Bundy related gossip and discussion

User avatar
Dolly
Posts: 14397
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:32 pm

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3776

Post by Dolly »

New York Times JAN. 4, 2016
Cautious Response to Armed Oregon Protest
.......
The protesters here chose a low-profile way to make their stand, choosing an out-of-the-way place in the dead of winter. They contend that under the Constitution, the federal government can own only a small amount of land, for very limited purposes — which do not include wildlife refuges — and can acquire land in a state only with the state’s consent. The courts have not agreed.

In a forum here last month,Ammon Bundy was explicit about starting a national movement, and said God had instructed him to come here.

“We can restore the Constitution back to this county, and it can be an example to all the other counties across this nation,” he told local residents. “The people of this country will come to you and protect you if you will make the right stand.” <snip>
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/05/us/in ... .html?_r=0

https://archive.is/Dtinr


The part about " the federal government can own only a small amount of land, for very limited purposes" has got me thinking about stuff.

DejaMoo had a post that linked to:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_ ... al_Freedom
Citizens for Constitutional Freedom
During the occupation, the militant group claimed that the United States Constitution allows the federal government of the United States to own only a small amount of land, and can only acquire land in states with the state's consent.[14]

Plus I stumbled upon another Facebook page: Cliven Bundy's Army!
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1717765141769695/

The first post is pinned and there is discussion about the Feds owning land and Article I, Section 8, Clause 17.
from http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charte ... cript.html

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;—And
I know there are Trump supporters in the Poot movement. Trump says he is gonna build a WALL.

Where in the Constitution does it say he is allowed to do this? Has any Pootriot mentioned this? How about KrisAnne Hall? Gavin Seim? Anybody?
Avatar by Tal Peleg Art of Makeup https://www.facebook.com/TalPelegMakeUp
User avatar
maydijo
Posts: 2764
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:23 pm
Location: where women glow and men plunder
Occupation: harassing marsupials

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3777

Post by maydijo »

Mary Quite Contrary wrote: :snippity:

Quick clarity for you (raised Irish Catholic with a Catholic school teaching mother-- it was rough),
Bishop in Catholicism oversees an area (territory like) of Catholic Churches. They aren't pastors in the Catholic religion but Priests, referred to as Father (add any name here).

In Christian religions they have pastors. I believe in some denominations the pastors are even married. Catholics don't allow priests or bishops to marry, ever. Hope this helps.

Welcome maydijo!
Thanks ever for the welcome!

Mormons really need to write a dictionary. I often find myself having to translate for my non-Mormon husband. In the LDS Church, Bishops are the leaders of the local congregations, like priests or pastors. A local congregation or "ward" has geographical boundaries. Several wards make up a stake (the number varies but would be around 5 - 10). A stake president is in charge of the stake. Yesterday I said he was like a Cardinal but that's wrong; he's more like a Catholic Bishop. I'm sorry for getting that so wrong; I know there's a very big difference between a Bishop and a Cardinal. Yesterday was a very long day; we'd spent the week on holidays and only just realised at 11 PM the night before that our flight was for early-morning and not early-afternoon; so it was a very long day and I wasn't quite functional.
User avatar
Dolly
Posts: 14397
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:32 pm

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3778

Post by Dolly »

Welcome to The Fogbow, maydijo. :wave:

Glad you could join us. Thanks for posting.
Avatar by Tal Peleg Art of Makeup https://www.facebook.com/TalPelegMakeUp
User avatar
maydijo
Posts: 2764
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:23 pm
Location: where women glow and men plunder
Occupation: harassing marsupials

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3779

Post by maydijo »

Dolly wrote:
big :snippity:

I know there are Trump supporters in the Poot movement. Trump is gonna build a WALL.

Where in the Constitution does it say he is allowed to do this? Has any Pootriot mentioned this? How about KrisAnne Hall? Gavin Seim? Anybody?

If you listen to their Facebook feeds, Trump is also going to release all the poots and put all public land in private hands. Funnily enough their idea of "democracy" looks an awful lot like a dictatorship!
User avatar
maydijo
Posts: 2764
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:23 pm
Location: where women glow and men plunder
Occupation: harassing marsupials

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3780

Post by maydijo »

Dolly wrote:Welcome to The Fogbow, maydijo. :wave:

Glad you could join us. Thanks for posting.
Thanks. I know I missed a couple of other welcomes too; so thanks to everyone for the welcomes. (I hope one blanket "thanks for the welcomes" is enough - otherwise with this friendly group I'll be hogging the boards just to say thanks!)
User avatar
TollandRCR
Posts: 20731
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3781

Post by TollandRCR »

Mary Quite Contrary wrote:
In Christian religions they have pastors. I believe in some denominations the pastors are even married. Catholics don't allow priests or bishops to marry, ever. Hope this helps.

