RSS

My Heroes Have Always Been Cowboys

14 Apr

Cliven Bundy [courtesy Google Images]

Cliven Bundy
[courtesy Google Images]

The Cliven Bundy standoff has apparently ended.  The Bureau of Land Management has withdrawn all of its helicopters, vehicles and hit men.  At least for now.

If the BLM comes after Bundy again, they’ll do a blitzkrieg and come so fast there won’t be time for the public to rally around Bundy. The BLM will probably start by cutting off the surrounding cellphone towers so no one will be able to call for help or broadcast live images of the raid and government brutality.  If the government kills anyone or burns their home to the ground, cutting off those cellphone towers (or otherwise seizing or disabling cell phones) will be evidence of government’s intent to commit murder–1st degree, cold-blooded, premeditated murder–without leaving any telltale digital evidence of their crime.

Nevertheless, for now, it’s time for the Bundys and all of their supporters to celebrate–and pray.

•  And it’s time for America to celebrate and pray, too, because in a nation of 317 million, a thousand (more or less) “Minutemen” stood up against the government–and the government backed down.

There’s a great lesson (and danger) in that victory.  See how few armed Americans it took to cause the gov-co to retreat?  But did you also see how few actually showed up to fight?

Those who fear the onset of martial law can see that martial law is nowhere near as scary as public indifference.  The threat of martial law could be eliminated across the entire nation if just 500,000 Americans (about 1 man–or woman–in 500) were willing to stand up with firearms and openly defy government thugs.  On the other hand, if not even 1 man in 500 were willing to fight, martial law could be easily established.

Government teaches us to praise the government soldiers who “fight for our freedoms” in foreign countries.  That’s largely a bunch of self-serving crap.  Government soldiers haven’t fought for any of our freedoms in my lifetime.  Did the Koreans threaten American freedoms?  How ’bout the North Vietnamese?  Iraqi’s?  Afghans?  Libyans?  I’m not here to praise any of those regimes, but not one of them ever threatened any legitimate “freedoms” of the American people.

Not one of those foreign governments has even threatened our freedom of speech, freedom of travel, or right to keep and bear arms.  Only our own government threatens our rights and freedoms–and it does so every single day.

If you want to thank someone for “fighting for your freedoms,” you ought to thank Cliven Bundy and the people who stood with him for the past week.   They fought the real enemy:  our own government.  They’re the heroes.

•  And then there’s firearms.

Those who support the 2nd Amendment also have cause to celebrate.  We’ve just seen the 2nd Amendment in action.  As declared in the “Preamble to the Bill of Rights,” the purpose for the first ten amendments to the Constitution is to “prevent misconstruction or abuse” of the “powers” of the Constitution.

Well, that’s pretty much what happened at the Bundy standoff.  The government’s attack was a misconstruction and/or abuse of the federal government’s powers.  The BLM came to rustle Bundy’s cattle, and perhaps murder Bundy and some of his family.  Some of Bundy’s supporters threatened to exercise their right to keep and bear arms to prevent the misconstruction or abuse of alleged federal powers under the Constitution.  By exercising their Second Amendment rights, they thereby succeeded in preventing what might otherwise have been a massacre.  Not one shot was fired.  But the threat that shots might be fired at the government kneebreakers was enough to send the government running.

Imagine what the Bundy story would have been if government had previously succeeded in disarming Americans.

In the Bundy drama, we’re seeing the reason, need and potential power of the 2nd Amendment.

• There’s reason to celebrate courage, too.

Government has taught its kneebreakers that the most important thing is that they all “come home alive” after any confrontation.  That lesson inclines government thugs to kill people (even innocent people) as a rational act of self-preservation.  Guilt or innocence of the victim is irrelevant.  There’s a war goin’ on between the government and the people, so why take a chance?  Whoever they see, might be armed.  Whoever they see, might pose a threat to the government agents’ lives.  So, why not shoot any remotely conceivable threat and “let God sort ’em out”?

Encouraged to value their own lives more highly than those of the people, Government agents can shoot anyone (regardless of whether the victim is young, old, armed or docile) under the pretext that the agents are afraid and get away with it.  The cops, the snipers, the BLM et al are effectively “licensed to kill” innocent people in order to ensure that the government thugs “go home for dinner” unscathed.

On the one hand, it’s scary that government agents and employees are empowered commit premeditated murder against innocent “civilians” as an act of self-preservation.

On the other hand, there’s also a silver lining to the government’s objective of all going home each night for dinner:  the government is scared to risk their lives in anything like a “fair” fight.

Oh, sure, they’ll kill the innocent and even those who are armed when government has overwhelming forces available.   But if the government is faced with an equivalent force of armed men in open terrain where government can’t easily hide, and there’s a genuine risk that government agents, employees, and hit men might be shot, they’ll follow their training and run like Hell to make sure they “get home for dinner tonight”.

We saw much the same thing happen in the A.D. 1992 Los Angeles riots.  Faced with widespread rioting, the cops cut and ran home for dinner.  They left the rioters in control of parts of the city.  Rather than “serve and protect,” they let the city burn.

There’s another big lesson here.  The cops aren’t as dumb as some people think.  They know they’re hugely outnumbered by the public.  They know that they can’t win if even one man in 500 rises up with a rifle.  They know that the only thing that maintains their perceived power is public apathy and fear.  They know that if the public begins to wake up and stand up, the cops (and FBI, BLM etc.) are toast.  Given their determination to “get home for dinner” each night, there’s no guarantee, but there’s a high probability that government kneebreakers faced with organized resistance will again cut and run.

We aren’t being overpowered by the police state.  We’re being intimidated by an illusion of government power into surrendering our liberties to a virtual handful of thugs.  In the end, we won’t lose our Liberty because we’re weak in a technical or numerical sense.  If we lose, it’ll be because we’re cowards.  And, insofar as we’re cowards, we’ll deserve to lose.  A few heroes might save us.  No heroes at all will seal our national fate.

•  Secrecy.

