RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Ash writes: "Nothing could better illustrate the reality of anti-African-American bias in America today than the stark contrast between what happened at the Bundy Ranch in Nevada and what is happening in Ferguson, Missouri. The response to those two events is a portal to the soul of a nation that still belongs to Jim Crow."

People protest Sunday, Aug. 17, 2014, for Michael Brown who was killed by a police officer last Saturday in Ferguson, Mo. (photo: Charlie Riedel/AP)
People protest Sunday, Aug. 17, 2014, for Michael Brown who was killed by a police officer last Saturday in Ferguson, Mo. (photo: Charlie Riedel/AP)


Where Were the Soldier-Cops at Bundy Ranch?

By Marc Ash, Reader Supported News

19 August 14

 

othing could better illustrate the reality of anti-African-American bias in America today than the stark contrast between what happened at the Bundy Ranch in Nevada and what is happening in Ferguson, Missouri. The response to those two events is a portal to the soul of a nation that still belongs to Jim Crow.

In Nevada, a rancher defied a federal court order with the support of hundreds of heavily armed self-styled militia members. Together they confronted federal agents attempting to serve a warrant, in some cases training their weapons on the agents.

In Ferguson, Missouri, following the fatal shooting of an unarmed 18-year-old black man by a white police officer, angry black residents left their homes, stood unarmed in the streets, and faced down a fully militarized, almost entirely white police force. Yes, looting of local businesses is taking place, but it began after the entirely peaceful protests were met by Ferguson Police in full combat mode.

To understand the state of race relations in America in the year 2014, you need look no further than the reactions by state and federal law enforcement to the two events.

In Nevada, state and federal law enforcement simply walked away, doing so, they said, “in the name of public safety.” The federal warrant remains unserved to this day.

In Ferguson, the guns remain pointed at the people, black people specifically. What started out as a shocking display of what can happen when a civilian police force adopts military methods and equipment has now become exponentially more volatile as the “real military” arrives, in the form of the Missouri National Guard.

Where was the full military response when it was really appropriate in Nevada? The Bundy Ranch incident was a far more aggressive assault on law and order than the defensive action in Ferguson. There was no response in Nevada – and an overwhelming, fully militarized response in Ferguson. Why? White fear.

To a white-dominated America, angry black folks in the streets are far more terrifying than the most heavily armed whites, regardless of the circumstances.

In reality, the white para-military Ferguson police are more closely aligned ideologically, and more likely to be sympathetic with the white so-called militiamen that defied federal agents at the Bundy Ranch than they are to oppose them. Both groups are largely comprised of members with military training and experience. The tactics each group employed at Bundy Ranch and Ferguson clearly relied on military methods. The views of both groups are equally hostile to African-Americans as well, as their words and actions clearly demonstrate.

During times of African-American unrest there is always a common refrain: “No justice, no peace.” In Ferguson, as across America today, there is no justice or peace.

How may deaths will it take?


Marc Ash is the founder and former Executive Director of Truthout, and is now founder and Editor of Reader Supported News.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+90 # Phillybuster 2014-08-19 14:50
In America, might, in the form of money or firepower, makes right. Insecure whites require someone to look down on in order to feel good about themselves.
 
 
+37 # JPC33 2014-08-20 05:39
Couldn't have said it better! The American success story is about being able to piss down your neighbor's back!
 
 
-59 # RLF 2014-08-20 06:27
Remember...2 of the three kids shot were 300 pounders...in all probability, scaring the shit out of the cops...no excuse but this is might and when you add in gangster chic in the communities of color you've got a recipe for disaster!
 
 
+21 # Billy Bob 2014-08-20 22:04
A lot of those Bundy ranch lunatics looked at least 300 pounds, and were carrying some pretty heavy weaponry, and pointing it directly AT law enforcement.

Here's a little secret:

Black people aren't really any scarier than white people.

The heavyweight champ has been a white guy for quite a while now, and so have nearly ALL of the top contenders for it.

Apparently, blacks never were "genetically" more able to fight.

White fear isn't due to black fearsomness, nearly as much as the fear of the unknown, and the fear of revenge.
 
 
+28 # Radscal 2014-08-20 12:14
Exactly. Bacon's Rebellion in 1676 was the seminal moment when the nascent economic elite learned how to pit poor whites against poor blacks and Indians through racial differences.

A multi-racial workers' revolt was crushed, and in the aftermath, the Indians arrested were shipped off to reservations, the blacks were hung and the whites were given small plots of land on which they became "rednecks."

Ever since, poor whites have been able to say, no matter how bad their lives are, "at least I'm not black."
 
 
+117 # RMDC 2014-08-19 15:30
This is right. If the police simply walked away from Ferguson in the interest of public safety, there would be no "violence." The violence is all of the police doing. they shoot guns, tear gas, smoke bombs, stun grenades, water canons and cause the people to panic and run. No one wants to get hit by a tear gas grenade. The cops create the panic. Take away all the police violence, and you'd have a peaceful demonstration demanding that their government take action against the shooter of Mike Brown.

But if you had a peaceful demonstration, then the mass media might have to listen to what African American people are saying. The police will go to any length to prevent that. They will kill a thousand people rather than listen to the moral complaints of African Americans. The police all over the US are the enforcers of the worst racism on earth.
 
 
+52 # ritawalpoleague 2014-08-20 02:34
What we're seeing in Ferguson is a foreshadowing of things to come - implosion/revol ution beginning to take shape. So sad and then some, rule of law and fundamental/ess ential constitutional rights are now gone bye bye. Some examples:

1. Occupy Wall Street peaceful protesters I've witnessed being or having been tortured by cops, i.e. seven close up Taser burns (no arrest, citation, reading of rights) on 17 year old girl; clubbing by cop on spine of 20 year old disabled young man; unwarranted grabbing by cops of Occupiers tents, sleeping bags and blankets and warm outer wear on a bitter cold night

2. Tear gassing of peaceful, anti- war in Iraq protesters, including small children, in 2003.

3. Multi egregious forms of cop brutalizing/tor ture of peace and justice St. Paddy's Day 2007 St. Paddy's Day Parade marchers, with permit to be in parade.

