‘Hero’ Cliven Bundy Wants to Tell You Something About ‘The Negro’

Screen Shot 2014-04-24 at 12.03.36 PMCliven Bundy’s stand-off with federal agents over cattle grazing on government-owned land has been an incredibly contentious topic here and elsewhere. Many see him as a hero, and others a thief of public resources. Since proclaiming victory against the feds, he’s been holding press conferences, and his comments in the latest one seem to have even his supporters scratching their heads.

Via New York Times:

But if the federal government has moved on, Mr. Bundy — a father of 14 and a registered Republican — has not.

He said he would continue holding a daily news conference; on Saturday, it drew one reporter and one photographer, so Mr. Bundy used the time to officiate at what was in effect a town meeting with supporters, discussing, in a long, loping discourse, the prevalence of abortion, the abuses of welfare and his views on race.

Mr. Bundy flies the U.S. flag and his friends acknowledge the national anthem but refuse to pay for the use of public lands. He is a welfare cheat, or a ‘welfare rancher.’

“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” he said. Mr. Bundy recalled driving past a public-housing project in North Las Vegas, “and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids — and there is always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch — they didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young girls to do.

“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. “They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”

Keep reading at The New York Times.

220 Comments on "‘Hero’ Cliven Bundy Wants to Tell You Something About ‘The Negro’"

  1. Like I said when the first article about Bundy was posted here… for some men “states rights” is about bovinae cattle, for others it’s about human cattle.
    #helterskelter

  2. Echar Lailoken | Apr 24, 2014 at 3:28 pm |

    I wonder what kind of logical flimflammery will be abused to backpedal out of this one?

    • emperorreagan | Apr 24, 2014 at 3:42 pm |

      So far on the disinfo facebook account:

      A comment about this guy just telling the truth.

      He’s sincere and exhibiting empathy, he’s just old so he’s doing it poorly.

      Disinfo is a government propaganda site trying to distract people from the real issue.

      The issue the militias were supporting had nothing to do with any of this, it was the notion of “free speech zones” and how they’re a violation of the first amendment.

      • > Disinfo is a government propaganda site trying to distract people from the real issue.

        Seems plausible to me, considering Wiltshire’s astrofoil.

      • Echar Lailoken | Apr 24, 2014 at 8:09 pm |

        Wait ’til you read some of the gems here.

  3. I am shocked that this man is a fascist racist, shocked!

    • Adam's Shadow | Apr 24, 2014 at 5:18 pm |

      Shocked!

      I’m wondering when the ZOG talk from hoss is going to start.

      • Soon, I hope:)

      • Actual Footage of Cameron driving out to the Bundy Ranch.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCu_wd_bulw

        • ……All you guys have is mockery, not a lick of sense or rational between the two of you. All you do is expose your inability to rationally debate time and again.

          • What’s that, snopes is ignored because it conveniently doesn’t support your conspiracy theory that has nothing at all to do with the price of tea in china?

          • You don’t understand. The legitimacy of a source is determined by the ideological implications of the information it provides, just as the truth or falseness of facts are determined by the conclusions they lead to.

          • Rhoid Rager | Apr 24, 2014 at 11:00 pm |

            A profound heuristic.

          • Anarchy Pony | Apr 24, 2014 at 10:31 pm |

            Wanna get rational? Bundy expropriated(read: Stole) value from land that didn’t belong to him to increase his wealth(that makes him a thief, something you claim to despise). He did so for over 10 years, he defied a court order and used threat of violence to get his way. He is thieving entitled garbage, hiding behind grandiose bullshit, and in reality is not very different than the welfare recipients he loves to blast.

          • Mr Willow | Apr 24, 2014 at 11:32 pm |

            Fucking thank you!!!!

          • kowalityjesus | Apr 25, 2014 at 9:58 am |

            Yeah! Anyone who extracts value from land is a thieving COMMUNIST! and should be imprisoned.

          • VaudeVillain | Apr 25, 2014 at 5:33 pm |

            Anyone who extracts values from land they do not own without adequately compensating the owner most certainly is a thief.

            Anyone who has done so to the tune of millions of dollars is a straight up career criminal.

            The fact that the owner of the land is, in this case, the public, does not change that what he did is theft.

          • Wait, two a whole shitload of wrongs don’t make a right?

            Please stay where you are while I run to fetch my bible that I may beat you into submission with it.

          • VaudeVillain | Apr 25, 2014 at 6:07 pm |

            You kid (I think), but I half expect kowality or Camron to sincerely point out that what I said wasn’t particularly insightful or groundbreaking, so I must be wrong and COMMUNISM!

            It’s a sad state of affairs.

          • On the other hand, we’ve just discovered two excellent candidates for Disinfo™-brand Slow Campers™

          • kowalityjesus | Apr 26, 2014 at 9:46 am |

            Yeah well why don’t we go cull the herds of buffalo for stealing the land’s value! Think of how much value the land would accrue! Seriously though, you need to incorporate some basic ecological facts into your thinking. Grassland and ungulates have a symbiosis, where poop helps the plants more than not being eaten. Grass anticipates grazers (as well as fire) so farming the land with cattle is not so bad, (as well as prescriptive burn). That being said, buffalo/gazelle graze less destructively by not eating plant down to the nub, and that ranch looks like its practically desert so I don’t if any grazing is particularly good. As for public ownership of the land, the feds are freakin scrooge they’ve got such a monopoly in the American west. http://www.vote29.com/newmyblog/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/map-owns_the_west.jpg

          • VaudeVillain | Apr 27, 2014 at 1:27 am |

            The buffalo and gazelle aren’t livestock owned by a professional rancher, they are wildlife. Please don’t force me to explain why those aren’t the same thing.

            Ecologically, cattle herds are not part of the West’s natural ecosystem. There are several species which act somewhat similarly to them, and compete with them for resources, but the specific behaviors of domesticated cattle are not particularly helpful to the ecology. Also, did I mention they compete with native fauna for resources? Starving out the lifeforms that are supposed to live there doesn’t strike me as a valid contribution.

            Regarding the percentage of land owned by the Feds… yeah, they probably shouldn’t have so much of a monopoly. It sucks. It’s also the law of the land, and there are plenty of people who seem to abide by it just fine… even among those who don’t like the arrangement. I’d be totally supportive of a movement top force the government to auction off large tracts of that public land, I’d recommend putting all proceeds toward ecological research and work to try and improve the availability of irrigation without destroying the watershed.

            What I won’t support is somebody just saying “aw, screw it” and ignoring the rules everyone else has to play by. 20 years of stealing, threats of violence, and disregard for the other members of your own community is not Civil Disobedience, it’s just plain old fashioned crime.

          • kowalityjesus | Apr 27, 2014 at 10:22 pm |

            Riddle me this Batman: when did herding cattle across the American West become illegal? When did the entirety of the USA become spoken for and partitioned like castled-and-carved-up Britain?

            The answer to the question, and why, will tell you a lot more about this debate than the habits of desert reptiles.

          • VaudeVillain | Apr 28, 2014 at 12:00 am |

            Never. But if you drive your herd across land you don’t own, public or private,you need to follow the owners rules… including if they ask for compensation. As it turns out, the BLM is quite happy to let this happen, and even charges well below market rates for people to do it.

            Well, either that or circa 1850, when the Federal government took legal ownership of the former Spanish territories. Take your pick.

            Unless you have some better answer, not steeped in never-quite-happened-that-way Wild West mythology, that actually explainst something. The game where you ask a deliberately leading question with a specific answer in mind, expecting me to guess what information you claim to have, is annoying and stupid.

          • kowalityjesus | Apr 29, 2014 at 2:20 am |

            Well why is this rule about not grazing on public land (that was devised sometime after the disappearance of the cattle-drive and the cowboy) being enforced at the Bundy ranch when it is almost certainly violated elsewhere? Are you going to believe the premise of desert turtles? I think this battle between citizens and government is analogous to a court case that will set a wide but non-specific precedent. You may vie to honor the US federal government’s right to be miserly with its massive land holdings in the western states, but I will side with the people that don’t play by the rules when the rules are shit.

          • VaudeVillain | Apr 29, 2014 at 9:53 am |

            Again, there isn’t a rule against grazing on public land, there is just a small fee for doing so… in fact, it is about 90% less than what private land owners charge for the same privilege.