About four or five days into the standoff, senior Senator Harry Reid, Democrat, from Nevada was implicated as possible instigator behind the BLM raid.  It was rumored by some that Senator Reid’s son (Rory Reid) was involved in a deal with a Red Chinese corporation that was supposed to build a solar energy farm in the vicinity of the Bundy ranch and that therefore Bundy had to be removed.  It was suspected that Senator Reid was causing Bundy to be removed in order to help enrich his son, Rory.

Whether that rumor is true or false is unknown to me.  However, according to the Washington Times (“Nevada ranch standoff could leave dirt on Harry Reid’s reputation”),

“Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said little as federal agents seized and then released cattle last week from the Bundy ranch, but there is little doubt that the highly charged episode was threatening to become a political headache for the Nevada Democrat.

“The Bureau of Land Management is headed by former longtime Reid aide Neil Kornze, who was confirmed by the Senate as BLM director on Tuesday, just as federal authorities descended on the cattle ranch outside Mesquite, Nev.”

 Therefore, it’s certain that Senator Reid is at least peripherally implicated in the Bundy standoff.

Some people believe that, even though Sen. Reid will not be running for reelection until A.D. 2016, he nevertheless ordered the BLM to retreat in order to avoid adversely affecting other Democrat candidates in next November’s election.  That explanation is plausible.

However, I suspect that if Sen. Reid is genuinely complicit, he must’ve started this confrontation with the expectation that his involvement would remain hidden to the public.  If so, Reid must’ve forgotten that this is the “Internet Age” and virtually no one’s secrets are safe from public exposure.  A paper trail follows each of us about (even Senators).  In most instances, no one bothers to look at our paper trails because the vast majority of us are insignificant to the “system” .  But, once any one of us attracts enough attention, our personal paper trail will be found, dissected and exposed to the public.

If Sen. Reid is party to the Bundy standoff (and even if he’s not) his paper trails to Nevada, his son, the BLM and/or the Chinese solar power corporation will be exposed and Reid’s power might be compromised.  The only way to take the light off of Sen. Reid may be to take the heat off of Bundy.  If so, that might also explain the BLM’s retreat.

•  Cliven Bundy.

He and his wife have fourteen children and forty-eight grandchildren.  I saw a video of Mr. Bundy standing with his arm around his wife and it was obvious that he was still in love with her.

Cliven Bundy is ten times the man that any of the BLM’s thugs could ever hope to be.  (Probably ten times the man that I am, too.)  He works for a living.  He has real family.  He’s a cowboy, for gosh-sakes.   He’s done more for American freedom than any tank Division in the Iraqi war.  I can only envy and admire the life he’s had and the legacy he’ll leave.

I’ll bet that Cliven can tell you stories about his daddy’s and granddaddy’s courage that would not only inspire you, but also set an example for Cliven to follow and live up to.  And now, Cliven has set an example for his children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren to be inspired by and to live up to.  Whatever happens from here on in, it’ll be hard to be a descendant of Cliven Bundy and not be proud.

•  Finally, Public relations and political sensitivity

I remember Hopalong Cassidy, Roy Rogers, Gene Autry, and John Wayne.  I remember sheriff Will Kane, the Magnificent Seven, High Noon and True Grit.  None of those men were real heroes.  All of their stories were fictional.  Still, their fictional stories inspired and taught us valuable as lessons on heroism.   Cliven Bundy’s name and story belong in the ranks of those myths because he’s a genuine hero and his story not only offers us some valuable lessons and examples–it’s true.

Somebody at the BLM should be fired for being dumb enough to threaten Bundy with armed thugs.  Gonna rob a man with 14 children?  Gonna kill a man with 48 grandchildren?  Gonna murder a genuine cowboy?!

Cowboys are American icons.  Bundy is what this country was all about and was intended to be.  He’s Rooster Cogburn, the Marlboro man and sheriff Will Kane all rolled into one.  More, he’s the real deal.  He’s an honest-to-God American willing to stand up and risk his life to fight for his own freedom.

But the BLM proposed to at least rustle his cattle, and probably kill him . . . ?

How could the government be so effing stupid?   Goin’ after Bundy makes about as much sense trying to shoot down Santa Claus for invading American air space.  The government’s attack on Bundy was a public relations nightmare. From the beginning, there was no way that government could come out of this confrontation without wearing the black hats of genuine villains and possible cold-blooded killers.

Bundy, on the other hand, was guaranteed a “white hat”.  Bundy has become an American icon.  If he survives until next November, he could run for Congress on a write-in vote and have decent chance of winning.

•  Next?

Bundy’s confrontation isn’t necessarily over.  The federal cattle rustlers may still sneak back after the dust settles.   If they come back (and Sheriff Richard Mack says they’re already planning to do so), they should come back with great, implacable fury.  They will almost certainly kill or jail Bundy and most of those who stand with him.  But they won’t deprive this country of the example Bundy has set or the memory of what can be achieved by one courageous man, his family, neighbors and few “Minute Men”.

As much as we need them, we don’t see many heroes these days.  So, I’m grateful for having seen Cliven Bundy.  I’m grateful for the price he’s paid and perhaps even for the price that he may yet pay.  You should be, too.

One thousand people stopped the gov-co in this last confrontation.  I don’t think that’ll be enough if there’s another raid.  Next time, it may take 3,000.  Maybe even 5,000.

If I recall correctly, Thomas Jefferson once observed that “The tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”  I think that tree is still thirsty.

video    00:02:56

 

Tags: , , , ,

52 responses to “My Heroes Have Always Been Cowboys

  1. dasanco

    April 14, 2014 at 10:25 PM

    thank you al for the refreshing, and non-commercial take on this event. it is very much appreciated.we tend to lose sight of the real prize from time-to-time, instead endeavoring to look at the purely legal take of things. some times we do need to see the original intent … period.

     
  2. Buck

    April 14, 2014 at 10:37 PM

    I was waiting for you to do a write up on this story. Great take Al.

