Sugar land swat standoff Videos

+oblong you are right. we are now going to need to form anti militia militia ! 

+panzerken what a bunch of ninnies.

+Frank Black I think we need a well armed militia to protect us from these well armed militia. you see the irony?This just pisses me off. Just will show you what a bunch of lame christians will do to get attention and power like little babies.

+Frank Black  Backround checks trample the 2nd? Oh pleeeeease!

Exactly!

+iinRez How about the citizens of the country that want them gone?  Do they not have rights?  They closed down all the schools the other day because people don't feel safe.  That's justified so 20 ranchers can steal wildlife refuge and use it for profit? 

+iinRez You can write a book if you wan't but I consider them terrorists in every form.  What other protests have ever involved guns to make a statement?  By your logic a threat is not a threat untill it has killed you.  As long as i just take what ever I wan't in society It's fine as long as they don't step in my way and I have to kill them.  They are using intimidation and saying they are willing to die for their political demands.  I live in this country.  How are they not stealing from me?  I like birds and conservation.  This is about good ol boy privilege.  "Just give me what I wan't and I won't have to kill you."  Sounds real peaceful and patriotic man.  these people are scum

+jjhollier AS for my comments on the police resting ones hand on their firearm suggests they may draw it, and point it at you. That is a threat of potential violence. But it is justified in the peoples eyes and not considered "terrorizing", one party is the law, one party is lawless. The same logic applies to the militias, the right to bare arms is a guarantee that a government cannot rule absolutely and dictate to the people of the United States. We the People(States) with the constitution are the law of the land, the federal government has broken law.These militia men may have jumped the gun and did something stupid, but the principle of their dissent is not one of terrorism it is one of patriotism.

+jjhollier They didn't use guns to seize anything, they merely broke into an empty building. This is the difference I am trying to make apparent, to call a person a terrorist suggests they have actively committed a brutal and violent act or incited terror. In the publics eyes that equates them with ISIS types, and that is an extreme conclusion to be made and hurts the image of all militia's across the nation (which strongly oppose Bundy's move by the way). The term terrorist is being carelessly thrown around at any form of dissent and it's a dangerous thing to allow. Yes these individuals say they will defend their lives if attacked, but other than that they have been peaceful and calm in there dissent. This can be dealt with by a peaceful means the law needn't enter with tear gas and guns drawn as that will incite a violent situation and turn these men into terrorists. Look this is a sticky situation but these folks honestly feel like they may be in danger and the government is being unjust and unconstitutional, so they brought arms.That is a right of the people if you've forgotten -to challenge the federal government if it is deemed tyrannical. This is the reason for the 2nd Amendment. Whether these militia men are justified or if it was even an appropriate move is another matter.But to immediately paint them as terrorists diminishes the power of the people to form a well regulated militia in a time of true tyranny. That is a danger to liberty and the constitution, these guys certainly messed up but they are not terrorists if you look at what they're doing in the context of Constitutional law. The line between terrorism and patriotism is quite thin but it is there and it is important to keep the definitions straight. Generalizing convolutes reality, things are not black and white, this or that they are very complicated.

+iinRez I'm confused by you saying "threatens violence during a peaceful traffic stop." and how that statments seem conflicting but I'll bite. If i haven't done anything wrong then them violently handcuffing me is certainly an abuse of their power.  The difference here is that these people have done something wrong. They have used weapons to seize federally owned wildlife habitat.  Would you have everyone believe that using weapons and threats that you would die defending that land is not a hostile act?  I sure think it is.  If you came into my house and said you own it now, but you're not going to kill me unless I attack you.  I would think that's a hostile act.

+jjhollier The USE of violence. Nothing violent has happened. They have only proclaimed they will defend them selves if attacked. When a police officer violently handcuffs you, or threatens violence by putting their hand on their gun during a peaceful traffic stop is that an act of terrorism?

ter·ror·ismˈterəˌrizəm/Submitnounthe use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.That's the definition.  How do they not fit it?  Especially the use of Arms and verbally telling them they would use force.  Is that not intimidation?  Is a terrorist not a terrorist until they have killed someone?

+jjhollier The vernacular "Extremist" and correlating the militia's with domestic Terrorism. No violence has been threatened by these guys.

+iinRez How?

+chris stuckey 3 hunters and Hammonds own Nephew testified they saw him do it. Sorry you are so misinformed.