            As to why they are enforcing this rule at the Bundy Ranch, it’s because he’s been violating the rules for two decades. There are other ranchers who also graze their cattle on public land, but most of them pay the fees… it’s just a cost of doing business, and a relatively minor one at that.

            I’ve also read reports that Bundy’s cattle have caused damage on private properties, been involved in auto accidents, attacked recreational visitors, and been a general nuisance in the area, but I’m frankly unsure if they are accurate depictions of reality or an ex post facto smear job. If it’s true, he is even less sympathetic. If it’s untrue, he’s still in the wrong here.

            As I said, I don’t particularly agree with the government’s land policies in the West. I suspect that a better way is possible, and I’d like to see it happen. I still don’t side with a man who has illegally misused land he does not own for the past 20 years in order to subsidize his commercial venture. He’s not Robin Hood, just a thief.

          • kowalityjesus | Apr 29, 2014 at 11:34 am |

            yeah, maybe he should just pay

          • VaudeVillain | Apr 29, 2014 at 1:49 pm |

            Honestly, yeah, he probably should have. Or not grazed his cattle on land that wasn’t his. Doing either of those things would have worked just fine.

          • Great posts. For all the so called “leftists” why don’t you figure out a way to smear Rosa Korie (democrat, activist, lesbian) for sharing the truth about the UN agenda for the 21st century aka Agenda 21 here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDtCb45Lqt0

            Lemme guess, if you make too much sense you must be racist…

          • Since you are casting aspersion on “leftists”, I assume you are “right wing”?

            In that case, I’d like to know what you have to say to someone who doesn’t believe in the existence of imaginary stupid fucking lines. Left/Right = different sides of the same coin at best.

            So, do you have something actionable? Do you have a mechanism to act on information in your possession that will get people to care about your cause? Because so far, you just seem like a troll with the ability to post articles.

            Michael C. Ruppert. Collapse
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdO2Xh51Q-U

            This is what trustworthy looks like.

          • VaudeVillain | Apr 28, 2014 at 8:18 am |

            I’m willing to watch this if there’s actually a case being made, but after 14 minutes of being told “this thing is happening” and her neglecting to say what it is or provide her promised hard evidence or do much of anything but flatter her audience and make vague insinuations… I’d like to know to what point I can fast forward and get to the meat.

            And know, “making too much sense” is not grounds for being called out as a racist. Saying racist nonsense is. I’d like to think that’s obvious.

        • kowalityjesus | Apr 25, 2014 at 9:59 am |

          ha. you fuck, Camron isn’t racist.

    • Chad Burke | Apr 24, 2014 at 8:31 pm |

      Racist yeah. Fascist? You need to learn the meaning of words before you go throwing them around.

      • “By ‘Fascism’ they mean, roughly speaking, something cruel, unscrupulous, arrogant, obscurantist, anti-liberal and anti-working-class. Except for the relatively small number of Fascist sympathizers, almost any English person would accept ‘bully’ as a synonym for ‘Fascist’. That is about as near to a definition as this much-abused word has come.”
        -George Orwell (prophetically, in 1944)
        http://orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/efasc

  4. African Americans had more freedom and happiness as slaves than they do as welfare recipients?

    Bundy doesn’t truly appreciate his private property or his freedom.

  5. I was going to comment on this, but there was no way that it wouldn’t sound racist in some sense

  6. He should go on tour with Ted Nugent. They’d be perfect together.
    I think Mr. Bumpy could help Ted run for president in 2016. I think they call that “synergy.”
    Whaddya think, Wiltshire?

    • Echar Lailoken | Apr 24, 2014 at 3:46 pm |

      This can be their theme song

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIk6-hHx–Q

    • MatthiasGoliath | Apr 24, 2014 at 4:56 pm |

      You’re onto something here!

    • Juan, you already stated you are unwilling to hear new information in our previous encounter, barring a change of mind I see no reason to posture like you are ready for a real lesson in logic and virtue.

      • Logic and virtue . . .

      • kowalityjesus | Apr 25, 2014 at 9:54 am |

        his response a further demonstration thereof. It’s just like The New Sweden, if you say taboo things relating to race, you’re over.

        ‘Who cares what kind of crux of constitutional law is teetering on a precipice at Bundy ranch? He said that black people living in housing projects aren’t happy! He can’t be right about anything!!!’

    • Henry Eugene | Apr 25, 2014 at 10:54 am |

      Yes. Mr. Bumpy, Ted Nougat, and the embalmed body of Fred “God Hates
      Fags” Phelch should go on the road and show their support for the GOP
      front runner by stopping at every stump stop running up to 2016. That
      would be terrific. Because it’s grrreat to be patriotic.

    • I think you are willfully ignorant.

      Via Charlie Delta

      The media distorts information to the point of social division. This is a photo of myself and the resilient, often charismatic, and maybe not so tactful Cliven Bundy. He’s a cowboy and a helluva family man, not an orator. One thing he definitely isn’t – a racist. I found his comments to not only be NOT racist, but his own
      view of his experiences.

      Who the heck are we to determine another man’s perspective on the world around him?! Just because Picasso’s view of theworld was abstract, does it negate the fact that his art was genuine? Furthermore, if you take the time to do your own research, you’ll find that his statements about some black Americans actually hold weight. He posed a hypothetical question. He said, “I wonder IF”

      … Hell, I’m black and I often wonder about the same about the decline of the black family. Bottom line is that we are all slaves in this waning republic, no matter our skin color. Mr. Bundy could have used any racial demographic as an example: Native Americans on reservations, whites in trailer parks, etc. He noticed the crippling effects of receiving government “assistance” and the long term result of accepting handouts.

      It’s not progress at all. I challenge Sean Hannity, Rand Paul, and others to read my comment and reconsider their position in this matter. Individual liberties are at stake here, yours and mine. THAT is the issue. Don’t let the liberal media and ignoramuses like Glenn Beck and that weasel Harry Reid make you lose sight of the real issue here: The federal government is a burgeoning behemoth and a bully on a once constitutional playground.

      I sincerely hope you real patriots out there who can see through the smoke.

      Semper Fidelis

  7. I expect the guy’s fifteen minutes of fame to end pretty quickly, even in most right wing media. Republicans tend to like their racist messaging with a little more subtlety than that.

  8. Tchoutoye | Apr 24, 2014 at 3:47 pm |

    “The Negro”… which one? If he’s talking about one person in particular, he should just name names.

  9. Eric_D_Read | Apr 24, 2014 at 4:00 pm |

    “Cliven Bundy and his family were hardly the first Nevada ranchers to confront federally licensed cattle rustlers who operated under the protection of militarized law enforcement agents. They were, however, the first to fight back.”

    http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2014/04/bunkerville-was-not-blms-first-rustlers.html

    If it had been the Dann family doing what Bundy did, everyone who is currently creaming themselves because of the heretical Gotcha! comments of a 67-year-old rancher from Nevada would be cheering them on.

    • Echar Lailoken | Apr 24, 2014 at 4:10 pm |

      Yeah, where was the militia to back them up?

    • And they’d be right to.

      • Eric_D_Read | Apr 24, 2014 at 8:21 pm |

        Great saying. I have the T-shirt.
        Unfortunately, they didn’t have the numbers or unity.

    • The fascist gov treats fascists preferentially.

      • More like this actually.

        • Eric_D_Read | Apr 24, 2014 at 8:27 pm |

          I can understand disagreeing with Bundy’s motives for squaring off with the Feds.

          But the visceral reaction from certain leftist segments who are otherwise constantly ranting about the U.S. Gov and what evil fascists they all are is sounding more and more like sour grapes.

          Bundy stared down the Fed goon squad and won (at least temporarily) while they keep getting their asses handed to them.

        • Mr Willow | Apr 24, 2014 at 9:07 pm |

          And how well do you think Occupy would have gone if they had shown up strapped with ARs and AKs?

          Do you really think Bloomberg would have told the cops to stand down, or would he (or Obama) have declared a state of emergency and called in the military?

          How do you think the media would have painted the movement? As freedom-loving democratic participants with valid concerns, or crazy left-wing terrorists threatening to impose Communism on everyone?

          Whose side would you have been on?

          • Eric_D_Read | Apr 24, 2014 at 9:38 pm |

            It they even took out a few pigs and a Goldman Sachs employee or two it would have accomplished more than Occupy actually did.