    With the attention this story has garnered and the support that the Bundy’s have received, I’m guessing that a massacre on their ranch at this point will cause the clatter of chambers slamming shut on millions of guns across this country. That’s a sleeping giant I wouldn’t want to awaken if I was the federal government. They may have technology on their side, but when it comes to a violent reaction that could span a while, short term history proves that the US military is not tooled for insurgent warfare in towns and cities across this continent. They’ll have their work cut out for them.

    A total collapse of the dollar coupled with an un-payable debt mixed with global hatred and disdain for our government mixed with a violent civil uprising just might make the next 5 or 6 years worth grabbing a bucket of popcorn and settling in to enjoy the show.

     
  3. Gary Lee, [Russell], sui juris

    April 14, 2014 at 10:38 PM

    Nice post Alfred. Hard to find honest, hard-working people with Cliven’s courage or principles. Easy to find armchair soldiers “ready to do battle” from the comfort of their home, though. They’re about the same as GovCo’s thugs who want to make it home for dinner.

    One thing about some of those guys there, they’re NOT BLM guys, they’re pros; mercs. I am not so sure they ran home to dinner, as they are used to fighting a lot worse than a bunch of cowboys. If BLM comes back, I’ll probably be one of those 3000, or 5000, or even 1000, whatever it takes, to stop the NAZI invasion of The United States of America.

    This same thing is happening in Texas, along the Rio Grande, where BLM is doing it to some ranchers down there, as well. I hope they can find the courage in Texas, and maybe Cliven’s outcome will help, to stand up for their rights there, as well.

    This isn’t going to go away unless WE, the people stop it. Gotta find the head of this snake and cut it off.

     
    • deb

      April 15, 2014 at 1:02 AM

      Gary da man, you’re still one of my heroes.
      @Gotta find the head of this snake and cut it off.– It’s coiled around a monumental landmark on the Potomac.

       
      • J.M.

        April 15, 2014 at 1:38 AM

        @Gotta find the head of this snake and cut it off.

        It’s about to be.

        @ >This same thing is happening in Texas, along the Rio Grande,

        Where along the Rio Grande, Gary Lee, [Russell], sui juris ?

        Sincerely,
        Jim Madison, jus sanguinis, Jus soli, sui juris, just me

         
      • J.M.

        April 15, 2014 at 6:39 PM

        @ >Gotta find the head of this snake and cut it off.– It’s coiled around a monumental landmark on the Potomac.

        Knowledge is powerful, isn’t it?

         
    • J.M.

      April 15, 2014 at 6:25 PM

      Gary Lee, [Russell], sui juris

      @ > Nice post Alfred. Hard to find honest, hard-working people with Cliven’s courage or principles. Easy to find armchair soldiers “ready to do battle” from the comfort of their home, though.

      Gary Lee, [Russell], sui juris, where were you when you typed out & made this post?

      J.M., just me

       
  4. Lyndon

    April 14, 2014 at 10:46 PM

    Good article. Glad to read it Al. I grew up in cattle country way up North. Will never, ever, ever, forget the freedom i lived by. Now, in the city, I had to learn how to be a man all over again as agent after agent tries to assert some imagined authority in our way.

     
    • JOE L'AMARCA

      April 15, 2014 at 1:03 AM

      I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT WICH GOVERNMENT IS WRONG AND WICH GOVERNMENT IS RIGHT , CLIVEN CNA YOU CONTACT ME ? PLEASE JOE

       
  5. J.M.

    April 15, 2014 at 1:16 AM

    Adask

    @ >He and his wife have fourteen children and forty-eight grandchildren. I saw a video of Mr. Bundy standing with his arm around his wife and it was obvious that he was still in love with her.

    True love IS a many splendored thing.

    @ >We’re being intimidated by an illusion of government power

    Illusion for too few. Can’t fight City Hall for too many

    @ > (Probably ten times the man that I am, too.)

    I KNOW he would say the same thing about you

    @ > He’s a cowboy, for gosh-sakes.

    Tear time again

    @ >I can only envy and admire the life he’s had and the legacy he’ll leave.

    If you stand fast, you will leave a great legacy too

    @ > Somebody at the BLM should be fired for being dumb enough to threaten Bundy with armed thugs.

    Disagree. ALL involved should at the very least be tarred & feathered. Better yet,
    HANG the REPROBATE traitors, & when the are DEAD, cut their dead bodies into as many pieces
    as “humanly” possible & throw the body parts into a Bonfire, with LIVE national news coverage.

    @ .> I’m grateful for the price he’s paid and perhaps even for the price that he may yet pay.

    me too

    @ >If I recall correctly, Thomas Jefferson once observed that “The tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” I think that tree is still thirsty.

    Think he also said something needed to be done about every 20 years too

     
  6. Roger

    April 15, 2014 at 1:40 AM

    It’s a good thing no shots were fired in this incident. The government has an effectively unlimited capacity to escalate, and the general public’s tacit approval to do so, when “terrorists” pose a threat. And the media, which the general public still trusts, would of course blame the “terrorists” for firing the first shot.

    All told, things went quite well.

     
    • Anthony Clifton

      April 15, 2014 at 8:18 AM

      how did Zionist TALMUDIC synagogue of Satan “TERRORISTS” become

      GOVERNMENT in America ?

      was it LEGAL ?

      are “we” required to be members of the stool sculpture deity cult….and quietly and tacitly agree with the AGENDA of the MASS MURDERERS who print the currency and own the Media? should “we” improve “our” language and maybe be a little more precise when discussing TRUTH and reality on the soil….?

      how do “we” preserve the peace and dignity of the soil that has millions of gallons of innocent blood screaming from the rivers of blood…

      Remember the Alamo…Waco…PALESTINE & 9/11.

      and the admonition in Matthew 13 concerning the proper place for the TARES

       
      • J.M.

        April 15, 2014 at 1:14 PM

        @ > was it LEGAL ?

        SURE, it WAS & IS legal, just like “abortion” IS LEGAL. Didn’t you know that?

         
      • J.M.

        April 15, 2014 at 1:25 PM

        @ > how do “we” preserve the peace and dignity of the soil that has millions of gallons of innocent blood screaming from the rivers of blood…

        “They” are trying to do so via what is called the “Law enforcement growth agency” & they ARE hiring.

