweller]

107. Yeah just lease it to a corporation

Have them send in Blackwater to remove the cattle. The teabaggers love corporations and crazy people with guns so they would let them do it.

[The Stranger]

84. Why does this freeloading piece of shit get to rip off the federal government and all us taxpayers?

[pothos]

89. lol

enjoy your (brief) stay here

[TorchTheWitch]

92. because the locals let him

For 20 years. They should have called in the Feds for help THEN. Instead they've let him get away with this for so long he has no reason to believe anymore that he won't continue to get away with it. And by deciding to do this cattle round up thinking he'd let them when all they've done for the past 20 years is allow him to get away with his crimes they were imbeciles to believe they could confiscate his cattle without him doing something to keep that from happening. Instead of pushing the problem up the chain to get it properly dealt with for 20 years they did nothing but let this ass have his way and embolden him. There never would have BEEN this gun waving stand off if they'd properly dealt with this guy decades ago instead of continually allowing him to get away with it which further emboldened him to this point. And instead of FINALLY calling in the Feds they backed down yet again giving him everything he wanted including the cattle they had rounded up which he promptly put right back on the Federal government land.

This should never ever ever risen to this point and for all these years with the locals continually backing down, continually emboldening him and not being prepared for what he'd do when they came in to round up his cattle. Shamefully, after all this instead of bringing in the Feds for help as they should have done years and years ago they once again backed down and gave him everything he wanted which not only emboldened him but every nutty crackpot criminal with a gun everywhere in the US given the nationwide exposure.

[fujiyama]

90. This was a smart move, all options considered

I mean, bloodshed over a stand off, Ruby Ridge/Waco style is the last thing the president needs - that too in an election year where things are not likely to go well as it is.

It may embolden the loonies to some extent, but I don't think it's worth having people killed because of a cattle grazing issue. Yes, this Bundy guy is nuts and his argument sounds like bullshit, but I agree that force should only be used as an absolute last option.

[NealK]

93. Bundy?

[riqster]

101. Like I said yesterday,

This is EXACTLY what happens when you surrender to terrorists.

http://bluntandcranky.wordpress.com/2014/04/14/never-ever-give-in-to-bullies-and-terrorists/

[Jake Stern]

105. People are so happy a non-standoff was averted but it set the stage for what is

likely to become a for real standoff down the road.

The Feds were there to execute a lawful court order and were driven off by armed thugs. What do people think is going to happen if some Federal judge finally issues an arrest warrant? The militias are going to say "Sorry, can't help you bro. They got a warrant!!"?

They'll be back and possibly in greater numbers.

Bullies don't see your walking away as you taking the high road, they see it as you being too scared to face them.

[hollowdweller]

108. The Media Printed pictures

Of people with guns pointing them at federal agents along with their names.

I wouldn't be suprised if there wasn't some action on that.

Also the next time this happens, and it will, I wouldn't be suprised if you see the BATF circulating among the militias, checking ID's and serial numbers on the guns to check for people who do not legally have the right to posess a firearm or who are posessing stolen firearms.

If the court gave the Feds posession of his cattle legally I would assume any cows sold at any cattle auction with that brand the profits would go to the feds?