          • No one was killed at the stand off now were they. I guess if you stand up for yourself that the bully might think twice before robbing you with the cameras rolling and the internet streaming. I don’t care how people paint the movement, at some point enough is enough. I don’t love my $lavery, do you? If tyrannical oppressors resort to violence instead of a fair hearing, isn’t that prove alone that they’ve no real authority outside of coercion? Please watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5FNDRgPOLs

          • Mr Willow | Apr 26, 2014 at 6:38 pm |

            The NYPD didn’t think twice about assaulting droves of Occupy protesters even after the initial round of videos were released. Oakland PD didn’t think twice about using rubber bullets and tear gas against people throwing bricks. Videos of cops outright executing people have made the rounds of Youtube.

            My $lavery (appropriate rendering) is one of the monied and the propertied thinking freedom means their ability to do and say whatever they want should not be infringed upon, including ecocide, genocide, and ownership of human beings through debt and wages; rather than all individuals being free from such oppression. This one dispute is hardly a trifle compared to corporate control of the media, our food supply, water supplies, and the politicians who are supposed to protect the public from the abuses of industry.

            If tyrannical oppressors resort to violence instead of a fair hearing, isn’t that prove alone that they’ve no real authority outside of coercion?

            And there it is. The great irony of propertarian “freedom” and all their pontification on the “monopoly of violence” is that, in reality, the only freedom they seek is for they themselves to enact violence upon anything or anyone that they don’t like. That reliance on violence, that “might makes right” attitude is in no way indicative of freedom, except for those with the biggest stick. It is, rather, the mindset of the feudal warlord, the iron-fisted dictator, and the spoiled child, who believes their way is the right way, and if they are told otherwise, they are entitled to club the offender’s skull in.

          • Have you ever heard of the non aggression principle previously Mr Willow? Do you realize that most libertarians also subscribe to it as a philosophy. Please consider the following as I think you have the wrong picture entirely of the principles of liberty being espoused here https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=OsvFYBZr7QE

          • Mr Willow | Apr 26, 2014 at 7:26 pm |

            He is not defending his property.

            He is defending his ability to use someone else’s property (i.e. public property, i.e. [partially] my property) without compensating the owner for it.

            In retaliation of being told “you can’t do that” he and his friends stuck guns in the faces of they who said it and responded “wanna bet?”

            That’s the mark of a feudal lord looking to expand his territory.

          • Don’t waste your time. You’ll get more results out of explaining the situation to this…

          • Mr Willow | Apr 27, 2014 at 12:29 am |

            Camron’s harmless as long as you don’t take him too seriously. ^_^

          • So why do you believe the BLM has the right to steal his property? Why do you believe that his family having homesteaded on the state of Nevada property for 140+ years does not have legal precedence for continued grazing on that state’s public land? Is it Nevada state property or is it the federal governments? (Washington D.C) What are your sources supporting your contention. Also are you familiar with Agenda 21? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzEEgtOFFlM

          • Mr Willow | Apr 27, 2014 at 12:28 am |

            The BLM seized the cattle on public land (killing four, which should not have happened—as most people here have been pointing out, there are no good guys here).

            He has every right to use public land, so long as he pays the same grazing fees the other farmers do. He doesn’t want to, so he doesn’t get to. He’s been dodging court orders to do so for a decade and more, and if he just payed the fee, nobody would have any problem. Or, he could, you know, stay on his land.

            And is that crock about sustainability being the new holocaust supposed to scare me? Because most of the stuff they’re referencing (green energy, sustainable farming, abolition of private property [provided they mean factories, corporations, large tracts of land, but like most propertarian propaganda is vague on the term and makes it sound like it’s your house {which I would abhor}], an increase in high-speed rail) are things I advocate, and will continue to advocate.

            Again, an infringement on propertarian “freedom” is to be told “no, you can’t exploit the land or people.”

            Nature is already, and has always been, above humanity. It will kill us if we overstep ourselves. If we kill it by endlessly extracting what value it does have, through mining, drilling, over-farming, and throwing toxicity into the environment faster than Nature can renew any damage we do, we will die as well.

            The only thing that was even mildly troubling in that spiel was the notion that mathematics, the very foundation of science, is made relative, and the abolition of privacy; both would be inane and detestable .

            But that speaks to a broader point. Sustainability is possible, if everyone worked together, shared resources, cooperated, and focused on creating a society based on mutual aid and respect. The o-so-dreaded government wouldn’t be necessary, either, if everything were managed democratically, but people like Bundy, or those in your charming little propaganda video, wouldn’t take too kindly to that, because it means they might need to think about the needs of someone else without the thought of profit, ownership, or property crossing their mind.

            If that makes me some sort of accessory to the coming Illuminati takeover then fine, I’ll take delight in smashing their surveillance drones and fight the rest of them when it comes to that. 😉

            Good day.

          • I still don’t see any links determining that your perspective is correct. Why do you presume the federal gov’t is correct here? Also are you aware that Bundy says he would gladly pay the tax to the state of Nevada. He just does not recognize the authority of the Federal gov’t here. You obviously don’t understand the real intentions behind Agenda 21 and are presuming that they care about “sustainability” or the desert tortoise when in reality it’s just a means to steal property while claiming to care about the environment. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFEECus1hlY

            Now instead of killing the messenger, if you disagree with Alex or Rachel Corrie on any one point, please be specific and lay out your case and please cite your sources.

            Thank you.

          • Mr Willow | Apr 27, 2014 at 2:09 am |

            He is on federal land. Sticking his fingers in his ears and saying he isn’t doesn’t change that.

            You can spare me Jones (and the irony of telling me to cite sources whilst posting trite conspiracy videos as credible citations). I watched the last vid because it was 9 min. In it, it was stated repeatedly that A21 was about sustainability, that that was its end goal. Such a thing was never disputed. The troublesome bit was the structure of the sustainability, that is, top down and authoritarian.

            I said I agreed with the principle that sustainability—built from common land ownership, mutual aid, and democratic management of most, if not all, industiral, economic, and business-related institutions—would be preferable to our current socio-economic environment of owners and the rest of us.

            What I don’t agree with is making facts relative (ironically what Bundy is doing by not recognising the BLM’s position—i.e. “We here reached consensus that the federal gov doesn’t exist and/or has no claim here”), and constant surveillance.

            But again, if society began behaving cooperatively, compassionately, and with egalitarian aims, the need for a government (and all their abuses) becomes largely (if not totally) non-existent.

          • But what is your sourced evidence proving so? I don’t expect you to take my word for it. Let’s just focus on that critical point. If you can’t prove it then everything you’ve said is just conjecture regarding his case.

          • > So why do you believe the BLM has the right to steal his property?

            Possibly the same reason you apparently believe he has the right to land originally stolen by violence from the Indians.

          • Cool, but you are American Libertarians, and you stole that word, forgetting what it actually means.

            So, you’re about as credible as Christians at this point.

        • I wouldn’t advise the kinds of behaviors at the very rural Bundy ranch in an urban area. The outcome would have been much different. But, I am also very curious about how it would have turned out differently in the streets of Carson City rather than out in the desert.

        • …Get yourself this response, then I’ll believe you have a point…

          Yes, you personally, @camronwiltshire:disqus. I’ll settle for any right wing moonbat that thinks some etchings on piece of hemp and a primitive fire stick is useful though.

      • Eric_D_Read | Apr 24, 2014 at 8:22 pm |

        I guess you’ve never heard of Waco or Ruby Ridge.

  10. Anarchy Pony | Apr 24, 2014 at 5:50 pm |

    Breaking: white southern rancher is racist, in other news sky is blue.

  11. Cortacespedes | Apr 24, 2014 at 5:53 pm |

    Bundy, and Richard Mack, are acolytes of W. Cleon Skousen; so how this is shocking to anyone, I don’t know.

    • Brothers and Sisters of the depressed come together and stand up for your rights and each others. Cliven Bundy is no racist, this is just a hateful tactic to avoid the bigger picture, that being we are all en$laved by the $ystem and the veil has worn thin.

      • “Now, what does all of this mean in this great period of history? It
        means that we’ve got to stay together. We’ve got to stay together and
        maintain unity. You know, whenever Pharaoh wanted to prolong the period
        of slavery in Egypt, he had a favorite, favorite formula for doing it.
        What was that? He kept the slaves fighting among themselves. But
        whenever the slaves get together, something happens in Pharaoh’s court,
        and he cannot hold the slaves in slavery. When the slaves get together,
        that’s the beginning of getting out of slavery. Now let us maintain
        unity.” – Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

        • And here is more information for those actually interested in a rational critique and discussion of the applicable facts.