         
    • J.M.

      April 15, 2014 at 6:45 PM

      @ All told, things went quite well.

      Yep, Now it’s back to the drawing board. I KNOW you KNOW what I mean.

       
    • J.M.

      April 17, 2014 at 6:09 AM

      My Heroes Have always Been Cowboys Thread

      Roger

      April 15, 2014 at 7:25 PM

      J.M. > “Then why have you commented & responded to me, J.M., SO MANY times before & had such nice things to say about me SO MANY times before?”

      I’ve been reading this blog long enough to know this never happened.

      You’re either hallucinating or just plain full of shit, JM.
      ———————————————–
      Since Alfred Adask has given full rein to you Roger to belittle, ridicule, mock,
      screw me sideways, longways & any which way but loose, & call me a liar too,
      what follows are some of the times Roger has responded to me, Jim Madison, aka J.M.
      ————————————————————————————————————————–
      MOOA & Your Adversary

      Roger

      April 5, 2014 at 12:29 AM

      J.M., I have been following MOOA at this blog and I see Toland pursuing a question that seems reasonable. What is wrong with this question? Explain it in simple terms that I can understand please. Accusing Toland of serving Satan because hes looking for the legislature’s definition of “animal” doesnt make sense to me. I’m not interested in what you think his motives are, I only want to know what is wrong with asking this question so a threat like “something BAD is going to happen” is a result.
      ——————————————————————————
      MOOA & Your Adversary

      Roger

      April 5, 2014 at 9:49 AM

      Hello again J.M.

      I am sure Toland knows what HE means by “animal”.

      Toland wants to find out what THE LEGISLATURE that wrote “man or other animals” meant by “animal”?

      What HE means by “animal” and what THE LEGISLATURE meant by animal are obviously different because what HE means by “animal” EXCLUDES man.

      What THE LEGISLATURE meant be “animal” INCLUDES man.

      Please try to grasp this before posting more personal attacks.
      —————————————————————
      MOOA & Your Adversary

      J.M.

      April 5, 2014 at 6:30 PM

      Henry,Sam, Roger,Toland

      @ > J.M. tries to shut down inconvenient speech.

      RIGHT !!! EXACTLY!!! adjective
      adjective: inconvenient causing trouble, difficulties, or discomfort.
      ———————————————————————
      MOOA & Your Adversary

      Roger

      April 5, 2014 at 8:45 PM

      Henry : “J.M. tries to shut down inconvenient speech.”

      J.M. : “RIGHT !!! EXACTLY!!! …”

      Exactly? LOL I’m amazed anyone would admit that. You’d be a model citizen of a Soviet republic where speech that causes “trouble, difficulties, or discomfort” gets shut down on a routine basis.
      ———————————————————————————
      MOOA & Your Adversary

      Roger, do you mean to say I would try to shut down Vladimir
      Putin talking about moral issues & Christian Values,etc.?
      Now you know better than this, naughty naughty naughty Roger.
      ———————————————————————-
      MOOA & Your Adversary

      J.M.

      April 6, 2014 at 12:29 AM

      Roger, Henry, Toland, Sam, et.al

      @Roger
      @April 3, 2014 at 12:58 AM

      @Me personally, I don’t want to criticize. I would like to believe this MOOA theory but first I have to take a look at it. So i don’t understand why the intent of the legislature when they said “animals” is a no go area. Isnt the intent of the legislature a subject we should spend alot of time on?

      Right, I agree. Just try to keep in mind that we only have a limited amount of time on this earth. Any cemetery should give you a possible hint or clue. We have 3 score + – 10
      ——————————————-

      MOOA & Your Adversary

      @> Roger
      @ >April 5, 2014 at 9:49 AM
      @ >Toland wants to find out what THE LEGISLATURE that wrote “man or other animals” meant by “animal”?

      Final suggestion. Contact someone close to you that is in the Legislature. You are supposed to have “Representatives.”

      It is difficult for me to send my response to anyone, at times, when there is no red letter reply button to click on.

      @ > Please try to grasp this before posting more personal attacks.

      I need you to define what attack means, in YOUR mind, not from any dictionary,etc.

      Yours Truly,
      Jim Madison, Jus Sanguinis, Jus Soli, Sui Juris
      aka, J.M.
      ———————————————————————
      MOOA & Your Adversary

      Roger

      April 12, 2014 at 2:56 AM

      Henry,

      Please don’t help make the comment sections of this blog any more pointless and boring than the troll has already succeeded in making them.

      This means please don’t feed the troll by responding to provocations like this one.

      Thanks.

       
      • Roger

        April 17, 2014 at 7:34 AM

        Hey airhead,

        The person who said he does not reply to or even read “comments by the many-times-banned numbnuts Les Fuchs (alias J.M. at the moment)” was Toland, not me. So, as usual, your post is frivolous and without relevance.

        But nice work dropping yet another load of incoherent crap on a thread.

         
    • J.M.

      April 17, 2014 at 9:29 AM

      Roger,

      @ > But nice work dropping yet another load of incoherent crap on a thread.

      Unless you are not the Roger on the MOOA And Your Adversary thread then Most of the incoherent crap IS from you, Roger. If nobody gives a damn about going to the MOOA & Your Adversary thread to check out whether or not what I posted is true & want to side with YOU, Roger, the HE/SHE is just as SORRY as you are. You said you never corresponded with me, The MOOA & Your Adversary thread says otherwise. IF anyone calls me a LIAR & I do not respond this means to me that I am agreeing. I responded. Obviously Alfred Adask ENJOYS you turning me inside out, CROSSWAYS, SIDEWAYS, LONGWAYS, ANY WHICH WAY BUT LOOSE & since Alfred says YOU Roger are the ONLY one who understands his purpose in having this blog, it’s obvious I have no purpose on it. I thought I was speaking in behalf of Alfred. You kept referring to HE. I understood this to mean Alfred, e.g., YOU, Roger, say > “I am sure Toland knows what HE means by “animal”.What HE means by “animal” and what THE LEGISLATURE meant by animal are obviously different because what HE means by “animal” EXCLUDES man.” < SEE I understood this to mean HE, IS Alfred Adask. BUT since it apparently does not, & since you say you have never corresponded with me, CRUEL mental games are allowed too. I believe if you had called Alfred, SWINE, & called him a LIAR, or a FAKE he would have banned you, Roger. BUT since he has allowed you to repeatedly say these things to me, IT"S CLEAR that I have no business on this blog, excuse me, this high quality unique blog as you, Roger call it. I am going to TRY & make one more post to somebody else who called me a liar several times too. That post will probably avail zilch also. But it will clear my tormented conscience BECAUSE I KNOW I TOLD THE TRUTH. However LIARS ARE BELIEVED this day & time. Adios amigo

       
      • Roger

        April 17, 2014 at 9:53 AM

        J.M.