+Carol Lee Bills This week, the House and Senate Armed Services Committees quietly attached a provision to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would mandate the handover of a large tract of Tonto National Forest to Resolution Copper, a subsidiary of the Australian-English mining company Rio Tinto, which co-owns with IRAN a uranium mine in Africa and which is 10-percent-owned by China. SHARED LINK ABOVE!

+Bill King you are a retard i hope you get better

I disagree with that I think they would be left alone seeing that this president has allowed all these Muslims into this country and the blacks left to rape pillage and plunder

Im neither right wing or left wing sir I fail to see your point.

Or different opinions or ways of thinking?

Bill, Muslims and Black Lives Matter are more apt to violence than someone who follows the Constitution of the United States. This is not a site for left wing Communists.

so is that what you do is to make something racist.instead of fighting for everyone as a whole .just push the racial divide more .last time I looked the oath keepers stand up for all peaceful actions and are as mixed in race as the population is.

i dont need to point out the racist propaganda bullshit you are spewing...its obvious...

+propagandapolicia That is how you debate come on how about a comment on the subject

+Bill King hey bill king....shut the fuck up....

+Nikkolo Makaveli i dont believe that buddy,blm were aloud to burn rob and destroy a whole city,(just give them there space) is what the black lady mayor said.and as far as muslims go,we have been lied to about most of there terrorist acts too,including trying to hide identitys of the sanbardino terrorist for as long as they could,even thow the whole country new the muslims did it . multiple cases of muslim terrorism like fort hood being portraid as work place violence,win clearly it was terrorism win the man was yellin allah okbar while he killed unarmed soldiers.

TY good sir.

Spot on

+Nikkolo Makaveli I don't think so not really and you will have to forgive me as I'm typing on a cell phone. There's no prejudice or malice in these words just stating facts that if a movement is predominantly Black or Muslim\ Arab or any minority for that matter then police response and or abuse is increased and the media outlook and reception is almost guaranteed to be negative. I'm not saying go out and discriminately attack white people, that would be a prejudiced statement.

+Nikkolo Makaveli racial injustice does exist. But making every single thing "if white people..., but if black people...." is fueling the fire. 

No pretending racial injustice doesn't exist won't extinguish racism sir by addressing the issues we work our way through the problem. Sir I'm not the problem you are.

+Bill King who says there aren't Muslims there? and there ARE black people there. Stop making everything about race, you are part of the problem.

+Bill King Very true it's unfortunate that credibility is given and taken by looks and appearances not actions or reasons.

+blueyed sissy He didn't take a stand, he made a complete ass out of himself and set himself up

+VikingPreparedness You got a federal government that operates illegally.

+sun Tao It was NOT a drone. It was a small airplane.

+sun Tao I did in my latest vid here:  https://youtu.be/vs3EP7m4rAg  If you subscribe, you will get them all.

+hawknives Does this LOOK like a 501c3 church?   https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCR8rQYOrUrungyRJko8FCrQ/videos

+btbell85 As for the coffee creamer... It was requested for the coffee the Harney county residents drink who are visiting the occupants on a daily basis. One guy has been seen in camo. Blaine Cooper, aka Stanly Blaine Hicks. Pete Santili walks around in camo, but he is PRESS. What are you doing to honor your oath to defend the Constitutional rights of Americans against domestic enemies?

+someusguysmusic If you don't want to stick out, don't seize and hold public property by force of arms.

+someusguysmusic It is a complicated concept.  When working at lower to middle levels - uniformity and professionalism go hand in hand.  Compare and contrast a modern army with a band run by an African Warlord.  When those warlords progress to the point they are putting their folks all in uniform (don't get hung up on Africa - consider FARC here) you see a definite uptick in professionalism.  Now compare and contrast a modern army (say the US Army) with that nation's Special Operations Forces - they many times are not "uniform" and yet everyone recognizes they have progressed beyond that.  Like I said, it is complicated.  NOw as to you - keep your comments polite or you will not be making them here any longer.

+NewJerseyMilitia Oh Come ON NOW! You dang well know I am RIGHT!  You was slobbering all over yourself every time Bush gave one of his DRUNKEN addresses to the nation.Fact Liberals will correct all the mistake the Republican Party made. You hate Liberals because it is fashionable to hate them and blame all the problems on NIGGERS and SPICS. Be honest with yourself tell the TRUTH!

