Cliven Bundy Ranch

[American Dream]

Forest Defense Blues

by STEPHEN QUIRK and ALEXANDER REID ROSS

http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/04/17/ ... nse-blues/

There is a line being drawn in the context of land management by the Forest Service and BLM [Bureau of Land Management]. While the Radical Right is allowed to scare the Federal Government out of enforcing public lands regulations through armed vigilantism, those who stand in the way of illegal deforestation are denigrated as “eco-terrorists.” As the FBI and DHS levy counterinsurgency tactics against nonviolent groups like Earth First!, they compromise with paramilitaries. That the government is more equipped to negotiate with armed militias in the service of millionaires than with lawyers and field surveyors representing tens of thousands of peaceful citizens shows their calculated tolerance for the destruction of public land. Hence, the wealth of the commons is transferred to corporate earnings reports.

[Iamwhomiam]

Sounder, we're done. I could go back point for point and argue with you, but it's really pointless. But you have claimed I laid upon someone some outrageous slander, which is patently false.

Yes, thank you, Peachtree Pam. His viewpoint in nearly identical to mine, excepting of course, about this,

"They are hostile to traditional industries like logging, mining and ranching, and if you have a puddle in your back yard, the EPA will try to regulate it as a navigable waterway.

That is only a slight exaggeration."

It is a gross exaggeration. Hydrofracking is mining. Forests are being stripped of lumber, particularly in the southeast, to be burned into pellets and shipped to the UK for burning in power plant furnaces.

[Iamwhomiam]

Sounder, we're done. But you have claimed I laid upon someone some outrageous slander, which is patently false and frankly impossible for you to know if I had.
Perhaps you meant to write libel? But I didn't libel anyone either, I mean you did admit you were an shithead.
You also claim, quoted below, that I turned this into something about me, but I did not. You did. Here, earlier:

I feel like pointing out a difference in our outlooks Iamwhomiam. You seem to let ideology do your thinking for you.
<snip>
You seem to see one ‘side’ as being bad, so the other must be ‘good’, or at least worth defending.
<snip>
Its going to be hard when you find out how thoroughly supportive your underlying ideology is for the purposes of slave makers, but hey maybe that’s some dissonance to be dealt with later.
<snip>
You dance away from the substance of the assertions by turning the subject to you. (It’s not about you) It is an internal contradiction to say ‘But this is not about me’, when YOU turned the subject to you, along the way throwing in an outrageous slander that these things are; ‘Nothing of course you’d care about’.

That last bit is just too much! You make allegations, post bullshit and won't substantiate your claims or even try to, when in truth,

It's become more about you making false and unsubstantial claims about me, about Reid, about the Chinese solar project without any factual basis for doing so.

And for someone with no interest in this drama, you sure seem to be, I mean, we've really gotta pay close attention to what's going on in the Ukraine, as that's so much more important than a police action being taken by government agencies against armed citizens at home.

Oops! I just fell off the wagon, too.

Sounder, you're a fucking twit. (#4)

slimmouse, you are indeed a puzzle. Alex Jones and Icke. These blogs you consider important sources? One guy's proclaimed himself to be Jesus, the second coming of the Messiah and the other just wants to be considered as if he was Jesus. Jeezus!

Yes, thank you, Peachtree Pam. His viewpoint is nearly identical to mine, excepting of course, about this,

"They are hostile to traditional industries like logging, mining and ranching, and if you have a puddle in your back yard, the EPA will try to regulate it as a navigable waterway.

That is only a slight exaggeration."

It is a gross exaggeration. Hydrofracking is mining. Forests are being stripped of lumber, particularly in the southeast, to be burned into pellets and shipped to the UK for burning in power plant furnaces. Our regulators are mostly corporate shills, looking for a buyout with decisions sure to please their future employers.

[Hunter]

Things arent always as black and white as many make them out to be, there is a lot of gray in the world and I am sure in this case it is the same, nobody but those directly involved really know what this is all about and those directly involved most certainly do not include Alex Jones or David Icke, neither of which can be relied upon for much anything other than a good chuckle if that. It is nothing personal but both have a very bad, long and sordid history of printing sensationalist BS willy nilly with no regard at all for the truth. Has Jones sometimes spoken truth? Certainly he has, but he is not a reliable source for it and there any number instances to show why through the years. I dont care to get in to Icke on here, if that is you thing great, it certainly isnt for me.