          Michelle Alexander: More Black Men Are In Prison Today Than Were Enslaved In 1850

          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/12/michelle-alexander-more-black-men-in-prison-slaves-1850_n_1007368.html

          • misinformation | Apr 24, 2014 at 11:07 pm |

            Hey! Are you calling the JustUs system racist?

          • Jonas Planck | Apr 28, 2014 at 12:00 am |

            He can’t possibly be saying that, because he also says that racist speech is not racism. I think I see what’s happening now… He’s suffering from a crippling case of Orwellian doublethink. Unlike the pundits who demonstrated to him how it’s done, he seems to actually BELIEVE it himself…for him, the memory hole is REAL, and he actually DOES forget what he said a few moments ago! It’s an early sign of the onset of Alzheimer’s, he should probably see a doctor about it.

          • misinformation | Apr 28, 2014 at 1:02 am |

            I actually think he was, through the link, alluding that the “justice” system is structurally racist (whether he was saying it directly or not)…and I agree.

          • Jonas Planck | Apr 28, 2014 at 3:19 am |

            Oh, I agree, too, but it’s just that… I don’t think HE would agree… and in reality, the entire justice system isn’t racist, it’s a lot of specific people in positions of power at all different levels that are racist, and they use the existing system to implement unfair practices based on that racial prejudice (I’m looking at YOU, Arpaio!).
            …If you want to split hairs.

          • Echar Lailoken | Apr 28, 2014 at 8:25 am |

            It could be that portions of the system haven’t caught up with the times yet. Changing things creates more work, and opens the system up to a high potential for less manageable disasters. AKA the unknown.

        • Jonas Planck | Apr 27, 2014 at 11:54 pm |

          …and now you’re a collectivist. Come on, man, pick a story and stick with it! You’re flip-flopping like a landed fish!

      • “You” so because my skin is white I automatically “got” this country. Am I a time traveler? This is such absurd illogic it is truly laughable. @JPH your skin is white right? Let me guess, you accept your place as a grovelling infidel forevermore based on phenotypic similarity to conquerors of old.

        • Jonas Planck | Apr 27, 2014 at 11:52 pm |

          As a formerly white male time traveler who no longer HAS any skin, I could choose to take offense at your remarks, but the thing is this: If you defend a deed, you don’t get to disavow any responsibility for it. You defended it. You must now support it with explanations of why of it was necessary, and what good it served. If you can’t do that, then don’t embrace it, mock it, like real men do!

    • I think you mean, “Mr. Bundy lies about his earlier remarks on the Alex Jones Show, and Alex Jones buys it without question.”

    • Echar Lailoken | Apr 28, 2014 at 8:28 am |

      Bulshytt is a term used to describe words, phrases, or even
      entire paragraphs which are misleading or empty in meaning. These terms
      are often listed as features of products extramuros. The term is often confused with one of a more vulgar nature.

  12. The real point the MSM wants to obscure. You really think the servants of the elite give a shit about the truth? No coverage on building 7 but plenty of time to spin someone’s comments to avoid the entire point that the foundation of our country enables redress of grievances and the right to bear arms specifically to reign in abusive and tyrannical government

    Also it is a fair question to ask are things better for black people when there are more black men incarcerated now in for profit prisons than were enslaved during slavery. Isn’t it odd that that this fact is completely ignored, why? Because it hits too close to home, it’s easy to talk about “entitlements” and “affirmative action” when they are perverse incentives designed to destroy the black family. But hey, don’t take my word for it, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUbOcgj8AjQ

    The ‘elite’ parasites hate the idea of their $laves coming together to fight the real overseers, thus more hate fueled spin and statist apology masquerading as concern and of course the regurgitation by the unthinking and irrational.

    • VaudeVillain | Apr 24, 2014 at 7:33 pm |

      Tell you what, we’ll try a pair of experiments.

      In the first experiment, we’ll let you live on welfare for a year.

      In the second experiment, we’ll enslave your ass and put you to work on a plantation for a year.

      After both experiments… tell us which one made you feel less free.

      Sound good?

      • Both are forms of slavery in my mind. Choosing the lesser of two evils is for the voting cattle.

        • VaudeVillain | Apr 24, 2014 at 8:02 pm |

          Bull. Fucking. Shit.

          Being a piece of chattel property isn’t even remotely the same as living on welfare. Not even close. Seriously.

          • No, both give an artificial construct control over your livelihood and requires the theft from others to do so. Both are forms of enlsavement that I do not condone nor agree with. Charity is not the gov’ts job and they DO NOT have good intentions with it. Watch the video I linked if you care to hear a new perspective. If you just want to harp on semantics as though you’ve said anything relevant to my argument go right ahead, but I do not condone any form of theft or slavery, whether it is an individual or a collective of individuals (government) it is immoral. Mr. Bundy is under assault because he is showing everyone what gov’t is really about. Watch the video.

          • > requires the theft from others

            Debtmoney is speech, not actual property.

          • VaudeVillain | Apr 24, 2014 at 11:20 pm |

            I’m not harping on semantics, I’m stating that your rhetoric is just that, nothing more.

            You can make whatever inane arguments you like that government giving people things is just the same as living under a brutal regime of generational forced bondage, all of which are purely semantic by the way, but in the end they are total fucking shit.

            So back to that proposed experiment… how do you think it would turn out?

          • The word you’re looking for is “sophistry.”

          • VaudeVillain | Apr 25, 2014 at 8:06 am |

            I have a modicum of respect for good sophists.

          • False dillema, false dichotomy. I don’t accept your rubric as it is based on falsehood and designed to lead one to the conclusion that theft is forgiveable if the gov’t does it. I disagree with slavery and your argument and think anyone discussing this owes it to Cliven Bundy to know what he actually said versus the edited version the NY times served up. Honest people at least. http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/unedited-tape-bundy-emerges-sheds-light-racist-remarks

          • VaudeVillain | Apr 25, 2014 at 2:11 pm |

            False dichotomy nothing: this is a question of two real things that have really happened being compared. I’m not sure if you are truly so dense that you cannot wrap your head around why Bundy’s statements are so reprehensible, or why your defense of them is so repulsive. The alternative is that you’re lying.

            Either way, you’re tiresome and trite, and you haven’t even managed to put a new or interesting spin on the same ridiculous “libertarian” pseudo-intellectual drivel I’ve already been through dozens of times. If it feels like I’m not putting much thought or effort into dealing with you… it’s because I’m not. Honestly, I have better shit to do with my time and energy than re-read the same old shit again just to make you feel like you’re worth it.

          • Because I don’t want to play your silly red herring, non sequitorial gibberish game I’m “tiresome and trite” right? 😉 Sure buddy. You should tell this guy he has it all wrong!

          • VaudeVillain | Apr 25, 2014 at 5:21 pm |

            No, you’re tiresome and trite because you’re tiresome and trite.

            As for “non-sequitorial gibberish game”, that is an excellent description of any argument that concludes with equating welfare programs to slavery. Thanks for the phrasing!

          • Jonas Planck | Apr 27, 2014 at 11:44 pm |

            So the threat of force IS a valid justification for a viewpoint? Good job, I knew you could finally admit to it. “Agree with me or I’ll either shoot you or shame you for your disrespect of how awesome I am!”

          • That does shed some better light on his comments. I still believe he was very, very, very wrong about African Americans having more freedom under slavery than under welfare, though. That part is just plain stupid.

          • Jonas Planck | Apr 27, 2014 at 11:36 pm |

            In other words, you don’t have the mental strength or flexibility to do one simple idea extrapolation. Either that, or you’re so obsessed with pushing one idea that you refuse to be seen thinking about anything else. Perhaps you should leave the planning of the future to others who have the capacity to think about an idea without believing it to be true. Your crippling lack of vision prevents you from being able to avoid the pitfalls inherent in such planning. You simply won’t be able to see the cliff until you’re already falling off of it.