+NewJerseyMilitia Ya I know how you feel. When Bush got his first term I was curious. When he got his second term I told everyone he was going to destroy this country. I wish like hell I was wrong.  NOW, here is the part that just kills me. You and others like you was in full support of Bush. Everyone tried to tell you 911 was a hoax, PATRIOT Act was going to take your guns and Homeland Security was the first step is stripping away all your freedom. You was right there with Bush shouting down all the non-believers. You hate Liberals because they tried to tell you where we was heading. You hated Bill Clinton because he slept with all kinds of women but you ignored Bush's in house lover Jeff Gannon. "Dennis Hastert is just a great guy and those Libs are making it all up"----come on that is what you was saying.  Larry Craig, Mark Foley and hundred of immoral republican bastards but Wild Bill Clinton slept around and he is worse than all of them put together?  Are you seeing the problem with your thinking? First step in healing is YOU have to admit YOU have a huge problem of ignoring the truth!

+NewJerseyMilitia Looks like you are going to be in distress for a LOOOONG TIMME! 

+NewJerseyMilitia And for Christ sake, fix that flag of yours. The hell are you a GOD Damned NAZI? 

+NewJerseyMilitia I am sorry that you are just another duped FOOL.  

+NewJerseyMilitiaI honor only one flag an that is the flag of the United States of America. This is the only flag in the world that truly symbolizes freedom. My family and my fellow American's families have fought and died for this flag. We drape this flag over the coffins of our fallen soldiers. There is no other flag that will ever take it's place. My allegiance and my soul belongs to the flag of the United States of America.The Confederate flag was and still is about slavery. It is a symbol of treason and no amount of justification will make it something else. It is the flag of injustice and disunity. It should not be afforded a place of honor, and it should have no appeal to those of us who call ourselves Americans.The Confederacy gone and it should be buried in the past and only remembered in the history books. To glorify their treason is an act of treason.

+NewJerseyMilitia Agree.

+NewJerseyMilitia OK. Try and tell me you was fighting for our constitutional rights during the Bush years.I take offense to your ICON.  

“So now I’m looking at going to prison for exercising my rights and they are charging me for something that’s not lawful.”When the Sheriff asked what he plans to do, Anderson said, “I hoping for a miracle. I mean, I believe God put us here and we’ve seen a lot of signs of that this is going to wake America up. And I guess I hope that the people stand strong enough that it forces their hand and the people that are corrupt have to pay the price, not innocent people that are standing up to point that corruption out.”Anderson feels as if the FBI does not want a peaceful resolution.“If we don’t stand up till the end on this–then why did we come here in the first place.”