All I seem to know is he was letting his cattle roam on public lands and not paying grazing fees, you cant do that, if you dont agree with grazing fees etc fine, that is another discussion but it is the law as it stands and it has to be followed, and there are ways to challenge it if you disagree with it, ignoring it never works and never will.

And for the record, yes the Federal govt went about this in a very bad way, I dont agree with the response at all, there was no need to handle this the way they did.


Also calling someone a shithead, an asshole a jerk or a twat cannot ever be libel, it is opinion and therefore protected speech, the reason is, you cannot prove you are NOT an asshole, a shithead or a jerk or twat because there is no real set definition of what these things are, they are just opinions. Libel would be calling someone a criminal, pedophile, tax evader, rapist, murderer etc when in fact they are NOT any such things and they can prove they are not, that would be libel, just calling someone a fuckhead, thats not libel because how you going to prove youre not a fuckhead, go ahead and try, a fuckhead, shithead, asshole, jerk, twat etc can mean many many different things to different people and it is impossible to prove you are none of them. Opinion is never libel, it is protected free speech, and slander is something spoken not written, if it is written it is libel, if it is spoken it is slander. There is also a thing called defamation, slightly different than the other two but similar in many ways. We will leave that for another day.

[slimmouse]

slimmouse, you are indeed a puzzle. Alex Jones and Icke. These blogs you consider important sources? One guy's proclaimed himself to be Jesus, the second coming of the Messiah and the other just wants to be considered as if he was Jesus. Jeezus!

.

Ignoring your comments about Icke proclaiming himself to be the Second coming, which is complete nonsense, Im wondering if absolutely everything on such sites is hyped up nonsense, because if its only the usual small percentage ( in my own experience) then this is very real and very ongoing.

Im just stunned that some still can't see it.

[Sounder]

Great to hear from you Hunter but,

To call someone a shithead was not the slander, the slander was to suggest that I do not care about things that have need for care to be shown about,when I wrote.

along the way throwing in an outrageous slander that these things are; ‘Nothing of course you’d care about’.

Jeeze, It seems we all need work on our reading comprehension. (I know I do.)

Also it is amusing that a poster calling me a shithead and now a fucking twit, and without addressing anything I wrote, can come off as the reasonable one just because he more closely represents community beliefs.

I guess rationality does have its limits.

[Rory]

But, what does moralmatters.org say is happening?

[Hunter]

Great to hear from you Hunter but,

To call someone a shithead was not the slander, the slander was to suggest that I do not care about things that have need for care to be shown about,when I wrote.

along the way throwing in an outrageous slander that these things are; ‘Nothing of course you’d care about’.

Jeeze, It seems we all need work on our reading comprehension. (I know I do.)

Also it is amusing that a poster calling me a shithead and now a fucking twit, and without addressing anything I wrote, can come off as the reasonable one just because he more closely represents community beliefs.

I guess rationality does have its limits.

That is, fine I really wasnt trying to single anyone out. I am not around here enough to throw any weight around, I was just speaking in general, I try and appreciate everyone's opinion but I do have trouble swallowing anything the far radical right is trying to push yet that is not to say the left is always better.

[Sounder]

The reference to climate change in the article that AD posted is wholly gratuitous, as delicate ecosystems need preserving on their own account and with CC having nothing to do with it. But the repetition does serve to remind all that we depend on the govt. to save us from the scourge of carbon. This dependency is bound to bleed into other ideation, as when for example; a lefty friend of mine was promoting military action into Syria because Assad is a really bad man. Or where folk want these ‘vigilantes’ dealt with harshly while forgetting that the ‘Law’ they earnestly want to see applied seldom serves to protect rather than to set up the exploitation of people and the environment.

While most folk will acknowledge the power of propaganda, they will typically resist considering how deeply they themselves are caught up in it, and still more loath to admit to being conduits of propaganda through their conscious modeling habits.

Here are two threads started by conniption that effectively expose the depth and broad participation in the spreading of propaganda. And it’s no surprise that these threads are not favored destination places for discussion.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=38034

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=37104

The PTMB give us material to repeat, and we dutifully spend our time cancelling our inherent creative potentials, replacing that with mantras of bullshit.

