A trial Forgotten??? Ryan Bundy's opening statement a must read!!!!

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: loveguy

Since when does the government negotiate with terrorists who orcastrate armed take overs of federal property????

Lincoln didn’t negotiate with the confederate traitors when they did that either...

You could have bothered to read the OPs link, might have got some education in the process.
Tell me, who owns State land.

Never mind, I already know.

I've only followed the Bundy case at a distance, gleaming small bits from the nightly news and such.

I'm also in general sympathetic to those standing up government over each. Not to a fault, but I am open minded about it.

With that said I read about 3/4ths of the opening statement linked to in the OP and I have to conclude the case is lost. I could not understand what he was trying to say; his ramblings where to disjointed to make out what his defense will be.

Sure ... state rights... water rights from 1843 ... his family bought a wagon and a horse and maybe a cow ... big deal. His message here made him sound like the loney people who try to get out of a speeding ticket because their sovereign citizen.

To be clear, as I said earlier I don't know enough about the case to say whether he is one of these loony people; what I am saying his opening statement did not convince me that he isn't. He will need to do better than that if he wants to win this case.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

How in the F you consider the federal government a slave master, but the state government A OK , just blows my freaking mind..

Fact is there ARE two jurisdictions ... both Federal and State. And it still means something. Property rights is one such issue where states rights / the right of the people are being trampled upon. I am not advocating for one system over another. I am only mentioning what is at stake in an historical context. But that seems lost on you.

Every nonesense traffic ticket, code enforcement, exc I have ever gotten, has come from the state..

Really? And you simply paid up? And how many people would agree with you? And how did you organize a repeal of said overreach? That simply goes to show that states is also .gov, man and you are their Bitch, their salve, their milk cow.

Where does that leave us? To consider that .gov overreach must be pushed back, whether, local, state, federal. So smaller government, bringing it back to the roots. We agree there. Now what are you going to do to end the long train of abuse?

See, the US is slipping on all freedom monitors. It is easy to compare the country with some dictatorship, like Zimbabwe for instance during the Mugabe period. It would be more beneficial to compare it with the real peers, EU, New Zeeland, Australia. So, you are simply trying to float an argument that has no bearing.

Relatively Benign? Seriously. I almost spilled my wine for laughing. Come on, you are not going to tell me you are falling for this cop out. With such reasoning: Stalin killed more people than Pol Pot so Pol Pot is relatively benign and Mao Zedong is less benign than Stalin because Mao killed more people than Stalin.

Don't you see how buying into this kind of crap enslaves your mind? I was, when I called you a .gov slave, not relating to for instance a sex slave in Islamic world, or a slave on a plantation. No, I was calling you a slave in relation to slavery to substances. That is an enslavement of the brain. It is funny how a persons own perspective bears on what is being written.

For instance, I wrote questions concerning certain actual matters. Clearly you did not carefully read or contemplate them, given your response that I would be spouting conspiracy. I did not. I posed you questions. Had you read and contemplated them carefully, you would have noticed a few things other than the crap you espoused. Dude, lighten up!

You proof reed nothing but spout:

Lincoln didn’t negotiate with the confederate traitors when they did that either...

You clearly are a case of twisted panties ....

Your rights mister Yankee, are connected to your person. Because you have a brain, you have the right to self determination. Because you have a tongue, you have the right to speak your mind. Because you have legs, you have the right to travel. You have the right of inviolable body. To be secure in your person and papers. the right to due process. Rights to property. Your rights do not arise from any government. They arise with you.

Now whether or not you can enjoy those rights, depends on how hard you wish to defend them. Not only for yourself, but for others too. What are you willing to give? Would you suffer imprisonment for standing up for those basic rights? Would you pledge your life, your fortune, your honor for that cause?

Where do you draw a line in the sand , a red line. Not an obama red line, that has no meaning. But a redline where you will be saying: I am going to fight for my right! I am not going to sit idly by?

Because we are a civil society, we reciprocally respect each others rights. We may have an opinion about for instance what we write here, but that is a good thing, yes? Not so with .gov. When you try to hide something under the guise of privilege, .gov already knows thanks to it's spying programs. Now turn the shoe onto the other foot. Spy on the .gov. ... hahaha, let's count in seconds how quick you are blackbagged by one of the numerous alphabet agencies and find yourself in some secure non descript facility to get informed about being arrested under the provisions of the patriot act.

This is not about left or right. This is about being free or not. This is about enslavement.... the process of becoming a slave or liberty. And it starts with the mind.