          • Jonas Planck | Apr 27, 2014 at 11:29 pm |

            This is what the government has been about for the past 200+ years, and before that, it was what every other government was also about. Although I commend the Tea Party for finally discovering this precisely at the exact moment that the president stopped being white (an amazingly improbable coincidence that has absolutely nothing to do with racism, I’m sure), they still have not achieved enough awareness to accomplish anything other than making it worse and then blaming someone else for it. They’ll even insist that it only just STARTED the instant Obama was elected. But I digress, this touches on a puzzle given to me by Neil Boortz:
            “It’s not the government’s job to help people,” He once announced with a certain finality.
            If this is the case, then what IS the government’s job? Why, to help only ITSELF, of course! So why, then, would corporatists and neolibertarians oppose such a completely self-serving entity while claiming that its alleged altruism is the REASON that they oppose it? If that altruism is a lie, then why oppose it? Because its actions fail to make the world a better place, as they claim? But it’s NOT THEIR JOB to help people by making the world a better place! It’s the government’s job to take what it wants, when it wants, and screw you, might makes right!
            See if you can untangle that paradox, I’ve been turning it over and over trying to make sense of it for years now, and nothing useful’s come of it.

        • Tuna Ghost | Apr 25, 2014 at 5:08 am |

          Way to dodge the question, you disingenuous shit

    • The weeks that you spent writing love letters to white supremacist newsletter publisher Ron Paul on this site, in 2012, are starting to make a lot more sense now.

    • Adam's Shadow | Apr 24, 2014 at 8:16 pm |

      Camron, I have the benefit (or disadvantage) or living in a community (Modesto, CA) where the rural and the urban are in fairly close proximity to each other. From my personal experience, all I can tell you is that the police treat rural whites with firearms with kid gloves compared to how they treat urban people of color with firearms (blacks, Latinos, etc.). If two dozen barrio homeboys tried to pull the shit that Bundy’s militia pals are pulling, they would get a gang injunction slapped on them.

      • Perhaps, what if their were a mixed group all understanding that their rights were being trampled by the BLM and the federal gov’t? My point is principles and ethics should be color blind and painting Bundy as racist is just an attempt to discredit him because he and the militia faced down the bully.

        • Tuna Ghost | Apr 25, 2014 at 12:20 pm |

          …or he just really is a racist redneck AND he faced down a bully. The two are not mutually exclusive, you child-like halfwit

          • Adam's Shadow | Apr 25, 2014 at 1:32 pm |

            Thank you. This is exactly how I feel about this situation. I’m happy he pissed off and stuck up to the feds, but that’s about the extent of my admiration for the guy. Otherwise, he’s just another person trying to game the system for personal gain while pretending he’s doing something noble and righteous. There are plenty of people on “the left” who pull the same thing, of course: criminal defense attorneys, a few people on welfare or SSI, etc; I only throw these examples in because I have personally seen them in action. However, I highly doubt Cliven Bundy gives a shit about property rights, eminent domain, or govt. overreach; what he actually gives a shit about is money.

            Also, would Bundy be okay if I just decided to live off that land myself? Could I camp there on-and-off for twenty years? What if I brought a dozen head of cattle to graze there?

    • > Also it is a fair question to ask are things better for black people
      when there are more black men incarcerated now in for profit prisons
      than were enslaved during slavery.

      Perhaps, but it’s not really the question Bundy asked.

  13. Echar Lailoken | Apr 24, 2014 at 7:42 pm |

    Just because he’s superior, doesn’t mean he’s racist. Nor does it mean he has the ability to pronounce president. I call all African Americans, Negroes because who doesn’t take that verbal shortcut? It’s not like it’s astronomically offensive or something. Especially while being filmed, for freedom!

  14. “We need to have those people join us and be with us”. How dare he be so “racist” as to praise Mexican people for their familial bonds and then want to join with them…. Thank you for posting this. Again the mainstream media are nothing but whores for power who will say or do anything to apologize for the true enslavers ie their masters.

    • Look Stud… nobody is joining you or Bundy in your cause of reinstating plantations. You are the perceived benefactors of such a racial policy so you can’t imagine being in bondage… unless it’s the ZOG Machine keeping the Goyem down. Arguing that “Negros” hang out on the porch too much (eluding the term “porch monkeys”) and that Mexicans are such good family people that they should be your slaves… is fucking disgusting you god damn racist halfwit.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWdVwt2deY4

      • misinformation | Apr 24, 2014 at 11:10 pm |

        Are you saying that Camron Wiltshire and Cliven Bundy are the same person? Holy shit. Has anyone ever seen them both in the same room at the same time?

        Or wait, that’s Camron Wiltshire in the video you posted? He looks so different.

        Oh, I see what you did there. You’re attributing comments to someone who never made them.

    • Tuna Ghost | Apr 25, 2014 at 5:07 am |

      Damn Camron, who could have predicted that you’d end up being taken even less seriously by folks on disinfo than you were when we last spoke? That the community would come to view you as hopelessly, aggressively ignorant?

      I mean, besides me, that is.

      • Anonymous trolls imagine themselves glorious. Tell me your name coward. Of course you won’t so sit down and eat your gmo gruel.

        • Tuna Ghost | Apr 27, 2014 at 9:34 pm |

          Troll? I’ve contributed more articles to Disinfo than you have. Admit it, whoever calls you on your stupid bullshit is “troll” to you. This is why you are not taken seriously.

          • To me anonymously sniping at me and continuing to use fallacious logic while avoiding all evidence I present is tantamount to Trolling. Here is a definition for you, maybe you can do another disinfo post about it. And of course it bears nothing on my argument how many posts you’ve made here now does it.

            Troll:

            informal
            make
            a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of
            upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them.
            “if people are obviously trolling then I’ll delete your posts and do my best to ban you”

          • As for fallacious logic… from what I’ve seen you just ignore anything that doesn’t fit your worldview. Your positions and beliefs appear to avoid logic altogether. Why should I trust the shit you link to over anyone else’s material?

            How is it you came to know the complete and unvarnished truth™?

            Also, prove you are Camron Wiltshire. Just cause you’ve got a “proper name” and semi-searchable web presence proves nothing.

            We demand to see your birth certificate!

            If you want to set yourself up as some kind of authority on anything, you’re going to have to provide proof that you have a clue. So far, lights are on, no one home. And I’ve lurked for years, so I only see you getting progressively less credible.

          • Tuna Ghost | Apr 27, 2014 at 11:34 pm |

            Seeing as how you’ve yet to display any evidence that you have any education, experience, or just basic knowledge of logic or reasoning, I think we’ll all just continue to mock you for sport.

          • Tuna Ghost | Apr 27, 2014 at 11:36 pm |

            And I’m not “sniping” at you, I’m straight up telling you you’re an embarrassment to this community.

  15. dis buny be a rasim

  16. Number1Framer | Apr 24, 2014 at 9:34 pm |

    Sarcasm (don’t flag me bro):

    “Lemme tell ya’ I know some things about the cracker man. They think they’re entitled to whatever they see, so they do as they please wherever they like. Now, do ya think the crackers are better off makin an honest living or by pretending they’re exceptions to the laws they create? He shoulda learnt how to fuck people on mortgages like a real free white man who knows his place.”

    So, are ignorant racial skrees ugly or what?

  17. Now he’s gone and done it: Bundy’s revealed the long awaited GOP jobs program–we’re all going back to picking cotton by hand. If we all learn that, then all our social ills will be solved.

  18. VaudeVillain | Apr 24, 2014 at 11:41 pm |

    Maybe if the system of slavery had allowed for the enslaved to have families, or for them to profit even slightly from their labor, he would have something remotely resembling a point. It didn’t. If we are going to put his comments in context, fine, but let’s really put them into context: he clearly demonstrates abject ignorance of what slavery means, how it works, and the formative role it plays in American culture.

    His comments exist in a context of hundreds of years of wealthy white men advocating that “the Negro” is essentially incapable of caring for themselves. His comments exist in a context where slavery is a real thing that really happened to real people and has had real consequences to this day. The addition of a few more words on his part is, in context, wholly insufficient to make his comments appropriate or reasonable or accurate.

    • Apathesis | Apr 25, 2014 at 7:19 am |

      All I was saying is the full video was not provided.

      And don’t any of you find it interesting that the New York Times and other websites didn’t even bother to talk much about Cliven Bundy until he said some dumb shit?

      Suddenly, he is everywhere.

      • Eric_D_Read | Apr 25, 2014 at 11:38 am |

        Basically what happened is that the shot caller for the BLM was smart enough not to want a martyr on their hands, so instead they just put a reliable asset, the NY Times, on Bundy until he said something that can be used to destroy his image.

        They got it with this video. Most of the public reacted to it like the well-trained dogs they are.

        • lol

          heard that same shit from the mouths of xtians on the Duck Dynasty guy when he opened his pie hole about “deh gayz”.