        > “…you say you have never corresponded with me…”

        Still wrong, Les.

        No one said they never corresponded with you.

        Toland said he NO LONGER corresponds with you.

        I never said anything about me personally not corresponding with you. In fact, I am corresponding with you now.

        Reread the above as often as necessary to maintain a grasp of the situation.

        > “I am going to TRY & make one more post to somebody else who called me a liar several times too.”

        Why resent being called a liar, when that’s what you are? Your very presence here is a lie after being banned so many times.

         
    • J.M.

      April 17, 2014 at 8:24 PM

      Roger,

      April 17, 2014 at 9:53 AM

      J.M.

      @ > Still wrong, Les.

      Does this mean I am less wrong, or, less right? Did you inadvertently by mistake forget to add another s ?

       
  7. citizenquasar

    April 15, 2014 at 4:08 AM

    The Bundy affair is NOT over, NOT by a long shot (no pun intended). It is only a matter of time until the government strikes again. Perhaps they will assassinate…uh…Arkancide him. Perhaps the will Blitzkrieg him. IMHO the government will kill Bundy and as many other people as it thinks it can get away with.

    This Harry Reid guy is nothing but a scoundrel, a Mafia don who hires thugs. As it turns out, Harry Reid is the Senate Majority Leader. I did NOT know this. Perhaps this is because, instead of paying attention to who the individual members of Congress are, for years I have not only been calling for a NEW FORM of government as soon as possible but have also suggested on many occasions that the members of Congress, particularly the Senate, be dragged out into the street and hung from the nearest lamp post.

    I think America is rapidly approaching a time when much more aggressive armed resistance will be necessary. I think that this armed resistance will necessarily take the form of Citizens attacking and destroying and occupying government agencies and offices. (For the record: This is NOT a threat and I am NOT engaging in interstate commerce here. I have already been arrested by an FBI SWAT team in full combat dress for posting on the internet and I have NO intention of provoking the same again. Not that they need any provocation.)

    I call it “the Chinese treatment” in remembrance of the many times the Chinese have taken over police stations by force. Or is it “going Greek?” Or is it a la Spain? Russia? Ukraine? Venezuela?…

     
    • J.M.

      April 15, 2014 at 11:17 AM

      @ > It is only a matter of time until the government strikes again.

      You are a non-fictional Sherlock Holmes.

       
    • Ritchard

      April 16, 2014 at 12:02 PM

      I wonder if you could elaborate in more detail on your incident with the FBI swat? I would like to know what was said that triggered the event. It would be interesting to know where threshold is when posting on the internet. The alternative is to be anonymous through an off shore server when posting if it is possible..

       
  8. Frank Moorman

    April 15, 2014 at 4:31 AM

    I liked your essay! It appears, that you may have finally come back on board again Pray that it is over with.

    Frank

     
    • J.M.

      April 15, 2014 at 1:38 PM

      @ > I liked your essay!

      Hey THANKS Frank. I was calling it an article & didn’t “feel” right about using that word, Article, but didn’t know what to use. ESSAY. I like that word. Thanks. I hope it does not disappoint you to know that you helped “me.” I KNOW it disappoints most of the “others.”

       
  9. Yartap

    April 15, 2014 at 11:04 AM

    “Only our own government threatens our rights and freedoms–and it does so every single day.”

    Al, no truer words have been spoken! Thanks.

     
    • J.M.

      April 16, 2014 at 12:31 AM

      Yartap,

      @ > “Only our own government threatens our rights and freedoms–and it does so every single day.”

      Don’t include ME in the OUR.

       
  10. Toland

    April 15, 2014 at 11:42 AM

    “…to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”

    — Declaration of Independence

     
    • J.M.

      April 15, 2014 at 1:20 PM

      @ > Declaration of Independence

      Huh?? What’s that ? Declaration of Independence ???

       
    • Roger

      April 15, 2014 at 2:26 PM

      Toland,

      As you may have noticed, the buffoon is trying to provoke you again. Kindly respect the readers of this blog by declining JM’s latest invitation to a public frot. Please do not feed the troll.

      Thanks.

       
      • J.M.

        April 15, 2014 at 4:16 PM

        Howdy amigos, neighbors,Toland, Roger, et.al.,

        What did you think of the Essay written by Alfred Adask, this one, entitled, My Heroes Have always been Cowboys? Can you comment about this essay from the heart ? I mean anybody can say, Al, one of your BEST ever, in my opinion. What are your thoughts about this Essay, Alfred’s Essay? Are you only able to comment about me? I consider the source TOO. This is why I ask questions like I do. I KNOW what Toland meant in his comment. BUT, WHO CARES ? You don’t want me to sic moon on you, do you ?

         
      • Toland

        April 15, 2014 at 6:43 PM

        I know, Roger.

        I don’t even read comments by the many-times-banned numbnuts Les Fuchs (alias J.M. at the moment). This is one sure way to keep from being drawn into J.M.’s game. Plus, it makes the comment sections of Alfred’s awesome blog fun again.

        Try it, you’ll like it.

        Feed not the troll.

         
      • J.M.

        April 15, 2014 at 11:10 PM

        @ >You’re either hallucinating or just plain full of shit, JM.