A central component of propaganda is repetition. The repetition biases or programs the unconscious toward being open to buying that Cadillac, kit-cat, war or environmental salvation program when the actual opportunity presents itself.

Repetition is a pretty reliable indicator that propaganda is going down. Unfortunately if the propaganda conforms well to the target audiences pretenses and beliefs, that mostly come down to various forms of prejudices, they tend to cheer it on.

Let’s be clear, the govt. doesn’t care in the least about the beliefs and desires of liberals or conservatives. The thugery component of conservatism will be used to cut down the forests, etc., and the liberals will be used to control lifestyle options through misguided applications of righteousness.

In both cases the govern mental goal is to monetize assets to pay off debts that are an inevitable result of a debt based monetary system.

We seem to think that problems are solved by creating new obligations, but those things are simply new forms of debt.

Debt is the problem, not the solution. Until we figure that one out, we are pissing into the wind.

[seemslikeadream]

Harry Reid: Cliven Bundy’s ‘domestic terrorists’

[brainpanhandler]

Here are two threads started by conniption that effectively expose the depth and broad participation in the spreading of propaganda. And it’s no surprise that these threads are not favored destination places for discussion.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=38034

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=37104

I don't see that you participated in either.

Why do you think "it’s no surprise that these threads are not favored destination places for discussion"?

The thread on hypocracy is just about the evil, lying, duplicity of politicians. You're right. It's not surprising that one was not particularly popular, as gauged by responses. That's hardly news here.

The thread on corporate media's war bias got moderate attention. More than the average thread around here. Perhaps I'll participate in that one as there is a glaring omission. Chomsky. That man has done more than any other single human being in exposing the corporate media's war bias, by far.

[Hunter]

The reference to climate change in the article that AD posted is wholly gratuitous, as delicate ecosystems need preserving on their own account and with CC having nothing to do with it. But the repetition does serve to remind all that we depend on the govt. to save us from the scourge of carbon. This dependency is bound to bleed into other ideation, as when for example; a lefty friend of mine was promoting military action into Syria because Assad is a really bad man. Or where folk want these ‘vigilantes’ dealt with harshly while forgetting that the ‘Law’ they earnestly want to see applied seldom serves to protect rather than to set up the exploitation of people and the environment.

While most folk will acknowledge the power of propaganda, they will typically resist considering how deeply they themselves are caught up in it, and still more loath to admit to being conduits of propaganda through their conscious modeling habits.

Here are two threads started by conniption that effectively expose the depth and broad participation in the spreading of propaganda. And it’s no surprise that these threads are not favored destination places for discussion.

http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board2/ ... =8&t=38034

http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board2/ ... =8&t=37104

The PTMB give us material to repeat, and we dutifully spend our time cancelling our inherent creative potentials, replacing that with mantras of bullshit.

A central component of propaganda is repetition. The repetition biases or programs the unconscious toward being open to buying that Cadillac, kit-cat, war or environmental salvation program when the actual opportunity presents itself.

Repetition is a pretty reliable indicator that propaganda is going down. Unfortunately if the propaganda conforms well to the target audiences pretenses and beliefs, that mostly come down to various forms of prejudices, they tend to cheer it on.

Let’s be clear, the govt. doesn’t care in the least about the beliefs and desires of liberals or conservatives. The thugery component of conservatism will be used to cut down the forests, etc., and the liberals will be used to control lifestyle options through misguided applications of righteousness.

In both cases the govern mental goal is to monetize assets to pay off debts that are an inevitable result of a debt based monetary system.

We seem to think that problems are solved by creating new obligations, but those things are simply new forms of debt.

Debt is the problem, not the solution. Until we figure that one out, we are pissing into the wind.

Wholly agree with you, both sides are fucked up and push their own propaganda and I think in the end they both serve the same masters when it really comes right down to it. ALL of the big spenders and special interest groups who benefit most from either party's actions are giving money equally to both sides, that cannot be disputed.

I would probably, if forced, say the only real difference is the left uses lube when they fuck us and the right seems to enjoy going in dry.