Welcome maydijo!
In most Christian denominations it is a problem if the pastor is not married. The pastor's wife has clear duties to the congregation. There are a few married Roman Catholic priests, converts from the Anglican church or an Eastern Orthodox church. The prohibition dates to about 305 C.E.
In the earliest years of the church, the clergy were largely married men. C K Barrett points to 1 Cor 9:5 as clearly indicating that "apostles, like other Christians, have a right to be (and many of them are) married", and the right for their wife to be "maintained by the communities in which they [the apostles] are working".[3] However, Paul himself was celibate,[4][5] and there is no consensus that inclusion among the requirements for candidacy to the office of "overseer" of being "the husband of one wife"[6] meant that celibate Christians were excluded.[7]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clerical_ ... al_origins
“The truth is, we know so little about life, we don’t really know what the good news is and what the bad news is.” Kurt Vonnegut
User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 47032
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3782

Post by Sterngard Friegen »

Quoting from One Corinthians, eh Tollie?
User avatar
Plutodog
Posts: 11956
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 10:11 pm

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3783

Post by Plutodog »

Hmmm...Paul was celibate in what sense, exactly?
The only good Bundy is an Al Bundy.
User avatar
Dolly
Posts: 14397
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:32 pm

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3784

Post by Dolly »

Linsay Tyler
Yesterday at 9:43am ·
I have a huge favor to ask of everyone that went to the refuge during the occupation, took pictures, spoke to the guys... Etc.. The ball is being dropped somewhere in the midst of all this. We need to pull together, get names, pictures, anything that will help and get it sent in..ASAP!!! You can private message me with your details, pics... Etc... If you need my number or my personal email, please ask!!! This is very important and we are limited on time!!!!!
Please share my post!!!

It looks like the ARCHIVE file grabbed all the comments. Some of them:
https://archive.is/OGkJl
Hidden Content
This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.
Linsay Tyler shared John Parker Jr.'s post.
4 hrs ·
John Parker Jr.
4 hrs ·
To the Burns, Or. Wildlife Refuge in January:
Not all involved were part of the refuge take over, some of us were there strictly learning what the government's response was, in real time
Linsay Tyler shared a page.
Yesterday at 7:33pm ·
Malheur Redress

A voice for the people covering Eastern Oregon.
http://www.malheurredress.com/
https://www.facebook.com/malheurredress/

Linsay Tyler
Yesterday at 1:09pm ·
We are currently working on the upcoming issues of the Malheur Redress. If you have an idea for an article let us know, we also have advertising fees setup. I know it's later than what we said, but we are all busy with life and kids and make no profit doing the paper, if you would like to donate or set up a subscription that would be fabulous.
$5.00 per month includes two issues per month or $50 per year includes 24 issues. If you prefer you can request a mailed hard copy for $9.00 per month or $85 per year. <snip>

I ARCHIVED her timeline. https://archive.is/ynqt2
Avatar by Tal Peleg Art of Makeup https://www.facebook.com/TalPelegMakeUp
User avatar
icebreaker
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 4:58 pm

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3785

Post by icebreaker »

Good evening, all. Lurker here, coming out of hiding for just a quick bit.

Excellent discussion, and I appreciate the (usually) even-handed responses from all points of view. The question was asked earlier as to exactly which Mormon teachings the Bundys were going against?

This little snippet is from one of the LDS Church's leaders, Dallin Oaks, who himself was an Attorney, University of Chicago Law Professor, and Supreme Court justice. He said this way back in 1992, and I find myself wondering if the Bundy problems were just budding back then. I'd love to find out more about what was going on back in 1992 that would prompt this warning.

He said, "Love of country is surely a strength, but carried to excess it can become the cause of spiritual downfall. There are some citizens whose patriotism is so intense and so all-consuming that it seems to override every other responsibility, including family and Church. I caution those patriots who are participating in or provisioning private armies and making private preparations for armed conflict. Their excessive zeal for one aspect of patriotism is causing them to risk spiritual downfall as they withdraw from the society of the Church and from the governance of those civil authorities to whom our twelfth article of faith makes all of us subject."

The 12th Article of Faith, which in my mind is the main church tenet that the Bundanistas are violating, says, "We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law."