        Is this a nice thing to say on this as you call it, high quality unique blog ? Are you so dense & stupid that you cannot see your comments are degrading this high quality unique blog ?

        What do you mean by saying, Please do not feed the troll ? I “see” your & Toland’s comments as insulting Alfred Adask. This is what peeves me off. I saw what happened to Bundy & his followers. Then Toland puts in a comment saying; “…to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…” Declaration of Independence

        Like THIS helped Bundy, et al ??? ANYTHING written in The Declaration of Independence HELPED Bundy ?? I can see Toland LAUGHING when he posted his comment & you TOO..

         
      • J.M.

        April 15, 2014 at 11:24 PM

        @ >J.M. > “Then why have you commented & responded to me, J.M., SO MANY times before & had such nice things to say about me SO MANY times before?”

        Because I was trying to help you. REMEMBER !!! Then when you turn around & insult scriptures I use to SHOW you where Alfred get his information from, & you ridicule this, YOU are not ridiculing ME, YOU are insulting The AUTHOR of The Holy Bible. But that’s ok YOU will answer for it “in time”

         
      • Roger

        April 15, 2014 at 11:40 PM

        The problem you’re having, Les Fuchs (alias J.M.), is that you’re a pompous ass.

        You PRESUME to know what other people mean by what they post. This, in itself, is a minor problem.

        The major problem (for Alfred’s otherwise awesome blog) is that you then waste large amounts of space with long-winded monologues based on your ignorant, simple-minded and INCORRECT presumptions about what other people mean by what they post.

         
      • J.M.

        April 16, 2014 at 12:23 AM

        Roger
        April 3, 2014 at 12:58 AM
        @> Me personally, I don’t want to criticize

        You don’t? Well maybe you, Roger, don’t like to criticize, but you certainly seem to enjoy, well what do you call what is written below from you to Toland. DEFINE IT for me.

        You, Roger, say to, Toland,

        @ > you may have noticed, the buffoon is trying to provoke you again. Kindly respect the readers of this blog by declining JM’s latest invitation to a public frot. Please do not feed the troll.

        I know that which is written below is not criticism, so, how do you DEFINE it, Roger

        @ > The problem you’re having, Les Fuchs (alias J.M.), is that you’re a pompous ass.

        Since you don’t like to criticize, Roger, what is the following DEFINED as;

        @ > You’re either hallucinating or just plain full of shit, JM.

        Roger, you don’t have to define the following. I think I understand what you are saying. I know it’s not criticizing.

        Roger
        April 7, 2014 at 1:17 AM
        J.M.,

        Why do you suppose a frivolous, low content/high volume commenter such as yourself is allowed so much free rein to degrade the tone of this blog all the way down to the wallowing pen with the swine?

        That is, why does Alfred Adask not stop self-indulgent swine like you, who are a-dime-a-dozen on the internet, from driving out intelligent discussion on his uniquely high-quality blog?

        Well jeepers creepers Roger, All I know is this is a uniquely high-quality blog. Comments like yours, Roger, & Toland, & Edoms Thorn, & Henry & a few others make it high quality. & UNIQUE

         
    • J.M.

      April 15, 2014 at 7:04 PM

      @ > I don’t even read comments by the many-times-banned numbnuts Les Fuchs (alias J.M. at the moment).

      Really ?? Then why have you commented & responded to me, J.M., SO MANY times before & had such nice things to say about me SO MANY times before? Remember, when I was trying to help you & your “friend.” I believe when I STOP trying to help people, THEN I will not receive anymore “nice” comments. Only those I have tried to help, turn on me like a poison viper & which ARE most of the people commenting on this blog, which is degrading this blog, by me calling it this blog & not as Roger calls it, this high quality unique blog. It is highly unique but only because, Alfred, & about 2 more commenters have courageous high quality thoughts & expressions to write about.

       
      • Roger

        April 15, 2014 at 7:25 PM

        J.M. > “Then why have you commented & responded to me, J.M., SO MANY times before & had such nice things to say about me SO MANY times before?”

        I’ve been reading this blog long enough to know this never happened.

        You’re either hallucinating or just plain full of shit, JM.

         
  11. EarlatOregon

    April 15, 2014 at 12:12 PM

    .
    .
    .
    .
    .

    Limits of Federal Jurisdiction

    in June 1957,
    the government of the United States published a work entitled:

    Jurisdiction Over Federal Areas Within The States:

    Report of the Interdepartmental Committee for the Study of
    Jurisdiction Over Federal Areas Within the States, Part II,
    .
    .

    Therein, the Committee stated:

    “The Constitution gives express recognition to
    but one means of Federal acquisition of legislative jurisdiction
    by State consent under Article I, section 8, clause 17 ….

    Justice McLean suggested that the Constitution provided the sole mode for transfer of jurisdiction,
    and that if this mode is not pursued, no transfer of jurisdiction can take place,”
    Id., at 41

    “It scarcely needs to be said that unless there has been a
    transfer of jurisdiction
    (1) pursuant to clause 17 by a Federal acquisition of land with State consent,
    or (2) by cession from the State to the Federal Government,
    or unless the Federal Government has reserved jurisdiction upon the admission of the State,
    the Federal Government possesses no legislative jurisdiction over any area within a State,
    such jurisdiction being for exercise by the State,
    subject to non-interference by the State with Federal functions,”
    Id., at 45.

    “The Federal Government cannot, by unilateral action on its part,
    acquire legislative jurisdiction
    over any area within the exterior boundaries of a State … ”
    Id., at 46.

    And in United States v. Benson, 495 F.2d 475, 481 (5th Cir. 1974),
    for a robbery committed at Fort Rucker, the court stated:

    “It is axiomatic that the prosecution must always prove
    territorial jurisdiction over a crime
    in order to sustain a conviction therefor.”

    http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/fedjurisreport.pdf

    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .

     
  12. Jethro

    April 15, 2014 at 3:55 PM

    It’s encouraging to know the government-type critters are RATIONAL. At least for now. Whether their lust for power and dominion over others overrides rationality tomorrow remains to be seen. But for today, reason may prevail against their will, and that’s effective knowledge when dealing with them.