+Preps EtceteraWhy the Government Owns So Much Land in the WestBy QUOCTRUNG BUI and MARGOT SANGER-KATZ JAN. 5, 2016Inside169 CommentsContinue reading the main story Federal AgencyBureau Of Land ManagementNational Park ServiceForest ServiceFish and WildlifeAdvertisementContinue reading the main storyContinue reading the main story Share This PageEmailShareTweetSavemoreContinue reading the main storyContinue reading the main storyThe United States government owns 47 percent of all land in the West. In some states, including Oregon, Utah and Nevada, the majority of land is owned by the federal government. Of course, it used to own nearly all of it.And that remaining ownership and management of large tracts of forest and grazing lands is the core of the problem for antigovernment protesters in Oregon. They have taken over a federal building, the latest in a long history of fights between the government and Western settlers about how the lands should be used.How did the federal government get the land?The history of federal land ownership has been largely one of divestiture and public use, not acquisition. As the United States expanded across the continent, it did so by purchasing or taking the land that became new states. (Among the groups it took land from were Native Americans.)Continue reading the main storyRelated CoverageProtesters in Oregon Seek to End Policy That Shaped WestCautious Response to Armed Oregon ProtestWhat We Know About the Standoff in OregonOver time, it transferred land to state governments and individuals, largely through homesteading and land grants, which allowed farmers to procure parcels of land for agricultural use. The government also tended to allow free use of unclaimed lands by ranchers and others, though there were skirmishes over the years when settlers tried to fence in public land or claimed land in Indian territories.That strategy worked well in the Midwest, where very little land remains in federal hands. East of the Mississippi, for example, the federal government owns only 4 percent of land.But in the 11 states in the West (including New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming and Montana, and not counting Alaska), a combination of geography and politics slowed things down.“The whole disposal system sort of hits a speed bump,” said Patricia Limerick, a history professor and director of the Center of the American West at the University of Colorado.The many mountainous, arid and difficult-to-reach tracts of land in the West simply weren’t attractive to farmers. Settlers claimed the few valleys where farming was feasible and built towns. The only thing most of the remaining land was good for was grazing, but cattle ranchers and sheep herders needed large tracts of land to feed their livestock, not the smaller parcels they could claim through homestead policies.More recently, federal law eliminated homesteading and set up more formal systems for management of the remaining land.Continue reading the main storyWhich Federal Agency Controls the Most Land?In Millions of AcresBureau Of Land ManagementForest ServiceFish and Wildlife ServiceNational Parks System247.3m192.9m89.1m79.6mBureau Of Land ManagementForest ServiceFish and Wildlife ServiceNational Parks System247.3m192.9m89.1m79.6mSource: Congressional Research ServiceIsn’t the government protecting that land?As conservation became a more important public policy goal, and politicians became concerned about substantial corruption involved in earlier land sales, efforts to hand over large tracts of federal land slowed. Some land was set aside for parks, wilderness and conservation.Much of the 247 million acres managed by the Bureau of Land Management is available for leases to ranchers seeking grass for their cattle and to companies that extract minerals or oil. The Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon, where Ammon Bundy and his supporters have occupied a building this week, is set aside as conservation land, where no development can take place. The federal land in Nevada that was central to Cliven Bundy’s 2014 dispute with federal officials was available for grazing to cattlemen willing to pay a lease fee, but with restrictions meant to protect the endangered desert tortoise.AdvertisementContinue reading the main storyAdvertisementContinue reading the main storyWhy are there cattle grazing on it?Continue reading the main storyRecent CommentsIowadebtJanuary 6, 2016"Wounded Knee" has nothing to do with Cliven, Ammon, or Ryan Bundy's revisionist self-aggrandizing constitutional selfishness. There is a...CeeTeeJanuary 6, 2016These white men with guns who have taken over OUR building should be arrested for taking over OUR building.They forget that the federal...801avdJanuary 6, 2016Faced with this story and the pictures and histories of these "occupiers" who, lets face it, are only still standing because of their skin...See All CommentsIn the early 1900s, cattle farming became a speculative boom because farmers realized that the federal government was basically giving away a valuable free commodity: grass. This quickly became a problem that economists call the “tragedy of the commons.” Everyone was allowed to let cattle graze the millions of acres of public grass. Ranchers, local officials and lawmakers got together and created a law called the Taylor Grazing Act, which effectively created a federal body called the Division of Grazing to manage the grazing of these lands.So, why the anger?Grumbling about federal control of local lands is nothing new. But research from the Government Accountability Office and the Congressional Research Service suggests that the federal government is a decent, if inflexible, landlord. Compared with private owners, it tends to charge lower rents for grazing and mining permits.Some of the land could be sold to individuals, and some has been — the government has sold hundreds of thousands of acres in the last 25 years. But that probably won’t help the protesters. “The ranchers couldn’t afford to buy these lands anyway,” said John Freemuth, a professor of public policy at Boise State University, who studies land-use policy.In recent years, Congress has considered legislation to transfer ownership of public lands from federal hands into state control. Advocates say that state ownership would be more responsive to the preferences of the people who wish to use the land.Continue reading the main story Write A CommentBut studies have established that there would be substantial administrative costs for states if they took over. And the federal government transfers a lot of its leasing revenue back to states to compensate for the taxes the states might have collected if the land were in private hands. If they owned the land, the states would have to collect rents and administer permits themselves.An economic study from Utah in 2012 found that taking over land management would cost the state government a substantial sum: $275 million a year.It may turn out that if the states own it, the ranchers will just be angry at another level of government for a different set of reasons.

+Lou Montanathe poll is halfway down to the right. as far as dem or repub goes, i could care less. in the western states, the feds control 70% of the land mass and that isn't a republican thing, it's liberal democrats..

+Preps Etcetera couldn't find it. Because I am richer than you I get 50 votes to your one (just to let you know how republicans want it).