The list goes on and on, as I've gone into court and admin. hearings, as a legal advocate, including for numerous African American friends of mine.

If any real McCoy investigation of any of the above went forward on above cited 1, 2, and 3, the outing of what is actually happening could occur - local cops now being ordered by fed. Homeland Security connected govt. agents, to brutalize/tortu re any and all who dare to exercise first amendment rights and protest what this country has now become, a non-democracy...

POLICE STATE AIN''T GREAT !
 
 
+30 # REDPILLED 2014-08-20 09:25
Thank you for trying to warn readers to what is most likely coming: violent repression of ALL dissent as more people realize they are at the mercy of the sociopathic Plundering Class and their willing, greedy lackeys in the White House, Congress, on the Supreme Court, and in state and local governments.

This is why Bush I created the program to give surplus military weapons to local police starting in 1990; why Clinton expanded that program; why Bush II created NorthCom and Fusion Centers which integrate Homeland Security, the FBI, and local police; and why Obomber embraces the idea that all dissent can now be considered "terrorism" and U.S. citizens can be "indefinitely detained" without trial.

The Total Surveillance/Po lice State is already here, but don't expect corporate media, the main propaganda ministry of that state and the empire, to ever inform people about it. That's why we need to keep the Internet open to all voices, and why we need to tell people that U.S. democracy is a sham, as you have done.
 
 
+44 # Willman 2014-08-19 18:48
Closet Klanners I say.
 
 
-43 # Citizen Mike 2014-08-19 20:06
Everyone is nominally equal under the law and every citizen can claim the Second Amendment. Doing this is a matter of being organized. The white militias speak of protecting their communities from tyrannical government. Well, there is nothing magically white in that position.

A tumult of black Americans joining the NRA en masse would be a very interesting political statement right now.
 
 
+72 # Skippydelic 2014-08-20 03:03
Quoting Citizen Mike:
The white militias speak of protecting their communities from tyrannical government.


So why haven't these Wonderfully Patriotic Militias made their way to Ferguson to combat the Tyrannical Government THERE?
 
 
+38 # kalpal 2014-08-20 05:33
Why would any sane person join the NRA? Its membership is at best almost sane but never quite so.

If the African Americans in Ferguson took up arms to protect themselves from the tyrrany of the WHITE GOVERNMENT, they would be all executed and the NRA/KKK would assert that its important to be armed in case "those people" tried to insist that they are fully human and fully vested in US citizenship.
 
 
+18 # RLF 2014-08-20 06:29
I agree...what if the Fergusonians showed up en masse with THEIR assault rifles??? What's good for the goose...
 
 
+11 # bmiluski 2014-08-20 14:39
But they didn't and that's why there is no comparison to the whole Bundy mess. The reason those white yahoos weren't confronted was because the BLM officials and law enforcement rangers were out numbered and there would have been a massacre.
 
 
+19 # MD426 2014-08-20 09:00
"A tumult of black Americans joining the NRA en masse would be a very interesting political statement right now."

I agree as well. If thousands of African Americans suddenly applied for NRA membership the NRA would _ _ _ _ its pants!

Brilliant idea!
 
 
+22 # Salus Populi 2014-08-20 09:55
"Tyrannical government"?

Well now, let's see: Bundy was using public land for private purposes: While his cattle were grazing, the land was effectively closed to other uses -- the equivalent of privately closing a portion of the Interstate to drag race on it.

This was legal, but there was a nominal grazing fee charged to help upkeep the lands that he was denying the rest of the public the use of. He refused to pay that fee; taking something for which there is a price and refusing to pay for it is legally known as *theft.*

Bundy had been contemptuously stealing the use of the land for so long that, despite the modest size of the fees, he had racked up in the neighborhood of *Two Million Dollars* in his theft.

The only differences between taking this money from the government and from a bank is that the latter is insured, and the former is essentially stealing from every tax paying citizen -- US -- in the country. It's like a Mafia capo taking money from everyone in the community, and then when the police come, putting his thugs out at his perimeters armed with fully automatic weapons. And *this* is what was being "defended against."

Just as the Aryan Nation and its affiliates steal money to support their fascist cause, and celebrate their "victory" over "ZOG," the slimeballs that make up the Nazified blogo-, radio-, and twitter/fb-sphe re celebrated the magnificent courage of the Brown Shirts, at least until Bundy revealed himself to be a racist cracker.
 
 
+7 # Majikman 2014-08-20 10:26
And there you have it, Saulus, why the feds didn't go after Bundy & co...those currently in power are his moral/ideologic al equals.
 
 
0 # karenvista 2014-08-22 19:26
So Salus Populi, would it be worse than "strong-arming" a box of Swisher Sweets?
 
 
+5 # Billy Bob 2014-08-20 22:08
The Black Panthers marched with openly carried guns back in the '60s and scared the SHIT out of white America. Suddenly guns didn't seem so safe and non-biased.

I wish they'd do it again.

Joining the NRA, however would be very stupid.
 
 
+1 # Texan 4 Peace 2014-08-22 21:05
The majority of NRA members cannot vote for the leadership -- you have to be a certain "class" of member (based on seniority and $$ contributions) -- so I doubt it would make a lot of difference.
Anyway, more Black Americans than White Americans favor gun control, since it is their communities that pay the highest price for the flood of guns in our neighborhoods. So why would they want to give their money to the NRA, which is basically the gun lobby?
 
 
+20 # tauzinger 2014-08-19 22:31
Marc Ash is wrong. This is not about race, but about arms. Bundy's people had guns and government didn't want to risk a blood bath. Ferguson is unarmed and gets killed, gassed, arrested, and harrassed. The lesson learned here is that in America you better have weapons if you want to have a peaceful protest or want to survive walking on the streets. Did I just say that, who wants to repeal the second amendment? Until it's repealed, this is what the evidence dictates.
 