Ummm, yeah. Bundy's got THAT one down. :roll:

Someone brought up excommunication - what are the chances? I'd say it's highly likely, given that this is such a high-profile case. However, I think (not positive on this though) that they often wait until the guilty verdict has been handed down, and the individual has been convicted. Just my opinion though (and really wishful thinking).

Hope that added a little insight. We now return you to your regularly scheduled program.
User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 9805
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:31 pm

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3786

Post by RVInit »

icebreaker wrote:Good evening, all. Lurker here, coming out of hiding for just a quick bit.

Excellent discussion, and I appreciate the (usually) even-handed responses from all points of view. The question was asked earlier as to exactly which Mormon teachings the Bundys were going against?

This little snippet is from one of the LDS Church's leaders, Dallin Oaks, who himself was an Attorney, University of Chicago Law Professor, and Supreme Court justice. He said this way back in 1992, and I find myself wondering if the Bundy problems were just budding back then. I'd love to find out more about what was going on back in 1992 that would prompt this warning.

He said, "Love of country is surely a strength, but carried to excess it can become the cause of spiritual downfall. There are some citizens whose patriotism is so intense and so all-consuming that it seems to override every other responsibility, including family and Church. I caution those patriots who are participating in or provisioning private armies and making private preparations for armed conflict. Their excessive zeal for one aspect of patriotism is causing them to risk spiritual downfall as they withdraw from the society of the Church and from the governance of those civil authorities to whom our twelfth article of faith makes all of us subject."

The 12th Article of Faith, which in my mind is the main church tenet that the Bundanistas are violating, says, "We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law."

Ummm, yeah. Bundy's got THAT one down. :roll:

Someone brought up excommunication - what are the chances? I'd say it's highly likely, given that this is such a high-profile case. However, I think (not positive on this though) that they often wait until the guilty verdict has been handed down, and the individual has been convicted. Just my opinion though (and really wishful thinking).

Hope that added a little insight. We now return you to your regularly scheduled program.
Thanks for weighing in. Not sure if anyone else had brought it up before, but I recently had asked a new member who is Mormon what she thought (if anything) about that possibility. I think the mid-90's is when Cliven quit paying his fees. Something that really strikes me about the whole Bundy family is also their penchant for lying. Ammon seems particularly adept at it. My impression is that lying is how the Bundys were able to get so many people to see them as victims of the federal government. Cliven claims that his family has ranched in that area since the 1800's but nobody that I know of has found evidence of that. As far as I have learned his father didn't buy what is called Bundy Ranch until 1946. IIRC the Nevada superseding indictment indicates that Bundy used deception to recruit all the gunmen and others who came out in support of him. Ammon Bundy clearly was full of lies and deception prior to the occupation, during the occupation, and I believe since being incarcerated.

How the Bundys view their own religion is a fascinating part of the whole story. It certainly isn't the first time and probably won't be the last that someone twists their interpretation of their religion to suit their own needs and bad deeds.
"I know that human being and fish can coexist peacefully"
--- George W Bush

ImageImage
User avatar
Flatpointhigh
Posts: 8171
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:05 pm
Location: Hotel California, PH23
Occupation: Voice Actor, Podcaster, I hold a Ph.D in Procrastination.
Contact:

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3787

Post by Flatpointhigh »

Re: 1992: Ruby Ridge. Excerpt:
http://archive.adl.org/learn/ext_us/mil ... =4&item=mm
History and Activities: Private Armies, Public Wars

... More than any other issue, though, the deadly standoffs at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in 1992 and Waco, Texas, in 1993 ignited widespread passion. To most Americans, these events were tragedies, but to the extreme right, they were examples of a government willing to stop at nothing to stamp out people who refused to conform.

Not surprisingly, some of the earliest leaders of the militia movement had personal associations with the standoffs at Ruby Ridge and Waco. Linda Thompson, an Indianapolis lawyer who decided unilaterally to represent the Branch Davidians during their standoff, went on to appoint herself "acting adjutant general" of the Unorganized Militia of the United States in 1993. Until her call for an armed march on Washington, D.C., fizzled in 1994, she was quite influential, particularly through the videotapes she produced alleging government complicity at Waco. More lasting in influence was a friend of Randy Weaver, John Trochmann, who with his brother and nephew formed the Militia of Montana in January 1994.
User avatar
Dandelion
Posts: 191
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 10:30 pm

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3788

Post by Dandelion »

Bundy bullies in action described here in Let's Talk Nevada, http://letstalknevada.com/bundys-harass ... personnel/
The accompanying video offers a good look at some of the key players in Oregon as well.
User avatar
Dr. Blue
Posts: 935
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 10:01 am
Occupation: Call the doctor!