          Great company and comparisons you folks keep.

          Methinks yousa heroes be sucking a whole lot of homoerotic phallic symbology?

        • Exactly, pavlovian stockholme pose down style. OMG he was accused of racism, now I will forget anything previously discussed and shift all focus to arguing over this red herring. Great posts as always Eric.

      • No they don’t because they are apologists for statism. If they are even real people who can say, could be nothing but a sock puppet armada of gov’t disinfo agents. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3127403/posts The reality is that statists are desperate to maintain their power and will stoop to any level to prevent free and critical thinking. Thus if you survey these types of threads, notice where the smearing and aspersion casting heavily derives from and how they simultaneously avoid presenting any sources to substantiate their rhetoric. I think disinfo is infested with these types of trolls and they always show up when an issue threatens the status quo bubble they are sworn to protect (and they think themselves different…) http://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm

  19. As much as I do enjoy someone standup up to the state i dont have patience for ignorant racism.

    However Bundy got it all wrong. Slavery never went away it just evolved into modern day corporate controlled capitalism where we are all slaves. And it also slavery in its ultimate form where the slaves do not even know they are slaves.

    ‘Murica.

    • kowalityjesus | Apr 25, 2014 at 10:11 am |

      it is much easier to pay a slave wage vs house and oversee actual slaves

      • Not when those slaves are viewed and managed as livestock with breeding stock, working stock, and house stock. It’s a self-supporting, closed-loop system.

        • kowalityjesus | Apr 25, 2014 at 4:59 pm |

          slaves in the American experience were replaced and/or supplanted by machines. Fossil fuels are the new slaves. Ask yourself what is easier, buying a combine or housing, feeding and keeping a team of 30 slaves in line?

          • Jonas Planck | Apr 27, 2014 at 10:58 pm |

            Nope.
            Premise: Corporations are people.
            Fact: Corporations have owners.
            Conclusion: People who are owned as property are called slaves, therefore corporations are slaves.

            See what I did there?

  20. gustave courbet | Apr 25, 2014 at 12:16 am |

    Having listened to Mr. Bundy’s response to the accusations of his racism on InfoWars, he seems to me to be a well-meaning but provincial man who is not consciously or maliciously racist but is also unaware of his cultural myopia. As such, he doesn’t think twice about using such archaic terms as ‘negro.’ What his words in this particular instance reveal is not a rabid klansman, but someone who is out of his depth in attempting to discuss issues beyond his knowledge or experience. It is unfortunate that he has become a spokesman for his ideological kin because he isn’t doing them any favors.

    • misinformation | Apr 25, 2014 at 12:53 am |

      Great post. I have a feeling before this reply (and perhaps even with it) that you would’ve received a lot of upvotes from people who were spewing all over this board that Bundy is indeed a “malicious racist” (to use your turn of phrase) – even though you’ve disagreed with them.

      • gustave courbet | Apr 25, 2014 at 1:03 am |

        Maybe so. I’ve been struck by how divisive the Bundy ‘thing’ has been on the comment boards.

        • misinformation | Apr 25, 2014 at 1:44 am |

          I’m surprised your “struck”. You’re more intelligent than that. Even disinfo folks have to battle to break out of the divide and conquer conditioning.

          “More labels, less nuance! Forget defining terms, more misunderstaning!

          …and look at that, just like I predicted. Some people screaming, “Malicious racist!”, are already on your upvote list.

    • Oh, he’s not conscious, alright. This is a guy who hasn’t had a new thought in easily 50 years.

    • Echar Lailoken | Apr 25, 2014 at 3:39 pm |

      Here’s some food for thought. Even though he may not own a white hood, he’s talking their talk. Who’s fooling who?

      Taking a cue from David Duke, former Imperial Wizard
      of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan in the 1970s, many attempted to
      “mainstream” their image by using euphemisms instead of racial epithets,
      talking of pride in their “heritage” rather than hatred of other groups
      and participating in state-run good-citizenship initiatives, like
      “adopt a highway” cleanup programs. At the same time, other Klan groups adopted camouflage uniforms and paramilitary activities.

      Essentially militias…

      Many Klan groups also adopted Christian Identity beliefs. They feared the “New World Order,” believed Jews and liberals were attempting to outlaw their religious practices, and considered gays and other “deviants” to be forcing their lifestyles into the mainstream. Although many Klansmen received food stamps and other forms of government assistance, they continually raged at African Americans who received “welfare” and accused them of “sucking the blood out of hard-working real Americans.”

      Consider Alex Jones’ core fearful rhetoric. Along with certain agitators here.

      Ku Klux Klan – History
      http://archive.adl.org/learn/ext_us/kkk/history.html?LEARN_Cat=ExtremismLEARN_SubCat=Extremism_in_Americaxpicked=4item=kkk

      • gustave courbet | Apr 26, 2014 at 2:06 am |

        I am well aware of the rhetoric of various strains of fringe sects of American society. I make a point of studying them. After having read your first paragraph, I would reiterate my assessment that Bundy is not a ‘conscious or malicious’ racist. That doesn’t mean he is not an ignorant racist; he may be. People who lead sheltered or rural lives tend to have very narrow perspectives and lack an erudition that leads them to simplistic generalities (race based and otherwise).

        To your second paragraph I would respond that the study of Mr. Jones’ neo-Bircher world view has been a particular interest of mine for years now (I live in Austin and have been listening to him on the radio for years, and have found that under the bullshit, there is sometimes a grain of truth). You’re absolutely right that ignorant and hypocritical paranoiac racists have an exotic pastiche of view points they espouse to justify their anger. But after having studied the primary sources they often cite, but haven’t read, I can say that there are smokey rooms full of rich assholes plotting to rule the world, but they don’t adhere to any ideology other than power. I’ll leave you with a quote from a history book by Carroll Quigley (that I would highly recommend):

        “There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right believes the communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups (establishment anglophile network originally associated with Cecil Rhodes), has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960’s, to examine its papers
        and secret records.”

        • I would reiterate my assessment that Bundy is not a ‘conscious or malicious’ racist. That doesn’t mean he is not an ignorant racist; he may be. People who lead sheltered or rural lives tend to have very narrow perspectives and lack an erudition that leads them to simplistic generalities (race based and otherwise).

          I’ll buy that. I find this to be the case with “people over a certain age” as well.

          I appreciate you took this Bundy tool seriously long enough to make this assessment. I kind of checked out way back when it was “Rancher in Nevada…” Bundy’s sheep fucking methods may work out fine for him in the middle of the desert, but the rest of the world has yet to fully join in him in Mad Max™ land.

          …dis is just da new raygun, ron “controlled opposition” paul, johannes meserle, george zimmerman flavor of the month for the so-called “Libertarian” set…

          • misinformation | Apr 28, 2014 at 1:07 am |

            Quotes well placed. Libertarian, yea right. No definition wobble there.

          • Libertarians™ For Liberty™!© since 1620 1776 1789 1791 1831 1848 1865 1877 1913 1920 1933 1964 1980 2001 2012 ¿2016‽ (:

          • gustave courbet | Apr 29, 2014 at 12:14 am |

            Well, I’ve been on the wrong end of a snap judgement before, and try to learn from my mistakes.

          • Yes. In this case, there are other, better reasons to distrust and cast scorn upon this Bundy™ character. The extent of his prejudice and bigotry is really quite besides the point.

            However, I have read that this type of PsyOp is common amongst the PR seekers of the Reich Wing™. It is actually considered a mark of honor in some circles to have been declared “racist”. The fuckin $$$ these assholes rack up in the aftermath is disgusting, but give the White Man™ credit for winning IDentity Politics™.

            It was certainly entertaining and educational to watch certain Disinfo™ denizens follow through with a quite predictable set of responses. The best part was producing the Black Marine™ to write a defense; exactly how I would have scripted it.

            In light of Rhoid Rager’s thesis on the source issue facing the community, I still can’t help but wonder if there may be a larger fracture across race, class, and related ISMz. I have no expectation nor desire for homogeny of thought here or anywhere, but the increasing polarization is both disheartening and exhausting.

        • Echar Lailoken | Apr 26, 2014 at 3:16 pm |

          I agree, he is an ignorant racist. I think some malicious racists came to his rescue recently, and he may now be beholden to them.

          A grain of truth is the sign of a great lie or yarn. Perhaps there is some small group. R. Buckminster Fuller thought so, and I hold him in high esteem. Thanks for the recommend.