 
+7 # Kootenay Coyote 2014-08-20 08:40
'...and government didn't want to risk a blood bath.'& what has its happily risked in Ferguson & elsewhere? it's certainly happy enough with the ongoing mini-bloodbath in inner cities & now in black suburbs....
 
 
+5 # REDPILLED 2014-08-20 09:34
"The lesson learned here is that in America you better have weapons if you want to have a peaceful protest..."

Oh, really? Why do you think NorthCom and Fusion Centers were created, and local police have been given military weapons and equipment, including armored vehicles, since 1990? Why do you think so many federal agencies have recently acquired hundreds of thousands of rounds of ammunition? I'm certain that Waco was one factor in restraining the feds in the Bundy situation, but if more and more protestors start showing up armed, the authoritarian backlash will occur. Even thousands of protestors armed with AR-15s would be no match for NorthCom and then, martial law would be declared and all bets would be off.
 
 
+8 # Buddha 2014-08-21 18:00
Except when whites "open carry" in public, the cops don't even blink...but a black kid picks up a BB gun in the BB gun section of a Walmart and gets gunned down. My ass this isn't about race and is just a Second Amendment issue...
 
 
+54 # Art947 2014-08-19 23:09
It is now 10 days after the murder of Michael Brown and the Military actions against this black community. How come the "cop" is still on the loose? It is also interesting that the powers that be have put a black captain in charge of the police force. Is this to try to say that this was not a racially-motiva ted incident?

As a white male, I am personally offended by the slow pace of the actions against the police officer. However, this seems to be a common occurence when it comes to violence by police -- no matter what the locality for these actions.
 
 
-39 # egbegb 2014-08-19 23:15
Sadly, RSN comment policy is too short to fully engage and support Marc Ash. Here are my thoughts posted elsewhere:

https://plus.google.com/113441025546840284414/posts/fb9y6eSD4bJ

RSN could make money if it encourage folks like me who disagree with Marc Ash to post all comments.
 
 
+44 # Old4Poor 2014-08-19 23:29
My first reaction to the gigantic armoured vehicles was why didn't Nevada have any of these? re the Bundy insurrection.

AS a tiny old white woman I am far more afraid of white thugs with big guns and not at all of unarmed black men.
 
 
-57 # FDRva 2014-08-20 01:52
If the poster were really a 'tiny white woman,' and not a political shill I might sympathize.
 
 
+32 # kalpal 2014-08-20 05:36
Your assumption about who the poster may be clearly demonstrates that you are indeed a shill and can't see any other posters as being anything but a shill.
 
 
-14 # lnason@umassd.edu 2014-08-20 05:59
While I'm not sure she is or is not a political shill, I am a short (tiny would be too kind), old, physically decrepit white woman and I do not fear the cops but worry more about the armed black and Latino thugs who live my neighborhood. Two blocks away a homeless man was murdered a couple of days ago, probably by thrill-seekers.

So far in my neighborhood in the past decade, the death ratio of cop killings to thug killings has been 0/7. The cops did kill one minority kid about four blocks away -- after a couple of rounds of tasering didn't stop him and he knifed a cop down and started going for another cop.

Cops often misbehave (they are human and make errors as often as the rest of us do) but the real source of violence in our poor neighborhoods is not the cops but the criminals.

Lee Nason
Neew Bedford, Massachusetts
 
 
+29 # Old4Poor 2014-08-20 08:15
HA! I am of Irish & French descent (white), 71, 5'1", and walk, barely, with either a cane or a walker.Losing vision and hearing. Nice to know I can still stir up trolls if not much else.
 
 
+27 # Old4Poor 2014-08-20 08:19
And the big white men with big guns who scare me are not police but so -called militeas, etc. who think they can prance around restaurants and department stores and terrorize the general populace.Or oppose legitimate government action such as at Bundy ranch.
 
 
-34 # FDRva 2014-08-20 01:08
Those of us, on the Left, who question President Obama's unsavory relationship to Wall Street makes me wonder about the timing--and the intell community relationship to--the recent made-for-TV "riots," in Ferguson.

Perhaps, heightening racial tension is intended to boost 'base Dem turnout' as Plouffe and Axelrod might advise.
 
 
-28 # FDRva 2014-08-20 01:17
This president has much to fear from his financial community and political community friends.

For his girls' sake I hope Barry Obama gets out of this alive.
 
 
-30 # FDRva 2014-08-20 01:30
Some folks in the intell community are playing an evil game in Ferguson--with nominally left-leaning assets doing the dirty work.

Maybe AG Holder can tamp this down--and save the President's lfe.
 
 
-27 # FDRva 2014-08-20 02:15
While not a fan of Barry Obama--as a security professional--I have done my best to keep him alive.
 
 
+12 # RLF 2014-08-20 06:33
Intell community with you really is an oxymoron!
 
 
+3 # Billy Bob 2014-08-22 06:23
"Those of us, on the Left"

-Pretty funny. Do you think anybody bought it?
 
 
-31 # FDRva 2014-08-20 03:07
Only a fool would think anybody--not based in London--in the "intell community" will be backing President Barry Obama much longer.

The President could tell the truth about his former friends--or have a well-endowed library.
 
 
-30 # FDRva 2014-08-20 03:19
It appears the President will have a well-endowed library.
 
 
+22 # kalpal 2014-08-20 05:39
Fasxcinating lie about your being a left leaning person. Your own words prove clearly that you have never been part of the left. I suspect that you are a RW shill being paid to spout BS on a full time basis.
 
 
+1 # Billy Bob 2014-08-22 06:23
Bingo!
 
 
+17 # itchyvet 2014-08-20 04:02
Going by this article, I take it the folks in Ferguson should arm themselves just as the Mayor has advised the folks in Detroit ?
I would also think, there are more then the odd one or two African folks in Ferguson who have served in the military and would be more then capable of utilizing such weaponry.
So, does this mean the U.S. is gearing up for Civil War ?
Certainly sounds like it to me.
 