+thatguy Do you believe the cops were justified in shooting Lavoy Finicum? Cast your vote. The poll is on the right hand side halfway down. //www.ktvz.com/

+Thomas PaineThis whole fight started during the Bush years.  These people are fucking BUMS!

+Thomas PaineThey have done nothing for no one but themselves. They simply wanted more free shit from the tax payers.

+Thomas PaineYou didn't mind during the Bush years, why now?

+thatguy Thank you for your post. I can truly appreciate what you wrote!

One word is all that is necessary to describe the sorry state of affairs in America (the world) today, that word is GREED. Today greed surpasses all understanding, and, that's the idea. Greed is actually defined as "terrorism" or anti-this or that, or patriotism or a lack of it. Greed is firmly implanted is all aspects of our lives.What have learned nothing since 911? If nothing else, we have learned greed. Greed has overwhelmed of those in high places. Presidents and Congresses, the American legal system, the media's talking heads, the preachers and the school teachers...just about every person in America is consumed with greed; consumed to the point of being totally corrupted.With each Republican President we get a new burst of greed and more shunning of our responsibilities to hour fellow man. Greed has twisted our values and degraded us as human beings. Greed is destroying the core values that makes men responsible. Bernie Sanders flies coach.+Thomas Paine

+Thomas PaineIt is all about Greed and money.

+Thomas Paine Most of Montana is privately held. Most of Montana is fenced. You can hardly step out of your car without a sign shouting at you "Private Property, KEEP OUT".

+Thomas PaineYou live in the city. What the hell does it matter to you? The Bureau of Land Management is to keep idiots from controlling and destroying the land of the people. Take a look at Montana. You can hardly access the mountain because everything is privately owned and fenced. Deer and Elk hunting has become nearly impossible. Everything is owned by some rich guy who lives out of state. 

+Thomas PaineYou sure enjoy the benefits of what Liberals have done.

+Thomas PaineYou are the mind of conservatives.

+Thomas PaineYou sure have a fixation with men's ass.

+Lou Montana Uh, LOU?  As I said before, Thomas Paine has left the building, you were feeding a troll (never good), now you are talking to a wall.  Keep it positive, keep it focused on the video, please.  Thanks.  PJF

+Lou Montana  Thomas Paine has left the building and will not be back.  Carry on.

+Lou MontanaLMAO! That's not an argument. Bring it on ya mental midget.

+oucanemailmePartner you are way out of your league here.

+Thomas PaineHey dumbass, I was talking about Lou's relative's land not Oregon.

IDK obviously. Maybe there are no mineral deposits to give away to cronies. Maybe the land has little value to the feds. Does the BLM burn the land there? Anyone that has a legal relationship with fedgov, receiving "benefits" has no right to a remedy in the courts. see USvBabcock... These courts are all administrative courts under Article I, under the executive...

My Uncle has a ranch in Jordon Vally, a hundred miles from this Oregon stand off. He runs twelve hundred head of beefers mostly brown angus. He leases 4000 acres from the government and has never had one problem.  Now why do these people have such a hard time?+oucanemailme

+Thomas PaineFUNNY!   My Uncle has a ranch in Jordon Vally, a hundred miles from this Oregon stand off. He runs twelve hundred head of beefers mostly brown angus. He leases 4000 acres from the government and has never had one problem.  Now why do these people have such a hard time?

+Thomas PaineYou are ranting like a city girl.

+Ben Clark constitution.i2i.org/tag/enclave-clause/

+Thomas PaineLet me guess, you live in the suburbs?

The purpose of government is to enable the people of a nation to live in safety and happiness. Government exists for the interests of the governed, not for the governors.  ~ Thomas Jefferson+Thomas Paine

+Thomas Paine uh !, good, Thomas Paine is sarcastic too, good! :) i dont agree with you though, people tends to think so, but i am not sure about that, in fact i fear the contrary

+Thomas Paine Thomas, sorry you should stop watching CNN 

+thatguyOh boy, you got all the answers. Thank God you are on our side.