          • gustave courbet | Apr 29, 2014 at 12:21 am |

            I personally believe that Alex Jones is a true believer, and not a COINTELPRO-style astro-turfing plant, but I think he’s in over his head and trying to make sense of something very complex through a familiar ideological lens. I like Fuller as well; do you recommend any of his work in particular?

          • Echar Lailoken | Apr 29, 2014 at 2:05 am |

            To be clear, I meant I meant this Bundy character by saying an ignorant racist. As for Jones, I dislike him because his words have legs that can easily walk through the mind of people already scared. The way he speaks, his body language, and his message are dangerous.

            As for R. Buckminster Fuller. Grunch of Giants is where he speaks about a group of people pulling the strings for selfish reasons.

            http://www.amazon.com/Grunch-Giants-R-Buckminster-Fuller/dp/0312351941

          • …one true believer is worth a thousand foot soldiers…

            That said, I will respectfully disagree with your assessment of Jones. Occam’s Razor suggests that the simplest answer is to follow the $$$. Fear, Hate, Paranoia, Anxiety, & Rage sell well in a populace so conditioned to readily crave such programming.

            It disturbs me to consider that had circumstances taken a different turn, I might have been one such “true believer”.

            …ÿ will still take their $$$ tho. (:

          • gustave courbet | May 4, 2014 at 6:11 pm |

            Well, the reason I don’t think money is a primary motivator with AJ (or at least wasn’t always a primary motivator) was that he toiled in fringe-anonymity for so long without a dime to show for it. If I had to hazard a guess I’d say ego gratification would be his raison d’etre. But, here on the outside we can only guess.

          • …I dunno…

            As a teenager, he read Gary Allen’s None Dare Call It Conspiracy, which strongly impacted him, and which he calls “the easiest-to-read primer on The New World Order”.

            Did he see “teh lightz” or $$$?

            Reading the wiki bio, I see bourgeois white kid who was working on his brand with religious zeal, no doubt. But ~6 years to piles of cash and national notoriety is pretty impressive career trajectory. As a fellow media producer, it’s really inspiring in a way.

            If only I didn’t want the amplified karma from cultivating paranoia/fear/greed/moral outrage while abusing issues of race/gender/religion/culture/misc dark arts in such twisted ways, I’m sure I could do one better and sketch something up for an 18-36 month timeline to Zero℠ and beyond with a modest infusion of capital.

          • gustave courbet | May 7, 2014 at 12:46 am |

            Interesting points. So you think the implication is that he had help in his rise to notoriety? Or that he’s ambitious to the point of being a cutthroat (the latter I’ve heard others say, like Jack Blood for instance)?

          • He definitely seems the cutthroat type, but both propositions could be accurate.

            Certain producers, labels, brands, et al. screen for a certain “knack” to channel & convey raw emotion that bypasses the logic centers. So it’s not impossible he didn’t get a helping hand, say when he transitioned from public access tv to radio. Or say when his show was picked to get syndicated. Syndication is a goal that many very good radio hosts never manage to achieve.

    • He is most definitely not racist, just under attack for pointing out the lack of legitimacy in the bullying federal gov’ts attacks on him and the 51 other ranchers (who they ran out of town to seize their land). The clones here will ignore all contextual evidence and continue to huff their own flatulence regardless Gustave. Kudos for being fair minded in your pursuit of the big picture.

      • Jonas Planck | Apr 27, 2014 at 10:25 pm |

        I agree, it isn’t racist to believe provably untrue absurd things about other races. To call that racist, you’d have to use the ACTUAL DEFINITION of the word racism, and as everyone knows, we have stopped using that definition and redefined the word “racism” to mean “Accusing a white person of being a racist.” because racists find that more convenient to their purposes. After all, racists have given racism a bad name over the years, so the word has a bit of a negative context these days. Perhaps it would facilitate communication if you found another word to describe what used to be referred to as racism… for instance, “superiorism,” or perhaps, “ignoramism.”
        I think the reason that the people here are confused is that they’re still using dictionaries from the 20th century, printed before we all agreed to redefine the words we use in order to mollycoddle the mentally infirm and people like yourself who don’t have enough courage to face the historical precedent for your ideas. They’re just very old- fashioned is all.

        And to clarify, you haven’t demonstrated any “racism,” what you’re doing is called “revisionism.” It’s the act of trying to change the historical record so that it conforms to your prejudices, as opposed to revising your prejudices to conform to reality, which is the way sane people do it.

      • gustave courbet | Apr 29, 2014 at 12:12 am |

        ‘Racist’ is a much used and not vary nuanced blanket term. People constantly generalize as means of simplifying the world down to a comprehensible level, and we (as a species) definitely tend to do that with social/national/ethnic/racial/religious groups. I believe the tendency towards tribalism is, if not hard-wired into humans, a basic facet of human culture. Making inferences about an individual based on general beliefs about his racial group is a form of racism, even if those beliefs are benign or positive. I would distinguish that sort of lack of perspective from people who are consciously aware of their bigotry and wear it with pride (you could correctly use the term racism for both, but qualification would be required for the former). When someone such as Bundy refers to ‘those people’, it shows a kind of compartmentalization in terms of group identity, and is often found in more rural folks who don’t regularly mix with a variety of people (my grandparents are an example of this). I would add that I agree that his provincial beliefs are a red herring as far as the issue that brought him into the news goes, and are an attempt at character assassination.

  21. Fuck Bundy and the Gubbmint. He’s grazing animals on public land. It’s public, right?
    And where did the ever virtuous Uncle Sam get this land? Who was using those lands first? So Bundy is grazing his animals on land Uncle Sam stole, with force, from other people.

    And while I won’t take Bundy’s side, the Gubbmint has a history of stealing and lying, and they don’t like it when it’s done to them? And in such a small and petty manner no less.

    Taking sides in this fight seems like taking sides in street fight between neo-Nazis and KKK memebers. I hope everyone gets the crap kicked out of them. I’ll stay out of it and hope they kill each other.

    • kowalityjesus | Apr 25, 2014 at 10:08 am |

      thank you. I honestly have not been following this dog and pony show for the “alternative” news fiends (read: losers). But obviously for most of American history, grazing cattle on public land was not illegal. So at what point did it become illegal, and why? Arbitrarily sometime in the 20th century and loosely enforced 99% of the time is what I would guess. The land does not accrue value if you are not grazing on it. It’s like the mistaken idea that forest fires ruin forests. No they don’t. Fires are an important part of clearing undergrowth and renewing forest ecology. I don’t think you should be grazing cattle in the desert where it could further desertify the land by erosion, but the government might as well allow economic activity to happen on the land if it can.

      • Jonas Planck | Apr 27, 2014 at 10:04 pm |

        Those WOULD be valid points if we were dealing with sane, rational people here, but that isn’t the case. Any moral principles that anyone brings up in regard to all this are quickly overshadowed by a massive Gordian knot of interconnected hypocrisy on almost every level…
        Premise: individuals and groups of individuals have the right to own property and decide what to do with that property, and nobody else has the right to just take it from them, BUT…
        Premise: If someone is failing to utilize their property in what others feel is a productive way, then others have the right to take it from them and use it in a manner that they see fit, whether or not the owner approves. BUT…
        Premise: If someone says you aren’t using your property productively and takes it from you, as described above, that’s theft, and it’s a crime, and that person or group should be prosecuted for it, BUT…
        …If a person’s property is consuming a resource that is another person’s property and the first person feels that it is justified because their property needs the other property in order to continue being their property, then the taking of another’s property is acceptable, because it’s property taking the property, not actual people… BUT…
        Etc. etc. and on and on…

        Until that screwed-up mess of conflicting principles is cleared up and removed, nobody is ever going to be able to even reach where a sober, mature discussion of land management and allocation of priorities can even TAKE PLACE. Negotiations only work when the people sitting at the table can agree on what the definitions are of the words that they are speaking. Without that, there’s no point in even trying to talk.

        • kowalityjesus | Apr 27, 2014 at 10:14 pm |

          I agree, lots of spinning of wheels and not a lot of progress happening here. Well put, sir. And I appreciate your tone as well as your aloof, objective attitude. “Barbed wire in the 21st century” is what I would like to say to anyone trying to get a little historical perspective.