 
+20 # walt 2014-08-20 04:22
It's sad to say, but the USA increasingly reveals excessive ignorance and arrogance combined on most issues. This comparison is definitely a perfect example. Bigotry is the most obvious form of this igno-arrogance and it seems impossible to eliminate in a country always claiming to be bringing democracy to other countries from the "land of the free." It seems America is sinking deeper every day.
 
 
+22 # kalpal 2014-08-20 05:41
We do not ever see or hear of a black police officer who shot multiple times a white teenager and killed him for walking down the middle of the street. Why is that?
 
 
-32 # lnason@umassd.edu 2014-08-20 05:43
While I disagree with this description of the events at the Bundy ranch, even this author does not allege that the crowds there were violent, looting and stealing stuff from innocent local shop owners, committing acts of vandalism against innocent third parties, throwing Molotov cocktails, or causing physical injuries to each other or to govt. agents.

While the over-reaction was clearly unjustified at Ferguson, the police response should indeed have been more harsh than the police response at the Bundy ranch.

I would further argue that the police response at the Bundy ranch was also an over-reaction by the cops -- though admittedly not as extreme as the Ferguson case. Some of the protestors were indeed armed but this is pretty normal in this part of the country and no one was shooting at anyone. But the feds did steal many of Clive Bundy's cattle and killed more than a few of them, destroying him financially and preventing him from making a living for himself and his family.

No one was hurt at the Bundy ranch by any of the protestors and govt. agents caused 100% of the damage that was done there. At Ferguson, many innocent people are being hurt every night and police forces have not been doing their job to protect innocents from the looters and shooters and vandals who are roaming the streets seeking victims.

Lee Nason
New Bedford, Massachusetts
 
 
+24 # RLF 2014-08-20 06:35
What if the police had shot one of the Bundy ranch assholes six times? Different story, eh?
 
 
+10 # indian weaver 2014-08-20 06:38
A LAUGHABLE IGNORANT COMMENT.
 
 
+11 # Bruce Gruber 2014-08-20 08:09
Your arguments are much clearer and contextual when your public safety management responsibilitie s are discerned. Surely your procedures and techniques have been sufficiently successful for you enjoy so much time to focus and contribute so many blogs justifying authoritarian principles. Out of context (your job) I had felt that the apologetic sincerity of a troll needed nudging. My concerns regarding 'propaganda' have now triggered my "anti-authorita rian" nature and you are judged differently. To whit:

1. You "disagree with (this) description of the events at the Bundy ranch ...". Obviously you were not there, so what besides your "professional" bias provides this insight? Marc Ash "...does not allege that the crowds there (Bundy ranch) were violent, looting and stealing stuff from innocent local shop owners, committing acts of vandalism against innocent third parties, throwing Molotov cocktails, or causing physical injuries to each other or to govt. agents." ...as if a marksman aiming a high powered rifle on an assemblage of campus police under your supervision would not be committing 'violence' against your "govt. agents". Further, I doubt that a "crowd" in Ferguson was " ...throwing Molotov cocktails, or causing physical injuries...". Pointing a weapon is an "assault". Coupled with the open militiamen's threats of 'what they were going to do' to the authorities they refuse to acknowledge or respect, the events suggest 'conspiracy'.
 
 
+11 # Bruce Gruber 2014-08-20 08:29
2. The "feds" did not "steal many of Clive Bundy's cattle and killed more than a few of them, destroying him financially and preventing him from making a living for himself and his family." They tried to serve legal papers and seize property for fees (taxes) that Bundy purposefully ignored for nearly two decades. Your outright misrepresentati on of fact and action by a public safety professional like yourself suggest an institutional racial bias akin to Nazi Aryan superiority. While softly expressed, you "...would further argue that the police response at the Bundy ranch was also an over-reaction by the cops ..." it leaves one wondering how you could possibly exact 'just and equal' protection under laws and rules you enforce. You are the cops.
3. You claim, "No one was hurt at the Bundy ranch by any of the protestors and govt. agents caused 100% of the damage that was done there." But from news reports we learned that the swaggering authoritarian nature of the "visiting" militia anarchists, their checkpoint road stops and open carry, testosterone laden bully display and self-righteous militant zeal (my descriptors) was unacceptable in the view of officials and citizens (who appear not to share the neighbor Bundy's concept of government and the US Constitutions). The question raised by your post must be "Do you?"
 
 
+11 # Bruce Gruber 2014-08-20 08:40
This is personal. I do not believe your job is to blog propaganda support for authoritarian and anti-government apologies while responsible and paid to protect the students and property at Umass. I don't pay taxes or tuition that support your salary, but I am offended by the pretense of your camouflaged comments. You deserve the right of free speech, but I doubt you are expected to collect public salary for playing at the political/socie tal trough of expression on 'company 'time.
 
 
+16 # Radscal 2014-08-20 12:43
The police brought in the armored personnel carriers and snipers before any incident of looting.

I've heard the police claim of molotov cocktails, and saw the prop they displayed, but despite thousands of video cameras down there, I've yet to see evidence of one, and have heard no non-police witnesses support that claim.

I'm appalled and disappointed at the looting, but the police chose to radically escalate the situation with their provocative aiming rifles at peaceful protesters and firing tear gas into crowds including children and the elderly, before any violence or vandalism had occurred.
 
 
+4 # reiverpacific 2014-08-21 09:17
Quoting lnason@umassd.edu:
While I disagree with this description of the events at the Bundy ranch, even this author does not allege that the crowds there were violent, looting and stealing stuff from innocent local shop owners, committing acts of vandalism against innocent third parties, throwing Molotov cocktails, or causing physical injuries to each other or to govt. agents.

While the over-reaction was clearly unjustified at Ferguson, the police response should indeed have been more harsh than the police response at the Bundy ranch.

I would further argue that the police response at the Bundy ranch was also an over-reaction by the cops -- though admittedly not as extreme as the Ferguson case. Some of the protestors were indeed armed but this is pretty normal in this part of the country and no one was shooting at anyone. But the feds did steal many of Clive Bundy's cattle and killed more than a few of them, destroying him financially and preventing him from making a living for himself and his family.