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3789

Post by Dr. Blue »

Don't know if someone has posted this already, but there's a podcast from Oregon Public Broadcasting that is starting up now, with the goal of following things through the trial. So far just background info, and it seems pretty good to me.

https://soundcloud.com/thislandisourland
User avatar
realist
Posts: 35445
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3790

Post by realist »

Dandelion wrote:Bundy bullies in action described here in Let's Talk Nevada, http://letstalknevada.com/bundys-harass ... personnel/
The accompanying video offers a good look at some of the key players in Oregon as well.
:thumbs:
ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image
User avatar
Mary Quite Contrary
Posts: 539
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 11:17 am

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3791

Post by Mary Quite Contrary »

Dandelion wrote:Bundy bullies in action described here in Let's Talk Nevada, http://letstalknevada.com/bundys-harass ... personnel/
The accompanying video offers a good look at some of the key players in Oregon as well.

I can't believe after all this time there are still videos out there I haven't seen to cement that the Bundy's are complete assholes. But there you have it. :eek2:

Thanks for the link.
"My greatest hope is for inclusion and love for all humanity in 2017 and beyond." -Pharrell Williams
stoppingby
Posts: 563
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 9:47 pm

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3792

Post by stoppingby »

Flatpointhigh wrote:Re: 1992: Ruby Ridge. Excerpt:
http://archive.adl.org/learn/ext_us/mil ... =4&item=mm
History and Activities: Private Armies, Public Wars

... More than any other issue, though, the deadly standoffs at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in 1992 and Waco, Texas, in 1993 ignited widespread passion. To most Americans, these events were tragedies, but to the extreme right, they were examples of a government willing to stop at nothing to stamp out people who refused to conform.
This is a pet peeve of mine. These folks didn't go nuts because the government screwed up in Ruby Ridge. Its their excuse, not their reason for their actions. There has always been a vein of extremism in this country, from the KKK to religious cults to the SovCit movement. I get frustrated when writers for websites like the ADL, who should know better, enables and amplifies these self-pitying excuses.

Anyone who takes a little time to watch these people's videos, or read their Facebook postings, would immediately see that the Sovcit folks weren't hardworking, well-educated, emotionally and financially stable people who went nuts when Ruby Ridge happened. They were already unbalanced individuals, prone to making exaggerated claims of victimhood, and completely lacking in self-awareness and personal responsibility. The press and the pundits need to stop falling for their self-pitying justifications. Heck, if the "it's your fault I misbehaved!" line didn't work in kindergarten, why would it work for adults?
User avatar
Flatpointhigh
Posts: 8171
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:05 pm
Location: Hotel California, PH23
Occupation: Voice Actor, Podcaster, I hold a Ph.D in Procrastination.
Contact:

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3793

Post by Flatpointhigh »

True, but - this could be but one of the impetus' for the warning in 1992. The entire piece covers the militia movement and how it has influenced all the NWO/FEMA/UN/AGENDA 21 conspiracies.
User avatar
Dolly
Posts: 14397
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:32 pm

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3794

Post by Dolly »

Sarah Redd Buck posted a video to her timeline.
September 1 at 2:25pm ·
Sekrit Stuffs!
[facebook]10157404728890319[/facebook]


https://archive.is/cw7Fj

I noticed the lower left portion. Google search shows: "Chad Karges, manager of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge". IIRC, the occupiers said the refuge was open/unlocked.
He said he maintained normal operations until Christmas, but afterward directed four maintenance workers who live on the refuge to move out. He also told employees to work always in teams.

Karges eventually decided on a more drastic step. Four days before the occupation, he ordered employees to lock up the refuge and leave "until further notice": He made one final trip to the headquarters to get papers - the day before the occupation. <snip>
Avatar by Tal Peleg Art of Makeup https://www.facebook.com/TalPelegMakeUp
rifleman1635
Posts: 467
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2016 12:09 am

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3795

Post by rifleman1635 »

woodworker wrote:
rifleman1635 wrote:While I'm sure that many members of Mormonism are no doubt loyal to the US, that does not erase the fact that sedition and rebellion against the US (and duly elected local governments) have been an integral part of Mormon policy from the start.
All one has to do is research "Mormon Wars" to see the history of sedition and outright rebellion ... the State of Utah owes the people of the United States an apology and should pay reparations for their bad acts done under the color of law. Brigham Young should be posthumously tried for treason and all his property and the property of the Mormon Church should be forfeit for their treason, but that's just MHO.
It is clear that Defendants Bundy are all acting on their Mormon beliefs and anything less than a complete repudiation (including excommunication) shows that the Mormon Hierarchy is still complicit in such sedition and rebellion against the duly elected government of the US.
Rifleman1635:

As a non-mormon, but as a jew (which I believe qualifies as a religion that has endured persecution), IMHO your post is a load of crap. One of the tenets of our country is that we don't believe in collective punishment or attainder or corruption of blood. Whatever crimes someone may have committed in the past are not the basis for condemning those persons heirs unless those heirs continue the wrongful activities. I could go on but I think you get the idea. Your suggestion is despicable.
Not a fan of Jonathan Swift I take it.
User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 9805
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:31 pm

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3796

Post by RVInit »

stoppingby wrote:
Flatpointhigh wrote:Re: 1992: Ruby Ridge. Excerpt:
http://archive.adl.org/learn/ext_us/mil ... =4&item=mm
History and Activities: Private Armies, Public Wars

... More than any other issue, though, the deadly standoffs at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in 1992 and Waco, Texas, in 1993 ignited widespread passion. To most Americans, these events were tragedies, but to the extreme right, they were examples of a government willing to stop at nothing to stamp out people who refused to conform.
This is a pet peeve of mine. These folks didn't go nuts because the government screwed up in Ruby Ridge. Its their excuse, not their reason for their actions. There has always been a vein of extremism in this country, from the KKK to religious cults to the SovCit movement. I get frustrated when writers for websites like the ADL, who should know better, enables and amplifies these self-pitying excuses.

Anyone who takes a little time to watch these people's videos, or read their Facebook postings, would immediately see that the Sovcit folks weren't hardworking, well-educated, emotionally and financially stable people who went nuts when Ruby Ridge happened. They were already unbalanced individuals, prone to making exaggerated claims of victimhood, and completely lacking in self-awareness and personal responsibility. The press and the pundits need to stop falling for their self-pitying justifications. Heck, if the "it's your fault I misbehaved!" line didn't work in kindergarten, why would it work for adults?
:clap: :clap: :clap:
"I know that human being and fish can coexist peacefully"
--- George W Bush

ImageImage
User avatar
Butterfly Bilderberg
Posts: 7657
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:26 pm

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3797

Post by Butterfly Bilderberg »

.
"Pity the nation that acclaims the bully as hero,
and that deems the glittering conqueror bountiful."
- Kahlil Gibran, The Garden of The Prophet
stoppingby
Posts: 563
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 9:47 pm

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3798

Post by stoppingby »

Flatpointhigh wrote:True, but - this could be but one of the impetus' for the warning in 1992. The entire piece covers the militia movement and how it has influenced all the NWO/FEMA/UN/AGENDA 21 conspiracies.
I guess I should have read the whole piece before posting :blackeye: - it does give a more nuanced take on the situation, along with discussion of the extreme right's obsession with paramilitary organizations. I shall withdraw my criticism of the ADL, and save my ire for the MSM who print articles "explaining" the Bundys et. al. by swallowing and repeating the Pooptriots excuses.
User avatar
Mink
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:46 pm
Location: Mink's Den

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3799

Post by Mink »

maydijo wrote:
DejaMoo wrote: :snippity:
So, it seems to me that Cliven and his neighbor Keith put together a book that comprises their beliefs based on a number of sources, including the Mormon Faith, the John Birch Society, and either a mixture of personal opinion or so-called personal revelation by Cliven and Keith. They believed in this enough to write it down and have it printed and bound. And the Bundys, at least, have grown up believing it as Truth.

I don't know how this works in the LDS faith, but if a practicing Roman Catholic began mixing RC doctrine with political notions and personal opinions (or, worse yet, religious revelations), went so far as to publish it and use with or instead of Church doctrine, and the church learned of it, they would be invited to have a meeting with their pastor. Maybe even the bishop.