          • Jonas Planck | Apr 27, 2014 at 10:40 pm |

            My attempts to be objective often prompt other people to wonder aloud if I’m some kind of alien… I suppose they’re half right on a technicality… but I DO feel like I’m watching some kind of inscrutable native ritual that you can’t hope to understand fully if you don’t first assume that everyone is lying about their true intentions and everything that they say is a completely disingenuous excuse. That’s the paradox at the heart of the knot: Everybody’s lying, they KNOW they’re lying, but the entire purpose of lying is to get others to believe that you AREN’T lying… and the more you do it, the more it becomes obvious that you’re doing it and the less trust you can steal, yet the goal was to conceal that obvious deceit and prevent mistrust.
            What, then, does anyone hope to accomplish, beyond the goal of convincing everyone else that they are liars?

  22. InfvoCuernos | Apr 25, 2014 at 2:13 am |

    Really, should this come as a surprise that someone within agriculture should take this view? Look at their history-and I mean all history, from Roman institution of serfdom to prevent farm labor from migrating into the cities, through to southern slavery including the US Civil War and the aftermath, and including the bizarre relationship that agro-business has with illegal migrant workers using them as slave labor (that’s right, if you work someone for under minimum wage, you’re using them as slave labor). The landed aristocracy has always considered themselves as the betters of those who do the actual work on a farm or plantation. These are exactly the class of asshole that thinks they can dictate the law from on high, by force of arms instead of in the manner in which we as a civilization have agreed upon. The sooner we reach a technological point where these dinosaurs will have no more sway over our food supply, the better. Unfortunately, we may have to deal with the devil in food corporations like Monsanto.

    • Ted Heistman | Apr 25, 2014 at 12:00 pm |

      interesting thoughts

    • Eric_D_Read | Apr 25, 2014 at 4:57 pm |

      “These are exactly the class of asshole that thinks they can dictate the law from on high, by force of arms instead of in the manner in which we as a civilization have agreed upon.”

      What are you, like 12?
      ALL law is dictated from on high and enforced through violence (either by threat or action).

      • InfvoCuernos | Apr 25, 2014 at 6:10 pm |

        Nice, agree with me and insult me. Go fuck yourself Mr. Read.

        • Eric_D_Read | Apr 25, 2014 at 9:32 pm |

          I don’t agree with you on this.
          That quote sounds like something a Senator’s PR people would come up with.
          If that observation offends you that much, the line to suck my dick starts to the left.

          • InfvoCuernos | Apr 26, 2014 at 12:53 am |

            Who sounds like they’re 12 now? For some reason, you are under the impression that I’m all about peace and love and the government we are currently ruled by. You are wrong. What senator’s PR people call aristocrats assholes? I might vote for that senator, if he exists, but he’s just another imaginary person like all those people in that line to the left to suck your imaginary dick. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out, chump.

  23. Gee, with all the White Citizen’s Council-esque BS this douchenozzle was spewing the ENTIRE TIME, how is it that people didn’t see this coming?

    • Jonas Planck | Apr 27, 2014 at 9:31 pm |

      I think they just assumed he had enough sense to keep it hidden behind code phrases… after all, everybody in the pundit community got the Luntz briefing so why wouldn’t this guy also know about all those unspoken rules that they have to abide by until it no longer suits them to abide by those rules? Not everybody can instinctively double-think, some people have to be trained in it.

  24. This doesn’t change the original argument but as for Bundy’s claims that he has rights to that land because his family has grazed cattle there for generations before the BLM even existed, it does turn it into a hypothetical argument since he has made up that history.

    ” Clark County property records show Cliven Bundy’s parents moved from Bundyville, Arizona and bought the 160 acre ranch in 1948 from Raoul and Ruth Leavitt.

    Water rights were transferred too, but only to the ranch, not the federally managed land surrounding it. Court records show Bundy family cattle didn’t start grazing on that land until 1954.

    The Bureau of Land Management was created 1946, the same year Cliven was born.”

  25. Those facts aren’t true because they don’t support Wiltshire’s desired conclusion.

    • Tuna Ghost | Apr 25, 2014 at 12:16 pm |

      Yeah that’s sort of his thing, I mean he basically owns it by now. “I’m aggressively, deliberately, and non-apologetically ignorant”, by Camron Wiltshire. And yet he acts surprised when no one takes him seriously! What a guy

  26. Just gonna leave this here. Things you will never see on MSNBCNN

  27. Jonas Planck | Apr 25, 2014 at 5:36 pm |

    I think what I love most about these people is their willingness to maintain an open dialogue in good faith with people who aren’t pretending that the things they say make sense or have some sort of logical basis in reality when they clearly don’t. It’s good that they can at least recognize that other people have points of view that differ from theirs without fearing that other points of view might destroy their way of life or some such nonsense… oh, wait no, I imagined that. They can’t handle a joke at all, can they?

    • Jonas Planck | Apr 27, 2014 at 9:14 pm |

      I have to extrapolate on this, because I’m still a little pissed at what happened… The bait I took was a video of some brain-damaged TV pundit insisting that the cows couldn’t be trespassing, because if they WERE on someone’s land illegally, then the government would have given them food stamps and free machine guns and big cash piles of stolen taxpayer money, because that what always happens when you jump the border, as everyone knows… That prompted a lot of vocal agreement from the local tribe in the comments, who felt it was just awful that illegal immigrants are treated better than livestock… How could I refuse such juicy bait?
      First, I agreed that they were right, that Mexicans SHOULD be killed, butchered, and sold as food in grocery stores and restaurants, because why treat them any better than a cow, right? What makes THEM so special that we aren’t allowed to eat them? Then, I also agreed with them that the threat of a heavily armed bovine militia shouldn’t be taken lightly, since as we all know, the intelligence of the average American is no match for the keen intellect of a cow, and if they were armed, we would be unable to stop such an insurgency. The cattle would have such tactical and strategic superiority due to their vast intellect that nothing we did could stop them! And the third jab, of course, was an interjection in one of those threads where someone gets REALLY REALLY angry about someone else describing the US as a “democracy” because it says “republic” in the actual documents, and that means, of course, that all forms of democratic representation are antithetical to the intent of the founding fathers, because logic, don’t you know. If you’re unfamiliar with how those arguments work, usually the person insisting that “it’s a REPUBLIC!” will refuse to elaborate on that, and simply repeat it over and over with ever-increasing levels of rage and derision while the other person engages in a futile attempt to explain to them that these words have definitions and meanings, and the founders’ intent is clearly visible to anyone who can read their writings and comprehend the themes they discussed. In this instance, my response was once again to agree, because as we all know, the founders hated democracy and only wanted to preserve the divine right of kings and monarchs in order to protect us from “mob rule,” as many of these people were calling it…
      Like I said, lightweight stuff, easily smacked down by even THESE mental patients… but what pissed me off wasn’t the censorship (I’d expect that from these tools) … it was the fact that my writings in this case… my intellectual PROPERTY… was erased from the site AND the disqus record entirely… morally, no different then taking someone’s livestock and killing it because you didn’t like where it was grazing. Essentially, these hypocrites have decided that they have the right to do the same things that they complain so ferociously about being done to them… and they will not hesitate to DO so, revealing that all this “outrage” and anger is nothing but phony posturing and bullshit social manipulation. They don’t give one single squirt of urine about anybody’s property rights except their own. To that end, I am diverging from my usual stance on this kind of issue, and saying that they deserve to have the feds fine them into bankruptcy and throw them in jail, shooting them if they resist. If that’s the way they want to treat others, then that’s the way they GET treated. The law does not make exceptions for retards who think that retardation is a get-out-of-jail-free card but deny that they suffer from retardation. To the Trail of Tears with them!

  28. VaudeVillain | Apr 25, 2014 at 5:46 pm |

    YES.

  29. Well, the one useful thing I learned from all of this is how heavily subsidized beef is through the BLM. These ranchers are paying $1.35 per cow/calf unit while the going grazing rate on private lands is over $16.00. That’s quite a difference in price that is not going into the taxpayer’s pockets. Meanwhile, the price of beef keeps going up and much of it goes overseas instead of staying here for the people who are subsidizing/paying for it.

  30. @disqus_NwDLxZqdeA:disqus so why do you presume that the Federal gov’t owns the land and not the state of Nevada? Let’s stay focused on this issue (though I’ve made many logical arguments against climate change alarmism, isn’t interesting how that fits so well with Agenda 21 dictates….look into it) So please answer my question and provide your sources. Otherwise your just blowing smoke.

  31. Are you high?

Comments are closed.