    Great article, Al.

     
    • J.M.

      April 15, 2014 at 6:31 PM

      Jethro,

      @ > It’s encouraging to know the government-type critters are RATIONAL.

      I call it having the sense of a goose. I can’t see anything “RATIONAL” about “them.”

       
  13. Henry

    April 16, 2014 at 7:56 AM

    Since this is a legal theory blog, perhaps a discussion of the legal case is in order.

    For a while Bundy was grazing his cattle on federal land, then the feds evicted him, right? What is the nature of the controversy? What are the theories?

     
    • Adask

      April 16, 2014 at 11:39 AM

      The US government owns half of the land west of the Mississippi. They own the land because it was all territories purchased by the feds. When enough people moved into a particular region and voted to become a State of the Union, that region became a State. The rule is that these new States were admitted into the Union on the same grounds as the original States. Under that rule, the original States owned all of the land within their borders, and every new States should be entitled to do the same. But the federal government decided to keep half or more of the territory within borders of the new States. I’m only guessing, but it’s possible that 80% of the State of Nevada is still owned by the federal government and the “State” itself owns only 20% of the land within its purported borders.

      Cliven Bundy was grazing cattle on land presumably owned by the federal government. But he’s arguing that his family has been grazing cattle on that land for about 140 years (if I understand correctly) and should be allowed to continue as always. His argument is shaky IF we allow that the federal government can own most of land of what should be the State of Nevada.

      But should most (or even any) of the land within the borders of The State of Nevada still remain property of the federal government? The Constitution makes clear that the only way land within a State of the Union can be subject to federal jurisdiction is by the consent of the State’s government. It’s also presumed that any new State entering the Union should enter on equal terms with preexisting States–and that means the new States must also be allowed to own ALL of the land within their borders.

      So, as Bundy has implicitly asked, Who is tresspassing? Is Bundy trespassing on federal land that the Feds have no right to own? Or are the BLM trespassing on land that should belong to The State of Nevada?

      The government will ignore the issue of its own legitimacy of its ownership of the land and probably say they’ve owned that land for so long, it’s theirs by imprescriptible right. But Bundy is saying his family has used that land for 140 years and therefore he has, at least, his own imprescriptible right to use that land.

      So, who’s right and who’s wrong?

      Bundy is not all in the right here.

      But the gov-co’s claim to own any of the land within the borders of The State of Nevada (or Oregon, Washington, California, Alaska, New Mexico, etc. etc. is arguably criminal and tyrannical.

      So, which “side” poses the greater threat to The United States of America: a cowboy grazing 1,000 head of cattle on “public land”–or a government in open violation of the Constitution?

      One other point: Article 3 Section 3 of the Constitution declares that “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” The word “them” is plural and refers back to “United States”. That means that the only treason defined in the Constitution is against the several “United States”–that is, against the several member-States of the perpetual Union styled “The United States of America”.

      Given that definition, it appears that any governmental entity that claims to own land within the borders of a State of the Union without the express consent of that State’s government and people is committing an act of treason. Insofar as that governmental entity backs its claim on the the State’s land with guns and soldiers, that governmental entity would seem to be clearly “levying war” on one or more of the States of the Union.

      It appears to me that a case could be made that the BLM is committing treason in its assault on Bundy and on The State of Nevada.

       
      • J.M.

        April 16, 2014 at 2:11 PM

        Adask,

        @ >Bundy is not all in the right here.

        ALL in the right ? Morally speaking, he IS all in the right based upon my understanding.

        Nevada became the 36th state on October 31, 1864,

        James Madison had included provisions for equality in admittance of the new States in the first draft of the Constitution:

        “If admission be consented to, new states shall be admitted on the same terms with the original states.”

        Nevada became the 36th state on October 31, 1864, as the second of two states added to the Union during the Civil War (the first being West Virginia).

        The 14th WAR Amendment was unconstitutionality ratified as IS proven by the of Judge L.H. Perez but as you, Alfred Adask said before, “We have been SCREWED.

        The 14th Amendment Is Unconstitutional – Judge L.H. Perez. It is difficult to emphasize strongly enough, the importance of this memorandum written by him

         
      • Lyndon

        April 16, 2014 at 4:29 PM

        Greetings Alfred:

        The administrations aka “FEDERAL or STATE Governments” may never “own” land. The man and woman acting as “FEDERAL or STATE Governments” have no proprietorship in anything they control while they are acting as “Government”. Furthermore, a relationship such as “Government” cannot own a tangible thing such as land. A relationship cannot “own” anything. The man and woman merely acting as “Government” are man and woman whose role is merely to protect the property of man and woman who do not act as “Government”: those man and woman who do not act as “Government” are known as “The People”.

        Man and woman acting as “Government” exist only as trustees of The People. A trustee’s role is to protect something placed in the trustees possession. Occasionally The People are the grantor’s of this trust, except no State or Federal Government is expressly entrusted. The only trust is implied, therefore the trust is weak at best.

        If Cliven is a man, and says he is a man, and if Bundy has not harmed The People’s land, then Cliven, a man of The People, has the use of common land as much as any other man, and the trustees are interfering with his use of common land. I doubt Cliven’s property (the cattle) are harming the common land of The People.

        Anyone may forward this post to Cliven if they know where to reach him. I hope trustees that read this will better understand who they are and what they are rightfully to be doing. There is no need for anyone to fight over this matter.

        Best to all,

        Lyndon

         
  14. J.M.

    April 16, 2014 at 6:09 PM

    @ > Man and woman acting as “Government” exist only as trustees of The People.

    Ohhh ok. Then what we, or some of us SEE, is only an illusion. When will your book be available? Maybe you have not finished writing it. Please keep us up to date on your book & the progress you are making. When you have finished writing your book, if not finished, will you give the price?
    I know many others want to know, so be concerned for them so if your book is at a high price, they can start saving up what it will cost,i.e., the price, of your book.