No one was hurt at the Bundy ranch by any of the protestors and govt. agents caused 100% of the damage that was done there. At Ferguson, many innocent people are being hurt every night and police forces have not been doing their job to protect innocents from the looters and shooters and vandals who are roaming the streets seeking victims.

Lee Nason
New Bedford, Massachusetts

Wrong again!
The Bundy thugs set up checkpoints and intimidated local people.
 
 
-1 # tpm713 2014-08-21 19:46
You are correct my friend. The two stories shouldn't be compared at all. By the way folks for your information there is NO war on black kids by the police. An unarmed white man was killed by police on August 11 in Salt Lake City. Where was the outcries that it was a racially motivated murder? There weren't any because people know how to use their brain.
 
 
+2 # karenvista 2014-08-22 20:12
There were numerous outcries and media reports of the unarmed white man who was killed by out of control police violence. Police outrages like all these have to stop!
 
 
+18 # fredboy 2014-08-20 06:54
What the Bundy Ranch incident revealed was the second coil of civilian militarization.

All focused on arming whites and making everyone else the enemy.

This is so clear to some of us. Amazed that others don't get it.
 
 
+13 # phrixus 2014-08-20 07:28
"In Nevada, state and federal law enforcement simply walked away, doing so, they said, 'in the name of public safety.' The federal warrant remains unserved to this day."

More likely in the name of POLICE safety aka public servants too cowardly to do the job the taxpayers pay them for. It's pretty damn easy to shoot unarmed protesters but a different story altogether when the opposition is heavily armed. It's laughable to read all the trash talk from some law enforcement morons (see NYPD) yet when it comes down to them doing their duty in a dangerous situation (see Clive Bundy) they stick their tails between their legs and run.

If law enforcement isn't willing to do its job (see Eric 'The Spineless' Holder) send the National Guard down to chat with Mr. Bundy and the ignorant assholes protecting him. I suspect the outcome will be somewhat different.
 
 
+1 # karenvista 2014-08-22 20:14
The governors send the National Guard from their states not the DOJ. You are just a Holder basher.
 
 
-25 # moafu@yahoo.com 2014-08-20 07:36
As a Conservative who contributes to RSN, I believe I have the right to address Ash's comments.

HOW BLIND ! HOW NARROW-MINDED ! HOW DETERMINED TO FIND PERSONAL BIAS IN A NEWS STORY AND TO PUSH AN AGENDA BEYOND THE STORY !

The Bundy situation did, in fact, have gov't militia on the ready to move in. It was diffused before tempers pulled triggers (from either side). Leftist pimps like Al Sharpton are riding on this for self-aggrandizement.

Mr. Ash? RSN is a great service. Thanks. It enables the Right to "listen in on the huddle" of the opposition.
HOW BLIND ! HOW NARROW-MINDED ! Proving once again that the Left is neither "Liberal" nor "Progressive".. ..just Leftists !
 
 
-26 # moafu@yahoo.com 2014-08-20 07:38
If I may add re: Bundy situation. When voters of Bundy's persuasion disagree with the government, there may be a potential violent situation, but NONE OF THOSE ON BUNDY'S SIDE WENT INTO TO TO STEAL AND DESTROY FROM STORE OWNERS !!
 
 
+10 # Bruce Gruber 2014-08-20 09:09
But they have no 'governor' on the throttle bent on murdering physicians who provide medical assistance and support to women, there was little hesitancy in supporting church bombings and the murder of civil rights workers during the desegregation era, and the willingness to 'exact' ultimate justice' on any with whom they disagree is fraught with the same tonic of self-righteousn ess that serves the 'true believers' of Islam - NONE WHATSOEVER! Would that the 'conservative' philosophy could encompass a concept of anger and equivalency that allowed them to consider action against the white plutocracy as they are willing to focus on blacks, Hispanics and liberal thought. I wish they could see through the 'investment' by billionaires in the information generated by shills like Limbaugh and Savage to antagonize and limit their perception. Then they might judge the rip off of billions by Wall Street in insider trading, 'hedge' funding and subsidies against the rip off of an unwed mother boosting milk for her child or a kid stealing cigarettes at the corner store. If police shot and killed every white kid that shoplifted as a prank or an initiation, then perhaps the illogical hatred might dissipate somewhat. "BLINDLESS" is a condition, not a philosophy. Unwillingness to think and evaluate because it weakens the ability to judge and condemn is a tragedy.
 
 
-1 # farmrdave 2014-08-20 15:25
My philosophy is generally I turn a blind eye to those like yourself who are spouting hatred. I figure you are upset about something and on another day might be a vary pleasant person. I wasn't alive in the segregation era, I suspect you weren't either. Shall we declare that is passed history? As for the conservative philosophy, it is one of equivalency and equality. With that said, I must add that respect is not bestowed, it is earned. We are all born with the same rights under law but it ends there. People are not equal, the law cannot make them equal. A tall man can reach higher than a short man. Some people are good with numbers, some with hectic environment, some need quiet and calm to function. We are all different in every way. That is why I am happy to be born into this country where any man (woman) can achieve what ever their capabilities allow. No one is tried or hung because they are liberal or conservative, black or white, Muslim or Jew.
 