+Lou Montana well, apparently they did

+thatguy Ryan Payne and John Jon Ritzheimer are racist and black history revisionist. The carry around a special version of the Constitution. The read from this as if its literally the law of the land. C R A Z Y

+Lou Montana Also everyone in the state would have it for free. It would be public property owned by the lawful party, the state. I see some talk about rich men. Successful people are not the enemy. The enemy is corporatism, and lawless government. These rich men you seek shelter from pay the politician you run to for protection.Our president makes 500,000 a year. Most politicians making over 100,000.The "Rich man" is rich cause people want need and like there services and product and give them money for them. The politicians are rich by making under handed deals with corporations and taking your money rather you like it or not.  

+Lou Montana First thing is to stop wild fires you set a backfire  that's why those ranchers are in jail setting a backfire to stop the wild fire. Secondly it doesn't take billions of dollars to take care of a forest. It was there long before we came. All of the things can easily be handled by the states. In many cases are.   

+mike fitzhugh Two Thumbs UP!!

+Ben Clark what guys ben?

+Lou Montana well you know what those ranchers need advocates. They are outnumbered. Eastern Oregon is mostly populated with people that work for the government so that puts the ranchers in a shitty spot. We're fucking sick of the feds ignoring the law of the land. They backburn alk the time and often those burns jumo to private property. But the feds dont even hold themselves acountable. And secondly the constitution states very clearly that the feds only own 10 square miles of d.c. and they can take over forts and ports if the state succeeds from the union. What we are doing it's completely legal.

+thatguy So who is going to fund the care of this land, who will pay the billions in costs to fight fire?Biggest ranchers will have free use while the small guy pays all the fees.

I can't say what they are. I don't know them. What i do Know is the historical founding of this nation, it's founding laws and the mind frame of the men who created this nation. No matter what is said about who they are, or how they live. The government is breaking the law. It has no power to own any land other than forts and docks. It also has authority over territories. It is not permitted to own any land within the boards of the U.S. Each state is considered sovereign. So once a territory petitions to become a state it is no longer under the authority of the fed. It's called Equal footing. Each territory that becomes a state has the same rights as the first 13 which is outlined in the declaration of independence. So whether these men are welfare slackers or inbred hillbillies, or aliens from a galaxy far far away. It doesn't change the fact that the federal government is acting outside of Law.              

+thatguy They are self-serving entitlement bums.

oh i get it left wing, right wing. This has everything to do with law and order. Nothing to do with some party. These guys aren't twisting anything. Article 1 section 8 clause 17 states the only land that can owned by the fed is 10 square miles for washington D.C and what land is allotted to them by the states in order to maintain a military presents.  The fifth amendment protects us from being tried twice. The fed broke both of these laws. 

What a load of bullshit.  This bullshit gets so old as these anarchist nuts continue to twist the U.S. Constitution.  It's time to take our country back from the extremist right wing anarchists and start applying law and order to the system.

+Lou Montana And if you don't you can expect to lose what liberties you have left. Jefferson said "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants alike." I agree with this guy here if your gonna do it, go in prepared. Yet if you read the federalist papers and the constitution, you'll find that our government is wildly outside of law. What happens when our grievances are ignored? What happens when law no longer applies to our government and the ignore the lawful ways of operating? Well the unfortunately. The liberty tree needs that refreshment. Something I do not want to see happen. Something that the founding members of our nation warned us about. Is it a conspiracy? No. The fed is openly defying the laws of the land. Most younger generations don't even know who we fought against to gain our independence. Let alone what the federalist papers our. No its not a conspiracy, it's just the nature of things. Power corrupts and people become complacent. We have forgotten what made us great. Today there's being such a division driven into our people. White shaming, Black blaming, false history taught in schools. People wearing their hearts on their sleeves. We our turning into a bunch of sissies. Oh can't say that it might offend someone. Good you have the right to be offend. You do not have the right to censor someone because of it though. I love my country's founding principles. Everything about what this country was. The strength of her people. Our heroes and founders, they were not perfect but no one is. I served proudly as a soldier in Iraq, but for what. A country that imprisons its people unjustly, stripes people of the lands illegally. Inforces law but refuses to follow it. Though I think the guys who are taking this stance, way under planned. What their doing is right and makes me feel proud that they are brave enough to rise their lives. To risk being SHOT! To try and restore the laws of our nation. There are far worst things in this world then being shot. To live with no dignity under an unjust system is nothing short of hell in my eyes.

+mike fitzhugh These guys are all talk and much bullshit.