:snippity:
I'm a bit confused as to whether you mean bishop in a Catholic sense or bishop in a Mormon sense. Within the LDS church the Bishop is the pastor.
:snippity:
I wouldn't be surprised if the Bundys have started or will start their own religious group. One of their ancestors (I believe it was Cliven's grandpappy?) started his own now-defunct sect; so there is some precedence for it within the family. It could also be why Ammon thinks he has the right to issue statements that are more befitting a prophet than a prisoner - as in his video telling women to quit their jobs and remain at home with their kids. These days, while there is still an "ideal" that women stay home and take care of their children, the official church line is that families are quite capable of making these decisions for themselves through prayer and study. In a Mormon context, this is usually referred to as "receiving revelation". Individuals receive revelations for themselves; husbands and wives receive revelation for their family; bishops receive revelation for their wards and stake presidents for their stake (with the understanding that any revelation which goes against the prophet is not divinely inspired), and only the prophet has the right to receive revelation for the entire LDS Church. Ammon is speaking as though he has the right to receive revelation for everyone. That is why I think Ammon thinks he's a prophet, which lends support to the idea that they have or will shortly have their own sect. (Indeed when this first started I kept thinking, They must belong to some weird off-shoot. They can't be real Mormons.)

The LDS Church came out with a statement in January denouncing the Bundys in what is (for the Church) very strong language. While there is a history within Mormonism of supporting this type of behaviour (the State of Deseret being the most obvious example) to my knowledge that behaviour is no longer condoned or supported. These days the Church is wealthy enough to purchase land for itself (and has extensive land holdings throughout the US). While historically the LDS Church used to provide material support to its followers, alas, those days are long gone now (unless you qualify for the church welfare program - which provides food, sometimes furniture or clothing, and may extend to paying your rent or the odd power bill; but certainly does not mean you get a farm handed to you.)

The Bundys claim that the government is trying to force the off their land; although they have presented no evidence to support this claim. IIRC the Bundy Ranch consists of about 100 acres and is worth about $60,000. If the government really wanted their land, surely they'd just offer well above the market price for it - What idiot wouldn't take, say, $500,000 for a worthless 100 acres of Nevada desert? (Yes, I know, we're talking about the Bundys here, they aren't your average idiots . . .)
I'm really hoping you didn't mean that literally. Habitat is rarely worthless for all wildlife though it can be of low or no value to some species. It can be rehabbed or just left alone until it can be if a target species is in mind.

Though this ordeal, we've seen poots call the refuge a frozen plot of land in the middle of nowhere. It irritates the daylights out of me when they seem to reduce its current or potential habitat value while it is an absolutely critical resource for birds migrating along the Pacific Flyway. The sad fact of the carp, more out of control than in January, is a function of the defendants and others driving out the fish biologist. I also often read poot comments about the ESA-listed desert tortoise having "evolved" with cattle therefore not at risk on Bundy land or other grazing land (which is a load of crap), or say the species has plenty of land to live on without attention paid to the value of the habitat. The quality and type of habitat is so very important for species but rarely worthless to all. Left alone, some areas will rehab themselves somewhat over time (w/ the exception of things like non-native grasses or thistle, for instance, or vegetation that can withstand very little rain). There would be marked improvement just doing nothing, but getting the cattle (and people and all their junk) off the land.

Thanks for the rest of your views on LDS. The church is so different from Protestant and RCC churches, people really don't get it much particularly if they haven't lived around LDS members or in communities with a very high percent of LDS members.
Quite Sane
User avatar
Mink
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:46 pm
Location: Mink's Den

Re: Bundy related gossip and discussion

#3800

Post by Mink »

stoppingby wrote:
Flatpointhigh wrote:Re: 1992: Ruby Ridge. Excerpt:
http://archive.adl.org/learn/ext_us/mil ... =4&item=mm
History and Activities: Private Armies, Public Wars

... More than any other issue, though, the deadly standoffs at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in 1992 and Waco, Texas, in 1993 ignited widespread passion. To most Americans, these events were tragedies, but to the extreme right, they were examples of a government willing to stop at nothing to stamp out people who refused to conform.
This is a pet peeve of mine. These folks didn't go nuts because the government screwed up in Ruby Ridge. Its their excuse, not their reason for their actions. There has always been a vein of extremism in this country, from the KKK to religious cults to the SovCit movement. I get frustrated when writers for websites like the ADL, who should know better, enables and amplifies these self-pitying excuses.

Anyone who takes a little time to watch these people's videos, or read their Facebook postings, would immediately see that the Sovcit folks weren't hardworking, well-educated, emotionally and financially stable people who went nuts when Ruby Ridge happened. They were already unbalanced individuals, prone to making exaggerated claims of victimhood, and completely lacking in self-awareness and personal responsibility. The press and the pundits need to stop falling for their self-pitying justifications. Heck, if the "it's your fault I misbehaved!" line didn't work in kindergarten, why would it work for adults?
:clap:
Quite Sane
Post Reply

Return to “Bundy Ranch/Malheur NWR”