 
+2 # Bruce Gruber 2014-08-20 17:38
Turning a "blind eye" suggests you cannot SEE. Concluding from my comment that I "spew hatred" suggests you cannot read. Google me or go to Facebook and you will see that I conceal little or nothing about myself - AND that your suspicion that I did not experience the segregation era is, similarly, less than incisive. I fail to agree that "passed history" exists with respect to racism, stereotyping, and superiority as attitudes. I have yet to read (other than William F Buckley) a cogent description of the 'philosophy' of the current disjointed and reflexive "conservative" movement - if such a thing exists. Equality is a concept of mutual respect and opportunity in our society. It has never been described as 'similarity' or 'identity' as in comparison. I assume you really CAN read, so I recommend you take a few minutes to digest the concept of Social Equality on Wikipedia so we are both talking about the same thing. "Respect" is a concept more complicated in its application. Again, a few minutes with Wikipedia might broaden your interpretation o the code words you use to justify your opinions.
Angry fundamentalist jihadist Muslims proved yesterday that people can be beheaded. J B Stoner proved that strong feelings can be used to justify wanton and random conservative assassinations. A couple of 'conservative' Texas white supremacists exceeded the hatred and 'capabilities of even the Muslims when the 'took care of' James Byrd Jr. Need more to "think" about 'facts'?
 
 
-8 # farmrdave 2014-08-20 19:46
Bruce you are attacking me for what reason? I have no idea what you are referring to as "code words" My words are from me and are true or I would not publish them. Respect is earned not bestowed. I am sure there are many persons that have written many pages of their opinion of respect. What I write is what I have learned in my life. For me it is a fact. To be respected one must earn the respect of others.

I really do not know what you are thinking that conservatives are. I read the words but much of your meanings alluded me. I will tell you. Conservatives are persons that believe they should keep what they earn. That no one should be required to "carry their water". That a mans home is his castle. That generosity and good will are high goals to strive for. To live and let live.

I have never met "Angry fundamentalist jihadist Muslims", so I have nothing to say about that.

History is passed, that's why it is history.

Superiority attitude? I think that is part of participating in federal employment after a few years.
 
 
+5 # Bruce Gruber 2014-08-20 22:25
I am dismayed. You are certainly not being "attacked". The concepts you hold dear:
" Conservatives are persons that believe they should keep what they earn. That no one should be required to "carry their water". That a mans home is his castle. That generosity and good will are high goals to strive for. To live and let live." are general talking points argued by some conservatives. They are not principles. They are justifications for disagreeing with the policies and laws and regulations some people don't like. The first is a general denial of the federal government's authority to collect income tax. It dates back to before the 16th Amendment was passed and has been bullshit since 1913. That doesn't mean you don't like to pay taxes (for some things), but it is the law of your country. The "carry water" expression refers, I believe, to the concept that each person should be responsible for themselves and no individual should be forced to do things for another. Let me simply say that if you ask me for a ride and I refuse and tell you to carry your own water, you might not want to serve with me in an army patrol. Your home may be your castle, but that doesn't mean you don't have responsibilitie s you share with your neighbors - both legal and civil - many of which are enacted through your community's enactment into law. " That generosity and good will are high goals to strive for. To live and let live." are platitudes. The second argues against the first.
 
 
+5 # Bruce Gruber 2014-08-20 22:55
Just because the past happened before doesn't mean the issues and events do not continue to demand attention. 9/11 is the past, but it sure hasn't been set aside Slavery was made illegal, but it certainly hasn't resulted in universal acceptance of blacks' equality by whites - for a couple of hundred years. What is the common saying? ... If you don't learn from history you are doomed to repeat it.
"Superiority" attitudes convey opinions about GROUPS that demean individuals within those groups, For example some might say redheads are prettier than brunets or bosses are smarter than employees or girls are smarter than boys OR blacks are inferior to whites. None is a fact, all are biased opinions. Some are hateful, some are stupid. NONE are FACTS. If I have a better education than you, I may have more facts and ideas at hand.it does not mean I am "smarter" than you. You may have more money than me. It does not make you "better" than me. BUT, if you THINK having more money than me makes you a better person, THEN YOU have a superiority 'complex". None of us should be afraid to express our feeling and beliefs, but we have a responsibility to ourselves to insure that we have thought through and considered the effect of our beliefs on EVERYONE around us if we are truly members of society and not lone wolves in a survival mode.
 
 
+9 # Kootenay Coyote 2014-08-20 08:43
The non-existent response to the Bundy affair harshly underlines the ingrained structural hypocrisy here. ‘...across America today, there is no justice or peace.’ Cui bono? & who benefits by this, & how? The uneasy power establishment, aware of the fragile house of cards that sustains it; the bigots clinging to their false worldviews; & the weapons makers, who prosper mightily no matter who’s on top. But not the rest of the nation, the world....
 
 
0 # margpark 2014-08-20 14:17
The dangerous armed militants at Cliven Bundy's ranch all agree with his hatred of government and taxes. I think the National Guard in Ferguson is supposed to be there to protect the protesters from the police and perhaps arrest the bad guys who steal out and smash windows after the protestors go home. I have no idea why the government has not cracked down on Cliven Bundy though. I was expecting an assault to occur any day at first.
 
 
0 # Bruce Gruber 2014-08-21 06:10
I interpreted the governor to say that the national guard (like the state police) were called to damp down the angry frustration of Ferguson citizens so there would not be riotous results from that anger. The guard was to protect (and reduce)the antagonistic challenge presented by the local police over-reaction and militancy. I don't think the national guard brought tanks and grenade launchers to "up" the confrontation with citizens.
With regard to Bundy's 15 minutes of fame ... obviously IRS, US marshal service and Homeland Security officials see little benefit in antagonizing the angry mob of militant, survivalist, anti government, WACO/Ruby Ridge, open carry conservatives into a "Mine is bigger than yours" confrontation to further escalate the fiction of "victimization" . Being patient and legal is NOT weakness or indifference. It may even save lives. Bundy's responsibilitie s as a citizen will be met. The interest clock is ticking on his debts. The Tea Party and Aryan Nation are unlikely to be willing to pay his legal expenses when the rubber hits the road.
 
 
-14 # farmrdave 2014-08-20 15:13
These two events are not similar in any way. Like comparing beef steak to watermelon. Sure they are both edible but the comparison stops there. Likewise what happened in Nevada was in no way comparable to what is happening in Missouri today.
Think about this. In Nevada the government was destroying private property, in Missouri rioters are destroying private property. In Nevada citizens showed up to defend people and property, in Missouri police showed up to defend people and property. Get the picture?
As for the young man who was killed. Only those who were there know what happened. We all know what some police are like, at the same time we all know what some young men are like as well. Lets just hope martial law is not declared over this matter. If marshal law is declared constitutional rights are suspended. If constitutional rights get suspended it may end in a terrible way.
 