[brainpanhandler]

The reference to climate change in the article that AD posted is wholly gratuitous, as delicate ecosystems need preserving on their own account and with CC having nothing to do with it. But the repetition does serve to remind all that we depend on the govt. to save us from the scourge of carbon. This dependency is bound to bleed into other ideation, as when for example; a lefty friend of mine was promoting military action into Syria because Assad is a really bad man. Or where folk want these ‘vigilantes’ dealt with harshly while forgetting that the ‘Law’ they earnestly want to see applied seldom serves to protect rather than to set up the exploitation of people and the environment.

While most folk will acknowledge the power of propaganda, they will typically resist considering how deeply they themselves are caught up in it, and still more loath to admit to being conduits of propaganda through their conscious modeling habits.

Here are two threads started by conniption that effectively expose the depth and broad participation in the spreading of propaganda. And it’s no surprise that these threads are not favored destination places for discussion.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=38034

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=37104

The PTMB give us material to repeat, and we dutifully spend our time cancelling our inherent creative potentials, replacing that with mantras of bullshit.

A central component of propaganda is repetition. The repetition biases or programs the unconscious toward being open to buying that Cadillac, kit-cat, war or environmental salvation program when the actual opportunity presents itself.

Repetition is a pretty reliable indicator that propaganda is going down. Unfortunately if the propaganda conforms well to the target audiences pretenses and beliefs, that mostly come down to various forms of prejudices, they tend to cheer it on.

Let’s be clear, the govt. doesn’t care in the least about the beliefs and desires of liberals or conservatives. The thugery component of conservatism will be used to cut down the forests, etc., and the liberals will be used to control lifestyle options through misguided applications of righteousness.

In both cases the govern mental goal is to monetize assets to pay off debts that are an inevitable result of a debt based monetary system.

We seem to think that problems are solved by creating new obligations, but those things are simply new forms of debt.

Debt is the problem, not the solution. Until we figure that one out, we are pissing into the wind.

Wholly agree with you, both sides are fucked up and push their own propaganda and I think in the end they both serve the same masters when it really comes right down to it. ALL of the big spenders and special interest groups who benefit most from either party's actions are giving money equally to both sides, that cannot be disputed.

I would probably, if forced, say the only real difference is the left uses lube when they fuck us and the right seems to enjoy going in dry.

That's sort of canonical around here. I don't know why people feel the need to repeat it ad nauseam.

It's worth mentioning however that if I got a choice between lube and no lube I'll take the lube.

[Sounder]

That's sort of canonical around here.

How can this be called canonical when you (BPH) implied by association not long ago on a CC thread that my critical thinking skills were on the level of a two year old when I challenged the prevailing CC consensus.

I maintain that AGW is little more than another desperate extension of western exceptionalism (complete with cavalry rushing in to save the day). That is hardly canonical around here, is it BPH?

[brainpanhandler]

That's sort of canonical around here.

How can this be called canonical when you (BPH) implied by association not long ago on a CC thread that my critical thinking skills were on the level of a two year old when I challenged the prevailing CC consensus.

I was responding to hunter and only tangentially to your remarks. If I had a nickle for every time the uncontroversial assertion that the dems are only barely better than the repubs was written around here I'd be able to afford the solar panels I want to purchase and have something left over to give to Jeff.

I have disparaged your critical thinking skills in the past, possibly even the recent past, but I think you are mixing me up with someone else in this instance. IAM maybe?

I maintain that AGW is little more than another desperate extension of western exceptionalism (complete with cavalry rushing in to save the day).

Yes. Everybody knows what you "maintain" by now, I guess. Although how AGW is a desperate extension of western exceptionalism in your world of insular mental abstractions is lost on me. The only thing exceptional about the west wrt to Anthropogenic climate disruption is that we are the main culprits.

That is hardly canonical around here, is it BPH?

I'd have to know what you mean first, which would mean you would have to reason and write clearly. I won't wait on that.

What is uncontroversial around here, with a few caveats, not least of which is that not ALL big spenders and special interest groups give money EQUALLY to both sides (that's demonstrably false and I dispute it), is:

both sides are fucked up and push their own propaganda and I think in the end they both serve the same masters when it really comes right down to it. ALL of the big spenders and special interest groups who benefit most from either party's actions are giving money equally to both sides, that cannot be disputed.

The thing is the differences, slim as they might be, can effect tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of individuals. Maybe millions. And sometimes those differences can be life or death. It's very difficult to impossible to quantify.