Cruz sides with Law Enforcement on Oregon Standoff

[muggsy]

I can see that this post is going nowhere, but down hill. I'm done here.

[Arkansas Bob]

A big NO on that. However it is not the other way either. If everything is a conspiracy that is just as unlikely. Bob

[TheTman]

Anyone wonder, why looters can burn property, take shots towards police, (From a long ways away with little chance of hitting any), loot the hell out of all the stores in the neighborhood, beat people up, and MSM says it's a non-violent protest, and people just lap up the pablum. Shots had been fired, people were beaten, Police cars overturned, but according to MSM it's no big deal. (in Ferguson shots were fired, not sure about Baltimore)
Meanwhile, you have a peaceful protest, with no property damaged, no shots fired, no rioting and looting, no police cars burned, and MSM turns it into a Dangerous Violent Assault, by Heavily Armed Outlaws, and again America laps up the pablum and assumes the worst about the Ranchers in Oregon? They have people in the local town scared to leave their homes. What kind of foolishness is that?

Usually there is a trail of money that can be followed to determine why things happen as they do, in the case of the looting and rioting, I suppose the longer they continued, the more people tuned in to watch the news. In the rancher case, I have no idea how it influenced news coverage, I suppose it increased viewership some, but I also wonder how much the BLM profited from taking over the ranchers land, then leasing it out to Russian owned Canadian One mining. Several tactics were used to force the ranchers off their land, including flooding their land, so it would be worthless, then buying it for pennies on the dollar, then opening the dams so the water would drain from the ranch land. One rancher tells a story of finding a bunker like facility on his ranch that looked to be deserted, but when he got out of his truck to investigate, BLM SUV's swarmed in, and told him he no longer owned this piece of property. No court action or anything just confiscating the land. How are these things legal? Maybe the Hammonds didn't want their help, but what about all the other ranchers being screwed over in the area? No one has bothered to get their reactions. When is the proper time to take action against tyrannical activities by Govt. agencies? Or do we act like sheep and let them do as they want? I don't believe that is what the founding fathers had in mind when they wrote the Constitution, and the 2nd Amendment, along with the rest of the Bill of Rights.
The death of Lavoy Finicum has a lot of people outraged. It might have been intended to scare people, but it doesn't seem to be having that effect, if anything it seems to be making people angrier and bolder, and less likely to take govt. BS.

The Oregon Governor, a Democrat, recently was raising hell about the ranchers protest, and wanted them dealt with. That may have been the driving force behind the ambush.
All I can say is God must have protected the ranchers, because they drove into an ambush, (They were headed to a meeting with the Sheriff of the adjoining county) where hundreds of rounds were fired into the truck, and there was only one casualty, and that's probably because he left the vehicle. You'd think the truck might have caught fire from a punctured gas tank or something, but it didn't.

And then, what kind of man walks up to a guy motionless on the ground, probably dead, and pumps several more shots into him, just to make sure. I imagine their intentions was that no one in the vehicle made it out alive, that's why I think they must have had divine protection to have lived through that. There were snipers planted all through the woods. Shots coming from every direction, and only one person died, and another one wounded. God knows who was in the right in this situation, and it was not the BLM, who have been abusing ranchers and Native Americans for years. Nor was it the FBI who tried their best to terminate everyone, but only succeeded with one. The narratives of the two women in the vehicle match closely, but differs greatly from the "official" narrative. People will say well they coordinated their stories, but they were split up, and never had the chance to talk to each other. And with all the bullets flying into the vehicle, I doubt if they were talking about their narratives of the situation matching during that time. I guess a lot comes down to if you want to side with an over reaching federal agency, that has been abusing it's power for years, or believe some god fearing ranchers and their supporters that were trying to set things right. Ammon Bundy also claims that he was operating under divine inspiration.

There is a Mark McConnell, that is also telling a narrative on the issue, but his story differs from all the other eye-witnesses and he is believed to have been one of the embedded agents in the Bundy camp. He also urged everyone into two vehicles, when people wanted to take several more. I think he knew what was about to happen. So I wouldn't put much stock in what he says.
if you go to: www.freecapitalist.com you can listen to one of the eye-witnesses tell her story. The link to her story is real easy to find.


Bye Muggs, I hope there are no hard feelings. Just because we don't agree on many things, doesn't mean anything more than we don't agree, well not to me anyway. Everyone has heard MSM's side of this story. I'm just trying to present the other side from the ranchers point of view. I guess I feel for them, because my Dad got screwed over on some land because of Eminent Domain. He had to let them run a high power line through the back 40 of our 80 acres, and they give them the right to access it at anytime. They low-balled him on the price they paid for the land to put the poles in, and the damage they caused tracking up the field with their equipment. Then they could come for service or repair anytime, even right before a wheat harvest and destroy a boatload of wheat if they needed too, and reimburse him maybe half of what the wheat might have brought if it was harvested. Luckily that didn't happen often. Most of the time they would wait until after harvest, or when it young enough that you could drive over it and not do it much damage, as long as it wasn't muddy. But it screwed us out of being able to develop it for housing or anything, as you couldn't build any structure within a few hundred yards of the line. But they did run through there and inspect it once a year at least for several years, then it tapered off, to less often.