 
+3 # cymricmorty 2014-08-20 18:57
Quoting farmrdave: "Think about this......Get the picture?"

No, I don't get YOUR picture. I hope I never get your picture.
 
 
+8 # Bruce Gruber 2014-08-20 19:57
The "property" you believe was being destroyed is OWNED by you and me. It is NOT Bundy's. He was leasing it from the federal government - US! He never paid his rent. He says he doesn't have to because the government - US-have no rights, nobody can 'control' him but the county sheriff. Is THAT your philosophy? WE are THE government because "government" is the compact, the contract, the agreement under which we American citizens agreed to accomplish "life liberty and the pursuit of happiness". By seeking and creating laws and regulations through collective action - election of representatives who could lead us into solutions for changes in circumstance and condition - our society created a vehicle for experimenting with a modified form of government from earlier times. That form of electing representatives modified the definition of democracy to add the term "republic". The wealthy landowning and mercantile may not have understood the full import of their hyperbole in trying to exempt themselves from the tyranny of monarchs and inherited power.
 
 
+5 # Bruce Gruber 2014-08-20 20:11
Few of them (white men) may have considered "equality of opportunity under the law" to incorporate women, minorities, poor people, indentured servants or slaves. Liberals suspect most of them were idealistic enough to be proud of the growth of opportunity and freedom America 'thinks' it displays to the rest of the world. Unfortunately (by my reckoning) conservatives resent almost all the expansion those principles have accomplished as we, America, struggled to resolve conflicts over public education, interstate highways, TVA, public health, women voting, desegregation ... and so many other issues. Most middle class and poorer conservatives would likely be dismayed if they discovered that the 'freedoms' they want to "recover" (superiority and control over the undeserving 'others') would simply return them to the condition of vassals - Robin Hoods thieving the rich folks' deer and stuff in Sherwood Acres - all owned by the Kings and Barons. You think Bundy was 'oppressed' by the feds? Wait till the Kochs own it all and you have to sneak past their military tanks and army to get water (no longer guaranteed by government ... because it's not specifically enumerated in the Constitution. Think before you feel. Imagine what could go wrong with your "plan" - if you know what that is. Then realize that your worst fears don't come close to what greedy bastards with ALL the lawyers and Congressmen can think up.
 
 
0 # Billy Bob 2014-08-20 23:52
Bruce,

I've really enjoyed and appreciated your comments on this thread.
 
 
+1 # Bruce Gruber 2014-08-21 06:44
You may wish to parse the issue by claiming you don't know what happened with the Brown 'boy', but if you haven't had a personal interaction with a "COP" (rather than a police officer) you, at least might have had a friend who shared their experience with you. Carrying a weapon AND a badge increase ANYONE'S testosterone support system. It's usually the guy in the bar who has a concealed "piece" that is most likely to be willing to 'get IT on with someone they don't like. Your admission: " We all know what some police are like, at the same time we all know what some young men are like as well." ... fairly screams for patience and restraint on the part of law enforcement in such a situation. The tragedy that IS Ferguson - and so many other places where disadvantaged and poor Americans are 'contained' - is that we as a nation cannot come to grips with our collective responsibility to create a future in which opportunity AND productivity combine to avoid or reverse this downhill plunge. I fear "conservatives" (Tea Party, Republican, wealthy tax avoiders and 'superiority' believers) - like Bundy - think we shouldn't do anything about it. Troubled neighbors and fellow citizens should "Carry their own water". They say we can't afford it. I say we can't afford NOT to.
 
 
-1 # farmrdave 2014-08-21 09:23
Bruce, you quoted and said in part, ""That no one should be required to "carry their water". That a mans home is his castle. That generosity and good will are high goals to strive for. To live and let live."" are general talking points argued by some conservatives. They are not principles."
On this we disagree, these are not principles I was taught to respect, they are principles I learned to respect in the school of life just as all those of every country, language, skin color, political standing, or era have learned throughout time. These "general talking points" if followed by the majority of those of us alive on the planet today have the power to free all men, to end hunger and poverty, maybe even the power to stop wars.
 
 
-5 # farmrdave 2014-08-21 09:33
I pay my taxes. If you are alluding to the Bunkerville incident, that was not a issue of refusal to pay taxes. It was a man who stood for his constitutional rights and risk all including his life and the lives of his family against actions taken by the BLM which were highly illegal for many reasons. During that incident (thanks to modern communication) fellow citizens from all across our country traveled at their own expense to defend Mr. Bundy from illegal actions by a federal military force on US soil in the state of Nevada who was threatening citizens at the point of a gun, destroying private property, stealing and killing cattle. There were so many persons showed up the traffic jam actually stopped a major freeway for nearly an hour. Those persons referred to as government hating conservative militia are actually concerned fellow US citizens who put their vary lives on the line to stand up for law and order when the federal government reached out to take more land away from "we the people". Do you remember Ruby Ridge Idaho in 1992? Or Waco Texas in 1993? Similar could have easily happened in Bunkerville Nevada in 2014 if fellow citizens had not rushed to aid Mr. Bundy. Fortunately no blood was spilled.
 
 
-4 # farmrdave 2014-08-21 09:33
Army patrol. Military is not doing what you want. It is possibly the best example of a socialist society. Top brass decides what everyone will do overall, lower echelons get to decide how those under them will carry out the orders. If told to ride with you on a patrol I will be with you on patrol no mater what I want to do, the matter of who is driving is decided by who ever is highest rank will decide.
Generosity and good will are not simply words. They are descriptions of ones actions. Good will towards others begins with learning and ends with aiding those in need.
 