+mike fitzhughDie for the rich so they can control public land. It might matter if it was the poor you was helping.

maybe were willing to get shot. maybe were willing to die. maybe were going to win without bloodshed. imagine that.

+Lou Montana Yep - imagine that.  :)

White people breaking the law? Have you ever seen the demographics in prisons across this country? You idiots crack me up.

Does this mean I can walk into any federal building and claim it? I don't live in Oregon but does this apply to me?

+Knut UppstadThe building was empty.  It is the purpose of the 2nd Amendment when the government breaks the law, which is what has happened in these cases. Remember Ferguson?  The mayor said "give them room to destroy"  they are just frustrated kids according the DOJ.  So don't hand me the racist BS. In Oregon nothing burned, no one was hurt, no one was threatened.  They will defend themselves, no doubt, but they are not violent unlike the "protesters" in Ferguson.  They have specific legal grievance, they are backed by law. The law is very specific in how much property the Federal Government can own of state land and for what purpose.  The Feds have tried to skirt this law through bureaucracies and agreements with foreign countries. It is the trade agreements that screw the little people.  We are importing meat and shutting down our own meat producers.  How does that make sense? Recently a couple of countries sued the United States so now we can't have labels on  meat to tell us what country the meat comes from.  While they are shutting down our ranchers?!?!   Do you get it?   

+Shiwanokia Protesting is OK, but to invade a federal building with guns in your hand?????? On what planet do you live on?

+Knut Uppstad BLM get away with so much everyday. Farrakhan gets away with inciting violence and the DOJ just looks the other way. No one in this situation called for killing anyone, they cited laws and have evidence. Grow up.

+Knut Uppstad - So true....white America is patriots but black America is thugs. Hypocritical reprobate nation of people.

+Kevin Joseph He's no expert. Smh

You're joking right… He's an expert.... a bunch of armed men have taken over federal property and he says let them have the building for a month

+Ryan Robbins Government can own land for forts and ports. The gov is going to sell the land in Oregon for water rights and uranium mining.  They pushed farmers out in one state and sold the land to the Saudi's a few years later.  

+Gerry Hatcher The "evil government"? You're funny.

+Ryan Robbins Why does the evil government need land why are they stealing land that people work all there life for.

that is not true the constitution very clearly states the federal government can own land

+Shiwanokia Oh I'll watch their press conference all right, but only to count the number of times a non-lawyer like Ammon Bundy uses the term 'unconstitutional'.

+Michael Heffernan Watch their press conference it explains everything. They picked that specific building. They are staying to unravel the illegal seizure of people's ranches and the bully tactics of unelected federal agencies.

The federal government doesn't own anything huh. Well ok then, explain to me how the federal government doesn't own the USS Gerald R. Ford. Or is the case that you think that you "own" an aircraft carrier?

+EmeraldView For doing what? Getting ready to defend the lives of people on that field should the contractors start to spray them with automatic fire? You sound like an idiot.

+frankcastle7777 SO what about the Feds who are illegally harassing ranchers to drive them off the lands so corporations can take it over. You think that is just fine right?

+frankcastle7777 Who cares what a 70 plus year old rancher thinks, That is not the point. It's un lawful to harass anyone no matter what they think about race.

+Sanitys Void The terrorist are getting arrest for their gun pointing from the bridge at LE and taking over property they do not own. That is a good thing. These foolish people make law abiding gun owner look bad.

+Sanitys Void   Bundy video states ' the nigro should of learn to pick cotton".  Only a racist bias person would say that statement is not wrong. LOL  There are about 47 million BLACKS on American soil and racist welfare bundy had an hand full of mess guided black dudes.  LOL  GOD BLESS dude.

+frankcastle7777 Your an idiot. He's not racist he hosted black militia men on his lands. And if he's a little racist by th left's standards that's just BS anyway. Lets see how much you keep supporting these policies when all the ranchers are gone and in prisons and you are not eating anymore because the Feds shut down all food imports to get rid of all the useless eaters they hate.

+Sanitys Void  HELL YES for us that pay our taxes and have to cover the bill for this racist welfare rancher Bundy. It is cheaper to have your live stock on federal land than to rent from a famer or buy land with the up keep / taxes that go along with that. So I guess bundy should of took his own advise from that racist video he made  and learned to pick cotton. LOL

+frankcastle7777 You seem to think Federal Grass could ever be worth over 1 million dollars LOL