     
  15. J.M.

    April 16, 2014 at 8:43 PM

    I grew up a-dreamin’ of bein’ a cowboy,
    And Lovin’ the cowboy ways.
    Pursuin’ the life of my high-ridin’ heroes,
    I burned up my childhood days.
    I learned of all the rules of the modern-day drifter,
    Don’t you hold on to nothin’ too long.
    Just take what you need from the ladies, then leave them,
    With the words of a sad country song.
    My heroes have always been cowboys.
    And they still are, it seems.
    Sadly, in search of, but one step in back of,
    Themselves and their slow-movin’ dreams.

    Cowboys are special with their own brand of misery,
    From being alone too long.
    You could die from the cold in the arms of a nightman,
    Knowin’ well that your best days are gone.
    Pickin’ up hookers instead of my pen,
    I let the words of my years fade away.
    Old worn-out saddles, and ‘old worn-out memories,
    With no one and no place to stay.

    My heroes have always been cowboys.
    And they still are, it seems.
    Sadly, in search of, but one step in back of,
    Themselves and their slow-movin’ dreams.

    Sadly, in search of, but one step in back of,
    Themselves and their slow-movin’ dreams.

    Yes, they are slow movin but it’s better than having nothin to hold on to or dream about.
    These slow moving dreams will soon become reality when the night is over.
    Looking back over my life, it seems like it was no more than a month or so ago
    It is written that we cannot understand the things that God has waiting for those who love him
    ONE thing I KNOW of is the peace of heart & mind that passes all understanding. I was blessed with this for 3 days & nights, many years ago. It was his way of letting me know of ONE thing that IS in store & some who make it will have this “peace” for eternity. It was the most beautiful thing I have ever known in my life. I wish I knew how to describe this peace to you, but I cannot even begin too but that in itself is more than enough if there was nothing more in store, but there IS more than this awaiting. wow.

     
  16. Peter

    April 17, 2014 at 10:20 AM

    U.S. inc. is a colony of CHINA inc. soon to be realized by the ones in the know and then possibly to the uncircumcised masses caught up with there FACEBOOK entries and high school social cliks 20 years removed from High School.

    China inc. pays their prolitariot with the same paper instruments as the U.S. inc. pays its prolitariot.
    It is entirely possible that when the dollar devaluation is fully implemented that the wages in the U.S.corporate structure will be at parity to that of China inc.and quite possible lower.

    As I has mentioned before, I do work in the USEconomy and do see the transformation underway. Management is in a panic, slashing hours and expecting more productivity out of the wage-earners. Anyone else out there see this? The most disheartening aspect of the whole situation is the consumers, customer, animals dont have a clue and still expect the same level of service as if everthing is O.K.. I equate it to the picture of the Soviet grocery counters under the social comunist facist business models in place in the past that depict lines out the door and one salami hanging on the hook. This what I see unfolding, abiet in its early stages gathering momentum.

    There aren’t going to be many business’s that survive what’s coming and/or underway. Thank the good Lord He let’ me see things.

    I remember some years ago a wise man told me that his grandfather told him that one day you would go down the road and there would be many, many people on the side of the road with a small box with all their possessions in it . He said you can not help them for there will be far to many of them. This is now present , they just arent on the side of the road. I told him in a similar vein that with my understanding of facts and truths it would be futile to try to teach them anything because there were to many of them and under mass mind control, and being like Pavlov’s dog salivating for the lies spewed out by the mainstream sources, and any truth told is a conspiracy theory.

    Slave labor wages are here, are there any wage earnes out there that see this starting?

    The price of gold and silver are going into a parabolic move that should handsomely reward all those that have sought safety and refuge in those assets, the only problem and concern I have is what the world is gonna be like when we get to that point.

    I wonder if there was anyone around in A.D. 1477 when the bear market in silver started thought that it would bottom in A.D. 2000. If it’s entirely possible we get to purchase an asset that has been in a bear market for approximately 525 years.

     
    • J.M.

      April 17, 2014 at 11:10 PM

      Peter,
      @ > I wonder if there was anyone around in A.D. 1477 when the bear market in silver started thought that it would bottom in A.D. 2000.

      BOY, !!! I don’t know but I think it is CRITICAL that we find out & as QUICKLY as POSSIBLE.This is probably the missing key. THANK YOU PETER for having the depth of perception to consider this. I am a little jealous of you. DARN IT. I should have thought of this,not you.lol

       
  17. Peter

    April 20, 2014 at 11:13 AM

    The Bundy standoff may be further evidence of the collapsing system.
    Given that indicator of the Fascist Business Model’s tyrannical oppression against all asset classes, stocks, bonds, productive land etc.. It’s just another signal.

    Silver have may be in a long down cycle and catching it at these lows off of a 500+ year bear market may be very rewarding going forward.

    The F.B.M. is forcing investors to look for safety in silver and gold life rafts. The amounts of flight capital is mind boggling and the few alternatives available even more mind boggling.

    I continue to believe the markets are reflecting a correct price and illustrating true price discovery despite the argument of manipulation. I wonder if we’ve been in a 500+ year cycle of manipulation? It’s like saying someone can control the rising and the setting sun. We may be in the early stages of at least a retracement rally to the true price due to 500+ years of market manipulation via paper artifices.

    Take the time to look at a 500 year chart , every picture tells a story.

    In the media feeds of the Bundy situation I did not see any of the cowboys wearing pink tennis shoes. Some cowboys were pink tennis shoes so that they aren’t presumed to be truck drivers
    ha.

     
  18. James Nicholas

    April 21, 2014 at 5:14 PM

    Are we falling for another false flag? What do I care if a ‘welfare cowboy’ can’t pay his bill to Uncle Sammy? Bullocks!! If this is even remotely credible as a relevant story, it’s Mr. Bundy’s private affair, via a private contract with the U.S. Gov., is it not?? How much welfare green has he accepted from U.S. Gov/Co as a rancher? Those of us who are paying bills want to know! But I already know where his greenbacks will end up when he sells his cattle and it won’t be his pocket.

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s