 
-2 # farmrdave 2014-08-21 10:01
In truth, I have no idea what happened with the Brown boy. At best it was a law officer defending himself or the law. At worst it was a racist man using his position to intimidate and kill.
It is too far removed for any factual information to reach me. I am commenting to help educate about the Bundy incident. It was nothing that you have claimed. It was nothing like what was reported in the news. It was, it is as I said. Please consider my words in that matter. Conservatives are not boogy men. Most conservatives are constitutional, freedom loving persons who believe government is out of control. For me I wish for an equitable non bloody method of reining in our cancerous government. Not anti government. The constitution is a exact list of what the different governments (federal or state) have authority to do. Those limits are greatly exceeded everyday. Also please consider that national news media report twisted facts intended to agree with some agenda, to sway public opinion this way or that, other news media simply reprints what is sent over AP-wire. How could I claim to know any facts about the Brown boy, from public comment after dubious newspaper articles? No reliable news can reach me unless it is directly from a person I know, who I have learned to respect.
 
 
-4 # farmrdave 2014-08-21 11:55
Bruce you claim the property involved in the Bundy incident was "owned by you and me". It is not. It is owned by the state of Nevada and is managed "public lands". I do not live in Nevada, even so I can go use those Nevada lands for uses deemed legal. Under constitutional law a state cannot limit use of it's lands to only residents of that state. This fiction of federal lands within the states of the Union is bogus. There is no constitutional support for the government to own or regulate resources within the states.
Bundy, has a complaint with illegal, unconstitutiona l actions taken by those in authority. Their authority is illegal because we the people did not grant that authority to them. If they did not receive the authority from us, did not receive it from constitutional law, it does not exist. Couple to that BLM sending in 200 plus armed troops to intimidate citizens, destroy private property, steal and kill cattle. Pretty scary when our government sends troops against US Citizens. Tells protesters if they wish to protest they can go do it in little fenced areas they provided and named "First Amendment Areas". Fenced with livestock panels. The disinformation news has hidden the facts of Nevada standoff.

I do not know what happened in Ferguson. I wish to set things strait about the Bunkerville incident
 
 
+4 # Radscal 2014-08-20 20:34
farmdave writes:
"Like comparing beef steak to watermelon."

Really? You really wrote that? Really?

And who would be the "watermelons?" How dare you call those white guys aiming rifles at federal agents "watermelons?" Because the deceased Michael Brown was surely a "beef steak." That must be what you meant, right?

'Cause you know, otherwise you might have let a little bit of racist stereotyping slip out.
 
 
+2 # Bruce Gruber 2014-08-21 06:33
"Back to work," as dad used to say ... or is it Ed Schultz?
farmrdave: The two events are RELATED. Bundy has claimed that the government cannot own federal property - that it is his right to take control and use whatever he wants of your/my public land ... and without compensation. Like, could he seize the CIA building and run his office from there? There was no property destruction ... only the denial, by me and you through our elected government, that his CLAIM of rights (under his opinion that the government ((you and me)) is illegitimate). A frustrated mob in Ferguson (or a subversive group of anarchists .. or a conservative plant wishing to make black protest look bad, ... or a crazy firebug - who knows?)burned some buildings. Reports suggest that some of the locals have complained about the loss of their one 'food' source in the neighborhood ... not exactly the offering of revolutionary punks. Many of thes neighbors, friends and sympathizers have invested the time, energy and, therefore, income potential in protesting peacefully their grievance over the execution of a jaywalker for failure to submit to a police officer's demands.
 
 
0 # Bruce Gruber 2014-08-21 07:15
Get "with it", farmrdave, TRY to empathize rather than condemn out of anger and frustration. A husband and wife may argue and disagree, but if they want the marriage to work and the kids to have stability they must find common ground, or at least a common enemy. That enemy cannot be the other person.

In the case of public, disagreement like Bundy or Ferguson, the common enemy/need, TO ME, is the decline of the middle class, poverty, the lack of real opportunity and the income inequality that been contrived by special interest tax policy. During Eisenhower's administration the effective tax rate on income over a million dollars was 90%. Now the well-to-do pay only 25-40% - if they pay anything at all with their credits, exclusions and deductions. That is a list of enemies to PROGRESS, though it means EVERYONE must pull TOGETHER for the American dream to work. "United (even if some are bitching about it) we stand. Divided we fall".
 
 
-2 # farmrdave 2014-08-21 11:33
Bruce, you said in part, "Bundy has claimed that the government cannot own federal property - that it is his right to take control and use whatever he wants of your/my public land ..." What Mr. Bundy said is Article 1 section 8, clause 17, states clearly what lands the federal government is ALLOWED to own within the states. Grazing land and forestland do not fit within those limits. Please study about grazing rights. They are a tangible form of real property. Mr. Bundy "owns" the grazing rights for some of this land in Nevada. However on the same land you can recreate, hunt, mine, and a host of other legal things anyone can do on public land without conflict. He is entitled to make certain improvements, fencing, watering facilities, corrals, necessary roads, probably many other things. All those improvements belong to him. They are private property. Of the 50 plus other ranches in that area all of them have been run out of business by BLM policies over the last 20 years. Mr. Bundy is standing his legal ground, nothing more nothing less. I have not heard any anti government statements issue forth from this man. By all accounts he pays his taxes, is a upstanding member of his community and is well thought of by neighbors and officials in the area. The information is on the internet if you look for it. His issue appears to be with claimed illegal authority from BLM. This is different from Ferguson. Do not believe the news reports about it.
 
 
+2 # phrixus 2014-08-21 10:42
"In Nevada the government was destroying private property..."

100% wrong. Do your homework.
 
 
+6 # JSRaleigh 2014-08-20 18:01
I've been thinking about the contrast between Ferguson, Mo and the Bundy Ranch for several days now. I'm glad to see someone finally put it into writing.
 
 
0 # lumot82 2016-01-10 15:39
Does no one remember Shays are rebellion? 4 cannon were dragged to the site. Shots were fired, grapeshot killed 4. Rebellion over. Would two tanks be sufficient. One drone. There is a precedent. Ditto the Whiskey Rebellion.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN