Fed’s 260K Acre Land Grab At Vail Lake



Via BenSwann.com

Having been challenged to provide “just one” example of where Agenda 21 has been utilized as a means to violate the property rights of a sovereign land owner, I wanted to call attention to the following article featuring the attestation from one such individual and his neighbors, giving testimonial here as to their personal experience with Agenda 21 styled politburos.

 “Freedom is in our DNA,” Johnson said. “It’s in our souls, it is our God-given right, and people want it. And I think you can squash it. I think you can run code enforcement all over it, you can intimidate it with guns and badges, you can call their property ‘habitat’, you can do all those things but at the end of the day, freedom is going to well up. And it’s welling up now. This is, after 20 years, finally our moment.”

The issue of federal agencies seizing public and private land is gaining more national attention, largely due to media coverage of the Bundy Ranch conflict with the Bureau of Land Management in Nevada. This attention has been prompting others to come forward to share their experiences dealing with federal land seizures in the United States.

Another individual is shedding light on these disturbing practices. In videos exclusive to Benswann.com, land owner Bill Johnson discussed the attempts from the BLM and the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) to take control of enormous, valuable properties in California.

Johnson owns approximately 11,000 acres of land in Riverside County in Temecula, California. His property includes Vail Lake which spans about 1,000 acres. Three million acres of wilderness surround the property. The BLM manages land on the northern and southern sides of this massive property, and both the BLM and the  MSHCP have been claiming “habitat conservation protection” rights on about 260,000 acres of land to aggressively restrict what Johnson and other land owners do with their property. Johnson said that these agencies are actively trying to push him and other land owners out of the area with endless regulations and intimidation.

Johnson said that tactics to drive out land owners included lying to them about the process being voluntary and falsely promising to purchase the land legally. He explained that the main strategy of the BLM and MSHCP is to render most of the Riverside County land useless to private owners in order to gain complete control. When MSHCP declared the land “habitat”,  farming, building, or any other developments became impossible, and the values of the various properties have been dramatically reduced. In the video below, Johnson describes previous dealings with federal agents seizing property.

Johnson believes that “habitat conservation” is simply a ruse to coerce him and others into surrendering their land to federal authorities. He said that the goal of the MSHCP is a “very coordinated and concerted effort” to devalue property and re-market it to developers who give large campaign contributions to politicians who are responsible for driving out the original land owners.

Johnson said that he heard Karin Watts-Bazan, of Riverside County Counsel, inform a property owner that “this is our core area property. We want to buy it, just try to build on it.”

Johnson has begun forbidding any government agent coming onto his property without a court order. He intends to pursue taking 200,000 acres out of county control, with the help of other land owners, and turning it into a “sovereign city”. He rejects the idea of MSHCP planning and would work with others to have their own land planning. Johnson believes this is the best way to raise the value of their properties and “unleash an economic boom out here that’s had a wet blanket over it for the benefit of a bunch of builders that are outside the area.”

Johnson said that on Memorial Day there will be a “massive demonstration” of land owners who are standing up to the federal manipulation of their property. He believes that freedom is “irrepressible” despite the attempts made by the government to impose tyranny. In the video below (click link for access to exclusive video), Johnson explains freedom and optimism despite the circumstances.

“Freedom is in our DNA,” Johnson said. “It’s in our souls, it is our God-given right, and people want it. And I think you can squash it. I think you can run code enforcement all over it, you can intimidate it with guns and badges, you can call their property ‘habitat’, you can do all those things but at the end of the day, freedom is going to well up. And it’s welling up now. This is, after 20 years, finally our moment.”

210 Comments on "Fed’s 260K Acre Land Grab At Vail Lake"

  1. @Number1Framer. Let’s carry the conversation over to this thread and start fresh. Thanks for being a good sport.

    • Number1Framer | May 6, 2014 at 1:34 am |

      Read the article and watched all 3 videos (all the links go to the same page).

      According to Bill Johnson: “He said that the goal of the MSHCP is a ‘very coordinated and concerted effort’ to devalue property and re-market it to developers who give large campaign contributions to politicians who are responsible for driving out the original land owners.” Sounds more like an issue to take up with elected officials rather than drawing an arbitrary line straight to the UN and labeling it “Agenda 21 styled.”

      Perhaps we need to also consider what this man’s neighbors have to
      say as well. It could be that they live here because they enjoy the
      rural character of the area and would rather not live next to his golf
      course surrounded by pop-up subdivisions. If they are elected in the
      majority to zoning/planning commissions, then Bill’s goose is cooked
      regardless of any federal involvement. If things are exactly as he says
      they are, then yes, it is problematic, but everyone has their own
      perspective and there’s obviously alot more to this particular story
      which will probably emerge in the next few days. But for now, UN it most
      certainly is not until proven otherwise by photo, video, or preferably written
      documentation. I will post a second reply with 2 links to Riverside Co’s
      planning commission website which may serve to give more info regarding
      Bill’s case (disinfo always holds my links for moderation, so check
      tomorrow). In any case, it will be interesting to see how many and what
      type of people show up on Memorial day.

      Have you given any more thought as to what your proposals are for preventing environmental destruction without giving wholesale power to the government?

      • misinformation | May 6, 2014 at 1:51 am |

        “Have you given any more thought as to what your proposals are for
        preventing environmental destruction without giving wholesale power to
        the government?”

        Doesn’t the gov’t already have this power?

        • Number1Framer | May 6, 2014 at 8:19 am |

          Camron proposed that there are alternatives in the previous thread we had going. I’m curious what his proposals are.

          • Ted Heistman | May 6, 2014 at 12:00 pm |

            We should just rely on the goodness of peoples hearts, their foresight and lack of greed.

          • Was gonna make some smart ass comment, but, you know, I really wish we could.

          • Ted Heistman | May 6, 2014 at 12:33 pm |

            I think in a way we can. That’s why its nice to have biologists and ecologists and other Scientists studying the environment so people can make informed decisions and shape good policies. Its not that nobody ever games the system, but I think most people don’t want to destroy the environment.

            I mean Ted Turner owns 2 million acres and he wants it to be wilderness.

          • Most people don’t, but some people really hate liberals.

          • I would prefer you acknowledge first that this gentlemen’s rights are in fact being violated precisely via the mechanisms outlined in Agenda 21 first. Just to be sure we are on the same page about reality. If you argue it away I’ve no interest in continuing to layout a case if it won’t be considered fairly and yes I have many more examples of even worse infringment. Case in point. https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=I3vvHWCyshs

          • terrasodium | May 7, 2014 at 5:46 pm |

            when manifest destiny rolled out over the west it served to rid the country side of the resource hoaders who were found living there and brought a new order to a pre-existing culture.Under the new age mantra of environmental destiny a redistribution of resource has again found a newer order (same core new name) and change of culture, put your mark on the bottom line and welcome to the reservation/sustainable city. Who needs a hard sell plan when you can soft sell an ideal.

          • Number1Framer | May 7, 2014 at 9:14 pm |

            The man says in the first minute of the above video that it happened over 20 years ago – outside the time frame of Agenda 21. Non-sequitur with regards to my whole original challenge to provide proof of UN involvement. I’ve no doubt that the government fucks people around and steals from them, but if we start believing every single person who makes a video bitching about anything, logic, rationale, and proof of any kind are out the window. I think Andrew posted the first sensible piece of the puzzle below.

  2. Anarchy Pony | May 5, 2014 at 11:08 pm |

    We get it Camron, you’re a whore who worships property.

    • Matt Staggs | May 6, 2014 at 12:07 am |

      Let’s keep things civil here, My Good Pony.

      • @Wanooski:disqus I take it you are again incapable of mounting an intelligent dialog so you resort to bully tactics befitting an anonymous keyboard warrior. Look if you don’t like what I post, fine, but if you’ve nothing to add to the conversation I’d ask that @mattstaggs:disqus invoke a ban on your commentary until you prove you can behave yourself. Otherwise this forum is ironically, enabling verbal abuse from people completely uninterested in intelligent discussion.

        • wonder how you’d fare if an option to ban a commenter was put to vote

          • misinformation | May 6, 2014 at 10:52 am |

            I think the people calling themselves the U.S. government have a monopoly on the use of “democracy” as a threat.

          • terrasodium | May 6, 2014 at 10:56 am |

            when 1 percent can’t speak with authority for the 51 percent to oppress the 49 percent, what good would a democracy be used for?

      • So as long as I use pretty, flowery, “socially acceptable” language, I can espouse doctrines of hate. Good to know.

        If you give me a good cut of the Ad revenue, I can easily duplicate, if not surpass, the returns you’re seeing here.

        • Matt Staggs | May 6, 2014 at 10:26 am |

          I’m not making a dime off ad revenue. As a matter of fact, I recently calculated my earnings from playing zoo keeper for this particular cage of monkeys and discovered that it comes to about an eighth of my state’s minimum wage.

          I do it anyway because I like Disinfo and the people who own it, and more specifically, I like Juan, Anarchy Pony, and a lot of the other commenters here, and if I don’t do my job then you won’t have anything to whinge about when you’re bored and looking for something to do online.

          I like Camron, too, but he’ll be the very first to tell you that we don’t agree on very much politically. Were I to choose what to post here based on things I agreed with then it would be very different indeed. And if ad revenue was a factor for me then this site would look a lot more like Buzzfeed. (And you’d have a 22 year-old intern from Manhattan running the site, I guess.)

          If you’re annoyed with Camron or his submissions then don’t read them. Move on to something else. If you think he’s harassing, abusing or intimidating you then let me know. If you don’t like the way the site is run then move on. If you can’t do any of these things and you’re still unhappy then you have yourself to blame.

          PS: you never responded to me about that sock puppet account.

          • Ted Heistman | May 6, 2014 at 11:15 am |

            I have to admit I Lol’d.

          • Nice one:)

          • marshall | May 6, 2014 at 5:51 pm |

            Hence the term, “ape shit ballistic”.

          • But can us monkeys still throw poo?

          • Aw, shucks. Thanks, Matt.
            I like being a resident shit-chucking monkey here:)

          • 🙂

          • Matt, I like this website a lot, and I very much appreciate the work you and the others do here, as well as the awesome participation by so many in the discussion community. Disinfo™ lives up to its brand and its tagline and that’s a relative rarity.

            However, you have missed my point. Camron’s ideology, as I have come to understand from his many years posting and commenting here, bears more than a passing resemblance to fascism. It’s not a matter of being “annoyed”: the shit he’s talking about threatens my already shitty way of life. Oh yes, he can create some vague simulation of logic, reason, and statistics to cover up the hate he preaches, but it doesn’t hide the core message. White Man™ in America talking about Liberty™? Please, by all means, continue to give him a soap box (I will grant it was educational for a while tho).

            I don’t appreciate that crap. Especially from someone so goddamn blind they post a video about Cognitive Dissonance while engaged in a textbook display of it. Maybe he’s more like-able in meatspace, people are better able to fake it there. But fine, I can avoid his presence easily enough. It was seeing your rebuke of Anarchy that actually brought me here and raised the blood level.

            As for your moderation policies here, I will reach back in to the memory hole for a good one: where were you when Ted Heistman called Bobbiethejean a cunt? It’s been awhile, but I don’t remember you telling him to keep it civil. In fact, I notice a lot of the more ideologically offensive posters in general don’t tend to get called out by you. I do appreciate that you attempted to balance out all the hate speech that has existed in the open since the Trayvon Martin incident (if not earlier) with your article condemning the use of racial code words though.

            I work four jobs, only one of which regularly pays me enough to kind of support myself. And that one is a minimum wage retail sales job. So frankly, the first world problems you experience running the site don’t really move the needle. Actually, if we were in “a professional setting”, your overall response would be regarded as an excuse, not an explanation.

            Civility™ is an excellent tool to suppress dissent and maintain the status quo.

            PS: you never responded to me about that sock puppet account.

            How long ago and on what article? Disqus doesn’t always send me my notifications.

          • Ted Heistman | May 6, 2014 at 5:21 pm |

            Famous last words. Bye

          • I use Disinfo as my “alternative” news and commentary source. Naturally, then, I like to read the articles no matter the ideology. What I care about are posts that are really just replies to something in the comments section, that are meant to outrage without any substance, and that are the same information again and again and again.

          • Ok, please quote me where I’ve said anything indicating that my ideology is fascist. Also if you would like to demonstrate your own “logical” prowess than why not enter a debate with me? As for complaining about your life and work, why not take a break from being a troll and spend that time developing a marketable skill? You already have a knack for gossip and slander, perhaps the TSA and or DHS would hire you? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-x8xxcvmvsM

          • BuzzCoastin | May 7, 2014 at 1:08 am |

            once I got stuck umpiring a little league game
            and I quickly realized it wasn’t my cup otea
            lots oshitfornothing
            butt controversy is the stuff of media
            oar so it seams to me
            need more money
            get the NWAz to pay more for their ads

          • Disinfo’s a psyop.

          • BuzzCoastin | May 7, 2014 at 3:50 pm |

            all info is dis info
            a high stress quantum
            psyop is just one form of info/dis info

          • Matt Staggs | May 7, 2014 at 6:07 pm |

            Yeah, it’s a psychological operation to drive me frickin’ nuts. 😉

          • Adam's Shadow | May 7, 2014 at 8:29 pm |

            You’re doing a good job, brother. You manage to give a wide variety of opinions and perspectives both exposure and respect, while still encouraging thoughtful dissent (I think). Keep fighting the good fight.

          • gustave courbet | May 7, 2014 at 1:40 am |

            Well said. I say keep the diversity of opinions coming.

      • Anarchy Pony | May 6, 2014 at 4:14 pm |

        I’ll try. But I just hate him soooooo much.

        • Echar Lailoken | May 6, 2014 at 5:52 pm |

          Why give him that power? Do you hate a speed bump, or do you adjust and move forward? Do you hate the bollards in front of a store, or do you walk around them?

          Sure these things may incite a need to exert some energy, but really they are background noise.

          • Echar Lailoken | May 6, 2014 at 5:58 pm |
          • Anarchy Pony | May 6, 2014 at 6:02 pm |

            I hate him enough to troll him, not lose sleep over it.

          • Echar Lailoken | May 6, 2014 at 6:03 pm |

            What do people typically do with background noises?

          • Typically, they ignore them…

            …but background noise has become a big part of my composition process, partly by necessity. It’s actually quite entrancing in the right setting with the right sounds. Great help to mindful listening practice as well.

            …point taken, though. 🙂

          • Echar Lailoken | May 6, 2014 at 10:06 pm |

            Music is different. I have loads of drone and ambient.

          • misinformation | May 7, 2014 at 2:09 am |

            “I have loads of drone…”

            Too easy…

          • @mattstaggs:disqus plain admission in black and white and yet it is allowed to happen.

          • Matt Staggs | May 7, 2014 at 12:40 pm |

            I’m generally pretty lenient of established commenters here, but Pony, dude. Please let up with that stuff. Don’t make this a bad day for me. Just move on to something else if Camron is annoying you. Seriously, this is a good philosophy for interacting with poelpe, generally. Camron and I don’t see eye to eye on any of this stuff, and we get along just fine. You can do the same thing.

          • Here is the thing though, I never mention him outside of responding to his trolling. So it’s not that I’m annoying him, it’s that he is an aggressive troll who rather than discuss facts resorts to malicious ad hominem attacks. When I defend myself and the facts then it is perceived as me “annoying” him. I don’t understand it honestly. Complete double standard.

          • Tuna Ghost | May 8, 2014 at 5:05 am |

            Jason has managed to say everything I’d say, except much more politely.

            But, for what it’s worth, while I do think you’re intellectually bankrupt, utterly incapable of any sort of reasoned discussion, incredibly — possibly to the point of doing real damage to yourself — delusional, that you absolutely deserve to have your opinions and ideas mocked relentlessly as the foolishness that they are, and that your presence makes Disinfo a worse place for everyone, I don’t think it’s necessary or appropriate to just out and out call you a “whore”. I don’t think you’ve demonstrated anything that would have you deserve that pejorative. I may have no respect for your opinions or intelligence, but I don’t like that word used that way and I don’t think you deserved it anyway.

          • You keep saying the same things over and over as though repetition alone will make them real. How about this then. I challenge you via Skype to debate any issue we have disagreed on in the past here at Disinfo. Digital face to digital face, all cources and citations provided and let the internet decide who makes the better case. Otherwise please refrain from attempting to slander my name or character. Today is 5/9/14 and I expect you will either put up or shut up. Also you did in fact refer to me as a “whore” simply for posting ideas you disagree with all the while painting me as “delusional”. I think you project your own issues on to me and others and your anonymity is demonstrative of your cowardly nature. I know you won’t put up, so go ahead and shut up.

          • Tuna Ghost | May 10, 2014 at 2:04 am |

            Also you did in fact refer to me as a “whore” simply for posting ideas you disagree with all the while painting me as “delusional”.

            Show me where I called you a “whore” and I’ll apologize.

            As for the rest, you are delusional, intellectually bankrupt, and offensive to anyone that has any respect for reasoned discussion. You are not taken seriously, nor do you deserve to be. Your challenges are a joke, and you will continue to be mocked.

          • Lookinfor Buford | May 7, 2014 at 6:04 pm |

            It sucks when the little puppets start to bark too much, don’t it?

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 2:23 pm |

            i am not getting involved in the substance of the thread, but this whole “i’m going to tell on you- matt matt please save me” is so childish and pathetic. coming from you who have trolled me and dozens of other posters. it’s not very libertarian either. man up and stand your f*cking ground.

          • “i am not getting invollved in the substance of the thread,” but, ” I will however presume (anonymously) that I have a right to troll and thus attack the victim for daring to set precedence of ethical and polite behavior by projecting onto Camron my own inadequacies. Tell you what, since you like beating your anonymous chest and sniping from a distance, why don’t you show me you yourself are not childish or pathetic and man up and discuss the facts at hand and or look through the dozens of trolling posts I have received from the likes of you and more that have nothing to do with what I’ve said and always attack me personally rather than deal with the message. Go ahead and “man up” yourself and be honest, otherwise all of your posturing and coquettish wavering from victim to aggressor is nothing more than a convenient play for anonymous theatrics. I stand my ground, I’m just tired of trolls pretending to rewrite history using nlp and other exploitative techniques that attempt to reframe everything to anonymous trolls attacking the messenger rather than dealing with the message. If they aren’t on the gov’t. pay roll they still do the job of deflection and prevent considered dialog. Endlessly jabbing, stinging and pulling tails and when the lion responds they cower presuming they’ve been sooo offended and they themselves gang up saying oohhh Matt, oohhh disinfo why do you even allow this person to post here, let us be, remove this gadfly from our digital township.

            Nice try “Jin” feel free to discuss the matter or please keep it to yourself. Your own behavior (again) is so completely obvious here, you and I in the past have had words and you take this opportunity to show your enmity is overriding your logic again and again. If you’ve nothing to say about the Fed’s stealing land then just wait for the next thread, it’s really that simple.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 3:01 pm |

            the netiquette of belonging to a cyber community is very simple and basically twofold: do not insult that community ad hoc, do not speak to the community at large in a condescending manner-particularly if that community largely disagrees with your spectrum of opinion. if you hate us so much, then either extricate yourself from said community, and find another like minded county of the interwebs to share your ideas, or start anew and learn to co-exist harmoniously and not by rat-tattle-tattling to teacher.

          • What “community” do you mean exactly? Regarding supposed ad hoc insulting, what evidence do you have of this having happened? Do you mean by presenting ideas in this forum that a few self-appointed gate keepers take issue with that I would be offending the “community”. This would make perfect sense why when individual rights are championed in this forum that there is so much derision by the way.

            You presume that the “community” (see self-appointed anonymous commenters) and their group think are of paramount importance in this realm and that their supposed unwritten dictates must be honored (rather tribalistic is it not) without question or dissension lest they all gang up like a hive of angered bees to subdue any such “offense” or thought crime.

            Then they abuse pronouns like “we” “us” presuming that the onus is always on the individual to conform to their unratified or signed pseudo charters which manifest fiat style ad hoc per the situation.

            When this is not taking seriously by an individual speaking under his actual name and not hiding behind a screenname the “community” is especially likely to attack said individual in a way only enabled by anonymity and distance, again showcasing their own disconnect from reality and explaining why they are so enraged at ideas that do not already conform to their statist drone like (p)sychophancy.

            When honest attempts are made to discuss controversial issues, said “community” regularly partakes in abusive behavior that demonstrates the utter hypocrisy of “their” supposed authority to regulate conversations in this forum. Me pointing this out to the moderator is especially infuriating as their cognitive dissonance is inflamed along with any other manner of butt hurtness.

            Anarchy Pony admitted he was trolling, so in spite of your long winded monologue, you again present that you are completely unaware of the relevant FACTS being discussed. (Just scroll up right?!)

            Presuming to contort everything back to me is explained by reading what I’ve stated above. Now do you actually have ANYTHING to say on the matter at hand? No, of course not, just a long nonsensical self contained “group think” discourse that you drag out and assail individuals who don’t think like you with. This is why I personally don’t take you personally very seriously as a thinker, because you focus on the petty.

            Or in short,

            “Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.”

            You’ve said nothing about the ideas I have presented in this forum again and you never will or if you pretend to with petty pseudo intellectualism, the minute your comforting notions are challenged by actual facts and evidence you resort to discussing people and not ideas.

            So yeah, care to talk about Agenda 21 or are you gonna keep up this Oprah victimhood brouhaha while attempting to paint me as your so called “community” or tribe’s number one thought criminal.

            ” A thousand flies can land on a piece of shit, it’s still a piece of shit.” And I’m not playing piggy to your lord of the flies bullshit.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 4:09 pm |

            the prolific and thematic nature of your posts is what i am referring to. and yes, without the dynamic, evolving, changing and diverse community of disinfo, this website is 75% diminished. the ‘us’ means the long-time posters who you are at odds with. judging from the comment re: community voting you ‘off the island’ so to speak- it seems many are opposed to the way you conduct yourself. if you think you’re doing a great job engaging minds and changing hearts, by all means, change nothing. you’re obviously very content in how things are.

          • Uh, Jin, how many posts have you made here compared to me? Prolific? The ‘us’ who are these ‘us’ exactly? Which posters and since when is there anytype of anonymous self appointed guardian democracy or union that has any sway on what individuals choose to say? “It seems many are opposed to the way you conduct yourself” Ok so you ignore everything I’ve said and continue to engage in the same behavior as though nothing was ever presented to you (not listening) I want to talk about Agenda 21. You want to frame me as being a contrarian who deserves to be ousted by those who might not agree with me here who have posted for a long time which of course bears nothing on the facts of the argument. This is what you want isn’t it.

            Most people who read the posts do not comment so chances are the hearts and minds shift is happening just by presenting more sides to the issues. Are you opposed to open presentation of varying view points? It sure seems that is the case, if not you should applaud the diversity I provide and learn to discuss ideas rather than people. Your snide, condescending attempts to derail the issues I raise is really what is the point here but you will ignore this and continue to rail with your imaginary “tribe”.

            That is unless you want to provide some names, seems you would prefer an anonymous jury of my non peers to violate my right to freedom of speech. It is you who are abusive of logic and language and it is you who avoids discussing the real issues. Now again, I reiterate, do you have anything to add about the topic at hand or do you insist upon petty sniping at my character as though it has any relevance (or factual basis given you’ve provided literally no evidence, just your anecdotal conjectural posturing), if you’ve no interest in discussing the ideas I present, then cease and desist from talking to or about me. It is really that simple. If you want to engage with me in discussion, stick to the facts and end the constant stream of personal drama you have been bringing to my posts for years.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 7:57 pm |

            my only issue was ever that you became petty and infringed on others freedom of expression by invoking matt to play pre-school teacher and recess monitor by asking for people to be ‘banned.’ i don’t care if you post or act ridiculous otherwise.

          • I challenge you to quote me in full context if it bothers you so much for me to suggest that people who are deliberately trolling and attacking me should suffer moderation. You do realize that this is completely normal nettiquette in forums yes? Most forums would not condone nearly the amount of static and hate filled invective hurled my way so again you are simply taking away time from discussing the issues here again. If you want to act ridiculous and remain completely ignorant of the facts, fine, but please keep me out of it. I’ve seen you joyriding said trolls hate throwing in your own smarmy sniping so don’t act like you are so righteous yourself Jin. Also please drop your baseless attacks, either quote me and the full context and links or politely cease and desist from mentioning me and your opinions about my supposed (projected) behavior you can’t substantiate, which distract from discussion of the topics I’ve been posting here, otherwise YOU are infringing upon my ability to speak clearly without unnecessary diversion. Keep the drama to yourself.

          • Matt Staggs | May 8, 2014 at 3:26 pm |

            “Most forums would not condone nearly the amount of static and hate filled invective hurled my way…”

            There’s a damned thin line here at Disinfo between over moderating and letting the savages run free, as there is between overt and covert hostility. I’m doing my very best to walk this line, but sometimes it’s a matter of intuition.

            Many times, I reach out privately to commenters here and ask them to tone it down. Anti-Euclidean accused me of neglecting a prior instance of abuse directed at a community member, but at the time, I felt that I shouldn’t have to produce a full accounting of my every action upon request. What A-E didn’t know is that I was on friendly terms with both of the commenters in question and spoke with them privately via email, apologizing to one and quietly asking the other to refrain from further attacks.

            I guess I could start sharing these emails, although I feel that they’re the e-equivalent of taking someone aside for a private talk. I’d also have to share every vile, crappy, hate-filled email I get from inordinately furious and often inchoate readers, random crazies, and people intent on ruining my day in one way or another. Some of these are actually from current and active commenters. I just don’t respond to them for the most part, and figure that this is “back room” kind of stuff that I shouldn’t bother other people who are just trying to have fun here with.

            I should probably state here that complaints regarding my work can be submitted to the contact form here. I will make sure that my manager sees any feedback from our readers.


          • There’s a damned thin line here at Disinfo between over moderating and letting the savages run free, as there is between overt and covert hostility. I’m doing my very best to walk this line, but sometimes it’s a matter of intuition.

            For what it’s worth, I still believe you walk the line better than most would. I’m less interested in critiquing your job performance than actually having an exchange where you don’t just talk past me.

            My issue remains that in regards to the issue of covert/overt hostility, you are willfully ignoring an important distinction. Why can actual violence and hate be preached from these pages, and implied violence threatened towards the community or individual posters be the de facto standard, yet don’t ever dare cross the line of invoking violence, even theoretical, towards another poster?

            Your original rebuke to me, in response to Ted, invoking “Stand Your Ground”, was a theoretical response to an implied threat of violence. This was also before Ted went back and edited his post to make his implied threat of violence look less menacing. Go back and re-read my comment carefully: there was a very narrow suggestion of violence there, let alone actionable violence; it certainly was not a threat. While I will grant the overt hostility inherent in the statement, I will stand by the comment as an acceptable response to both Ted and Camron should they feel it necessary to use physical violence in any way, for any reason, towards my person. They should also appreciate that I’m learning lessons about when to invoke violence from their magnanimous examples.

            In the realms of synchroncity, this “gem” about framing crossed my TwitFeed™ the other day. http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/05/10-things-you-cant-unsee-and-what-that-says-about-your-brain/361335/

            Now the “can’t unsee” part is total bullshit, but many people may not have the determination required to “unsee” once they’ve been primed. Fewer still may be unable to hold the primed image, and the abstract image in their minds’ eye at the same time. Which, when you get right down to some of the zcience, makes for an interesting commentary on the human condition.

            But who primed who here? And who is unable to hold the primed image and the abstract image in their mind?

            Furthermore, I posted a response to Camron’s attempt to take advantage of the situation that would probably be relevant at the very least in defense of the larger narrative I have been attempting to discuss for nearly a week now.

            Point || Counterpoint :::
            http://youtu.be/K8qDpg_x49Y?t=1h23m15s || http://youtu.be/K8qDpg_x49Y?t=1h24m15s

            Context :::

            Okay, I can see that with this article, and Anarchy Pony’s comment straight off the bat, you’re trying to turn the volume down. That’s fine. However, I’d recommend you give the “keep it civil” directive to those with Article Posting Capability™ as well. Camron may well be your friend and a “valued contributor”, but to me he fits the internuts definition of TROLL. He’d be purely amusing if he weren’t espousing hate. Perhaps if people didn’t start shit from their by-line, you would have less to worry about in general. Respect starts at the source.

            Also, you may call me ÿ when addressing me. Think of it as the “X” in Malcom X if that helps. ÿ works too if you want to be more formal. 😉 Anti-Euclidean is more of an open-source, hyper-local anti-ideological framework for interfacing with this thing we call Reality™ (meat, cyber, or astral space). I am working on a better treatise to describe A-E (Ǣ???, thanks Matt!) but writing of that nature is much like my other art and music: lacking homoeostasis, it takes a long time to generate something of sufficient quality that can make it past my own editorial judgement.

            If there are any issues you’d like to address with me privately, DM my twitter or tumblr, and I’ll kick you up to an email addy you can reach me at. I’d prefer not to be publicly shamed, particularly when I don’t accept the framing.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 8, 2014 at 3:32 pm |

            you’re cute when you’re angry

          • Lookinfor Buford | May 7, 2014 at 5:55 pm |

            community? lol. Hey Jin, what makes you think ‘the community’ is on your side. Oh you meant ‘the current group think’.. Ok well I guess so. I, for one, think the feds should fuck off. And that you and pony have way too much pent up digital aggression. And pretty much the sum of my observances of you two make me think you don’t participate in the real world of give and take, give respect get respect, life.. or you are paid shills, one.. Cameron has spent hours on this thread deflecting total fuckmuck from ‘the community’, instead of having a couple of interesting couter-points thrown his way. Sounds more like a cult, and honestly, if you two are the ringleaders, I feel sorry for disinfo, as a cult. Love you anyway, you little non sequiteurs, you..

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 6:13 pm |

            “what makes you think ‘the community’ is on your side”
            i don’t think they are on “my” side or anyone’s side. this thread defacto proves ‘they’ are tired of these bullshit posts.
            like i said to the CW, if you don’t like it here, extricate yourself and find yourself somewhere more warm and cuddly.

          • Lookinfor Buford | May 7, 2014 at 6:14 pm |

            Tired of it? Then why all flock to it?

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 6:16 pm |

            they came to voice displeasure. well within everyone’s right;)

          • Lookinfor Buford | May 7, 2014 at 6:18 pm |

            Or to carry forward a propagandists viewpoint, that people are lemmings who ‘won’t’ think for themselves, and therefore must be brainwashed into the group by ostracizing anyone who dares to propose a discussion on a topic where the truth doesn’t fit well with the propaganda.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 6:21 pm |

            the real ‘propaganda’ is the alex jones shill talking points that someone have made a multi-year exercise in the absurd.

          • Lookinfor Buford | May 7, 2014 at 6:22 pm |

            So you think Cameron is just an Alex Jones automaton?

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 6:23 pm |

            yes. in the similar, parallel, and uncanny way that you seem to be camron’s automaton.

          • Lookinfor Buford | May 7, 2014 at 6:24 pm |

            Cameron and I have never fully agreed on anything. We’ve also never disrespected each other in any way we wouldn’t do if standing face to face.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 6:27 pm |

            you really need to read through some older threads. your condescension is obviously without any knowledge on the subject at hand. i’ve been posting here so much longer than you, so please let us who KNOW the story- tell it. ‘k bro?

          • Lookinfor Buford | May 7, 2014 at 6:28 pm |

            There’s no seniority in gangland. What kind of dumbass thinks there is?

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 6:37 pm |

            using your metaphor of ‘gangland’- do you know anything about gangs- anything at all? because gangs ALWAYS have a hierarchy. just saying.

          • Lookinfor Buford | May 7, 2014 at 6:37 pm |

            So where do you fall in the disinfo ‘cult of group think’ hierarchical collective command structure?

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 6:39 pm |

            it wasn’t my metaphor, it’s yours.

          • Lookinfor Buford | May 7, 2014 at 6:40 pm |

            I’m a gang of one. You, on the other hand, are part of some imaginary ‘community’ here on disinfo.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 7:58 pm |

            okay, ‘we’ don’t exist, none of us do. interesting cartesian analysis.

          • Ted Heistman | May 7, 2014 at 6:58 pm |

            No they don’t. That sounds more like Hollywood. Depends on how you define gang though. Many gangs are pretty anarchic.

          • Ted Heistman | May 7, 2014 at 7:00 pm |

            I know that that is just a side note you are making, but some Philosophers such as Deleuze have studdied this.

          • On paper, the MS13 has a hierarchy, a language, and a code of conduct. In reality, the gang is loosely organized, with cells across Central America, Mexico, and the United States, but without any single recognized leader. The leaders are known as “palabreros,” loosely translated as “those who have the word.” These leaders control what are known as “cliques,” the cells that operate in specific territories.

            These cliques have their own leaders and hierarchies. Most cliques have a “primera palabra” and “segunda palabra,” in reference to first and second-in-command. Some cliques are transnational; some fight with others and have more violent reputations. Some cliques control smaller cliques in a given region. They also have treasurers and other small
            functionary positions.


          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 8:06 pm |

            delueze refers to gang as ‘micro-fascists.’ that’s hardly anarchic.

          • Ted Heistman | May 7, 2014 at 8:18 pm |

            You think you can sum up Deleuze thoughts on a subject with a two word phrase? Sweet.

          • Ted Heistman | May 7, 2014 at 8:30 pm |

            This writer makes the case that street gangs have A rhizomatic structure. http://thecrankysociologists.com/2013/11/26/book-review-the-gang-beyond/
            That fits my personal experience as well.

          • Ted Heistman | May 7, 2014 at 8:33 pm |

            Now, Hallsworth does not argue for an
            “either/or” typology here. Gangs may follow hybrid structures as well
            but it is misleading and inappropriate to use the corporate structure as
            model for the gang, as this would lead to a Gilbert Ryle-type of
            category mistake. How could gangs be bureaucratic when relationships are
            based on kinship and clientelism and violence is valued. Gangs are also
            not impersonal organizations. Quite the opposite, actually, as
            relationships are highly personal. Moreover, because of the larger
            social context and the illegal activities that gang members engage in,
            reality is highly unpredictable and cannot be made more certain just by
            wishing it or issuing a few memos and new regulations. Most of gang
            actions are situational and contextual, and ever-changing. And if there
            is a business logic at work sometimes, it is complicated personal and
            emotional factors that can lead to violence and deaths, and sometimes,
            for stupid reasons. Because gang life is inherently unstable, so is its
            structuring. And it is this instability that make it almost impossible
            for gang to structure bureaucratically and territorialize. In this
            sense, gangs are assemblages more than formal organizations.”

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 9:06 pm |

            Now, Hallsworth does not argue for an
            “either/or” typology here. Gangs may follow hybrid structures as well but it is misleading and inappropriate to use the corporate structure asmodel for the gang, as this would lead to a Gilbert Ryle-type of category mistake. How could gangs be bureaucratic when relationships are
            based on kinship and clientelism and violence is valued. Gangs are alsonot impersonal organizations. Quite the opposite, actually, as relationships are highly personal. Moreover, because of the larger social context and the illegal activities that gang members engage in,
            reality is highly unpredictable and cannot be made more certain just by wishing it or issuing a few memos and new regulations. Most of gang actions are situational and contextual, and ever-changing. And if there is a business logic at work sometimes, it is complicated personal and emotional factors that can lead to violence and deaths, and sometimes, for stupid reasons. Because gang life is inherently unstable, so is its structuring. And it is this instability that make it almost impossible
            for gang to structure bureaucratically and territorialize. In this
            sense, gangs are assemblages more than formal organizations.”

            did you read this paragraph before you cut and pasted?
            it basically makes an arguement (whilst still referring to UK youth gangs) that gangs do indeed have structure- that structure happens to be specific and fluid.

          • Ted Heistman | May 7, 2014 at 9:08 pm |

            Apparently you don’t understand what hierarchy is, if you think it is fluid and changes from instance to instance.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 9:23 pm |

            lol. okay ted, i didn’t say ‘hierarchy within UK youth gangs is fluid and changing from instance to instance.’ i said the author asserts that ‘within [uk youth gangs] the comparison to corporate bureaucratic structures is incorrect because within each gang the dynamic is different (from gang to gang)- although some are indeed structured more like corporate bureaucracies, they are also less formal and more based on kinship and violence (personal vs. impersonal).’ and yes, hierarchy can take many different forms. he didn’t assert that gangs were egalitarian or anarchic.

          • Ted Heistman | May 7, 2014 at 9:54 pm |

            Thinking you are always right, is a delusion. It keeps you from learning. By definition, if you are omniscient, you can’t learn.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 10:35 pm |

            my use of the word ‘gang’ was mis-leading and probably innappropriate to what i was referring. i can see you being confused. you made a good sociological point, gangs may be ‘rhizomatic’ – i don’t disagree, but that doesn’t preclude them from being authoritarian either.

          • Ted Heistman | May 7, 2014 at 10:41 pm |

            I am not confused. You said “gangs always have hierarchy” I posted a link to a book that makes the case based on case studies and research that they are rhizomatic in structure.

            In order to maintain the delusion that you are always right, you seem to be taking the position that hierarchy and rhizome are the same thing. Its actually humorous. 😉

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 10:54 pm |

            one doesn’t preclude the other. i understand them not to be the same or even related structural forms.

            when i said ‘gangs’ i meant triads/mafia. like i’ve stated a dozen times. you are very confused.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 11:00 pm |

            the book is referring to UK youth street gangs. i am referring to the triads/mafia.

            UK youth gangs =/= mafia/the triad/the yakuza

            i misspoke, i acknowledge that.

            nor am i an expert on street crime.

            however i understand somethings from certain readings.

            again, i misspoke, referring to ‘gangs’ when i meant organised crime.

            you cited a source, whose case study is not even remotely related to what i was referring to. within that study the author conceded certain points that i made previously.

            again, i am not referring to what you are referring to.

            i am not talking about youth gangs or street gangs.

            i am talking about hierarchical, trans-national, criminal organisations.

            i also do NOT believe they parallel corporate bureaucracy, but they DO have a hierarchical structure.

            you are neither an expert nor even well-read.

            try again.

          • Ted Heistman | May 8, 2014 at 12:43 am |

            You are just fake laughing.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 8, 2014 at 12:55 pm |

            ‘rhizome’ =/= decentralised, non-hierarchichal forms of organisation that include some kind of democratic consent.
            you better read the book review you copy/pasted.
            and UK youth street gangs =/= yakuza, the mafia, the triads.
            i’m onto your bullshit. you hijack a thread for your own small, useless amusements. same ol same ol.

          • Ted Heistman | May 8, 2014 at 2:10 pm |

            I think you are a lot like most of these people you argue with here. Just because you are on the Left and they are on the Right doesn’t mean you aren’t alike. You are meant for each other. two sides of the same coin.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 8, 2014 at 6:43 pm |

            the shinier, prettier, more valuable flip side of course;)

          • Speaking of which, I can’t remember Mr. Wiltshire ever admitting he was wrong about even the smallest of details or changing his mind about anything.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 8:54 pm |

            ‘that writer’ is referring to youth gangs in the UK.
            we’re referring to the mafia, and the triads. organised crime, not petty drug dealers on a street corner, or hooded youths with baseball bats.

          • Ted Heistman | May 7, 2014 at 8:59 pm |

            You said “all gangs” have a hierarchy.

          • Ted Heistman | May 7, 2014 at 9:00 pm |

            But from from experience I don’t expect you to admit it when you are wrong, on even the most minor point…so carry on arguing with Buford

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 9:02 pm |

            i am not wrong actually. we’re just talking about two totally different things. an hour ago i responded to you saying my definition of ‘gang’ was ‘the triads or the mafia.’ it is you who insist on playing semantics, oh well.

          • Ted Heistman | May 7, 2014 at 9:05 pm |

            The biggest gangs in the world are rhizomatic. Sociologists used to working within bureaucracy project strict hierarchy on them.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 9:07 pm |

            i don’t disagree they are not bureacratic, but triads and the mafia are top-down organisations. fyi.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 9:01 pm |

            to a reply of ‘gangland.’ i understood that as ‘mafia.’ i simply didn’t adjust my language to reflect the specific of to what i was referring.

          • Lookinfor Buford | May 8, 2014 at 6:10 pm |

            I actually meant the iron maiden song, but whatev..

          • As a Recognized Expert In The Field Of Trolling™ certified by the Bouvet Island Research Council℺, including a noted popectoral thesis on How To Troll Ineffectivelÿ and manÿ extant examples herein these pages, ÿ’m sorry to say this so bluntly…


            You’re kind of bad at this trolling thing, bro. Keep trying though. If ÿ can do it, then go directly to jail; do not pass go, do not collect $200.

          • Matt Staggs | May 8, 2014 at 10:15 pm |

            One more umlaut and I would have accepted your credentials, but these are the little faults that distinguish a real BIRCher from a pretender! Have at you, imposter!

          • lol, thanks for the laugh, Matt. =)

          • Here again, if you question the assumed and would be kings of disinfotania you are trolling, but if you troll posters whose ideas do not conform with your own then you are a fine and upstanding “disinfonaut”. Reading between the lines it appears the more conformist you are, the more “different” you are to Jin and other potential sockpuppet regurgitator posters here. Nice formula for mind control.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 8, 2014 at 6:47 pm |

            of course you did. *pats on the head*

          • I for one am “offended” at your brazen display of condescension here “Jin”.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 9, 2014 at 3:30 pm |


          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 8:50 pm |

            no i don’t, but i don’t think calling them ‘anarchic’ or de-centralised is grounded in real world experience.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 7:54 pm |

            gangs as wide ranging, transnational criminal groups like the various triads.they may have a loose organisation within cells, but there is almost always a central authority or figure who governs them.

          • Jin loves the state, he loves hierarchies of control and he needs you to love it too so he can not have a cognitive dissonant freakout.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 9, 2014 at 3:31 pm |

            i am an anarchist. you know opposed to state and capital. but don’t let the truth get in the way of your continued idiocy, cutiepie camron.

          • When you say you’re opposed to capital, what exactly do you mean by capital?

          • Jin The Ninja | May 9, 2014 at 8:18 pm |

            in summary: capitalist production and accumulation.

          • So much for “trying to raise the level of discourse,” eh?

          • Such behavior is unbefitting gentlemanly conduct after all.

          • LB and about 5 others.

          • Lookinfor Buford | May 7, 2014 at 6:37 pm |

            Yes echar, it’s all a consipracy.

          • Translation, if you do not think like “Jin” you are the outsider and you are then like everyone else who is “outsider”. This is because in his gay wisdom he is soooo completely tolerant of others, just like any non white person can be racist no matter what racist views or beliefs they harbor, nor can any gay person be small minded and belligerent because they are the minority.

            Notice Jin never defines a particular argument, he prefers blanket dismissals and derision so he needn’t actually pose a cogent case one way or the other. He manages to do so while taking himself completely seriously… @lookinforbuford:disqus sorry he has decided to label and smear you with his silly tactics, now you are nothing more than an “automaton” or a cheerleader for me since you dared disagree with him. This is exactly why his posts always come of the same way, because he has no interest in actually discussing issues. Just people he has never met in person nor bothered to actually listen to.

            “Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.”

            Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.
            Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/e/eleanorroo385439.html#do1hppYUBpttFu07.99
            Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.
            Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/e/eleanorroo385439.html#do1hppYUBpttFu07.99

          • Lookinfor Buford | May 7, 2014 at 6:20 pm |

            btw when did you write the Constitution of netiquette? In case you didn’t notice, it’s gangland out here.

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 6:22 pm |

            i’m sorry that your experience with your anarcho-cap fringe-kin has been so disenfranchising. i promise to play nice if you do;)

          • Lookinfor Buford | May 7, 2014 at 6:23 pm |

            Is this where you tell me ‘the community’ knows all about my kin? And you all know I’m related to Alex Jones?

          • Jin The Ninja | May 7, 2014 at 6:25 pm |

            the only thing i know about you, is that you make me LMFAO with your commentaries, historical and contemporary.

          • Lookinfor Buford | May 7, 2014 at 6:26 pm |

            Well I’m truly ebullient knowing that.

          • Tuna Ghost | May 8, 2014 at 4:38 am |

            Years ago, people were willing to throw counter-points his way. Pearls before swine, as the saying goes. He has eradicated any goodwill or willingness to engage with his own behavior over the years.

          • Again with this nonsense from an anonymous troll.

          • Tuna Ghost | May 10, 2014 at 2:11 am |

            “Troll”? Why, because I tell you without any ambiguity that you’re a joke and that you’re taken even less seriously now than back when I would attempt to reason with you, only to discover that you have no intention of listening to anyone that disagrees with you? Something, I hasten to add, that has been discovered by more and more people since that time? That is commented upon every time you post anything? This is the truth, Camron. I have always told you the truth.

          • Thank you Lookinfor Buford. Yes these self appointed muckety mucks definitely need to get it out of their system already. The response below completely proves the blindness present in disinfo’s “Top Commenters” (translation, needs to get a life)

    • BuzzCoastin | May 6, 2014 at 3:45 am |

      Disinfo’s power struggle leads down road to anarchy

  3. Wah, wah, wee, wah!

  4. Oginikwe | May 6, 2014 at 1:40 am |

    Not getting sucked into these black holes of bullshit anymore. I love the discussions on this site and the company but there comes a point where we’re just getting beat over the head.

    • misinformation | May 6, 2014 at 1:43 am |

      “we’re just getting beat over the head.”

      What are you getting beat over the head with?

      • (see attachment)

        • misinformation | May 6, 2014 at 2:00 am |

          People are getting beat over the head with Jeff Goldblum?

          • Wow dude, I only meant the second most offensive thing in the image, the gigantic pile of fictional dinosaur shit.

            …Let’s not say things we can’t take back, here…

      • Oginikwe | May 6, 2014 at 2:31 am |

        I understand.
        You have a problem with metaphors.
        We get that.

        • misinformation | May 7, 2014 at 2:14 am |


          All hail the pronoun king!

          • Oginikwe | May 7, 2014 at 8:12 am |

            All hail the vacuous and mediocre who can only snipe from the bushes without adding any content.

      • Jonas Planck | May 6, 2014 at 3:30 am |

        Misrepresentation of ideologies used to justify acquisition. To wit: “[Johnson] said that the goal of the MSHCP is a ‘very coordinated and concerted effort’ to devalue property and re-market it to developers who give large campaign contributions to politicians who are responsible for driving out the original land owners.”
        So is that state socialism, crony capitalism, corporate communism, or all three combined into a perfect storm of amoral excuses and motivations? Is his assertion even accurate? Is it “campaign contributions” or is it actually stock options and a revolving career door that yield the best gains for the conspirators involved? Shall we blame “big government” when it’s only acting at the behest of private investors? Or shall we blame the investors who’d be unable to acquire the land without the authority of big government providing the legal muscle?
        How about we just blame whatever it is we hate, regardless of whether or not it makes sense? We can blame the endangered fucking turtle that somebody used as a legal wedge to get in the door, it’ll make as much sense. Those damn turtles, always trying to destroy our very way of life! That’s the way we usually spin things, right? We can at least use hypothetical scenarios based around the premise to find out where people stand on certain things… is it wrong to seize land for green energy projects, but NOT wrong to seize land in order to exploit fossil fuel resources? “drill here, drill now,” sounds all well and good when it’s said to the right people, but how you gonna drill if you don’t own the land to drill on it? You have to TAKE the land first before you can frack it and extract the deep tar. And most importantly, why is there NOBODY ANYWHERE who can answer these questions honestly without rubbing their greasy personal agendas all over the answers?
        Basically, we’re getting beaten over the head with P.R. instead of actually learning anything useful or accurate. But hey, welcome to 21st century America, right? If you want answers you’re in the WRONG PLACE for that… try northern Europe, I hear they’re slightly more honest over there.

        • All of which is an argument for reforming government, not for dismantling it and leaving venture capitalists with no check on their power. Anarchism, if implemented, would do more to disarm the people than any gun grab can hope to do.

          • Anarchism American Libertarianism, if implemented, would do more to disarm the people than any fictional threat of a gun grab could hope to do.

            Anarchy, if it is at all possible on a larger scale, would confront concentrated economic and religious power just as much as concentrated government (if not more so).

            It’s the American Libertarians/Anarcho-Caps that have stolen terminology and not used it properly, nor matched it suitably to fit their ideology. Of course, the moment someone tells you about how their version of “Anarchy” is the right one for everyone everywhere for all time, that’s when you are given permission to sucker punch them.

          • misinformation | May 7, 2014 at 2:15 am |

            Nothing easier than making decrees without defining terms 😉

          • Shoot, you’re preaching to the choir. This whole symbolic language medium is nothing but a crutch passing fad for those who haven’t ascended to their full 5D potential.

            ¡When will duh humanz learn dat teh werdz ℛ ¬ ur 友☃!

          • Rhoid Rager | May 7, 2014 at 10:12 am |

            My upvote about 300 times over.

          • misinformation | May 7, 2014 at 10:32 pm |

            “It’s the American Libertarians/Anarcho-Caps that have stolen terminology
            and not used it properly, nor matched it suitably to fit their ideology…”

            and “liberals” and “conservatives” and “organic” and “freedom” and “democracy” and “collateral damage” and “hope” and “change” and…

          • gustave courbet | May 7, 2014 at 1:49 am |

            I suggest you read more about anarchism.

        • misinformation | May 7, 2014 at 10:30 pm |

          That was a swell reply, thanks for taking the time.

  5. Actually “Freedom” isn’t in DNA… “Gods” are assigned to a people, and you want what you’re told to.

  6. emperorreagan | May 6, 2014 at 9:16 am |

    In case you didn’t see my other videos or pay attention to the mountains of links, watch THIS video about Agenda 21!


    “In the 1987-88 season, Wilkins posted the highest scoring average of his career and finished second to Jordan in the NBA scoring race. He averaged 30.7 points for the Hawks, but Jordan bested him at 35.0. Jordan also defeated Wilkins for the Slam Dunk Championship at the NBA All-Star Weekend in Chicago. Wilkins earned a berth on the All-NBA Second Team and became the first Hawks player to be named NBA Player of the Week three times in a season. In his third straight All-Star Game appearance, Wilkins scored 29 points on 12-of-22 shooting, leading the East squad to a 138-133 victory.

    Atlanta (50-32) won at least 50 games for the third straight season and advanced to the 1988 Eastern Conference Semifinals before losing to the Boston Celtics in seven games. In Game 7 on May 22, Wilkins and Larry Bird carried their respective teams to a thrilling finish, trading bucket for bucket in the fourth quarter until Boston won with a 118-116 victory. Wilkins finished with 47 points and Bird had 34-with 20 of his points tallied in the fourth quarter. “The basket was like a well,” remembered Wilkins. “I couldn’t miss. He couldn’t miss. And it went down to the last shot of the game. Who was going to make the last shot? That’s the greatest game I’ve ever played in or seen played. It was two guys who just did not want to lose.”
    During the 1989 season with the Hawks, Wilkins’s scoring average dropped slightly to 26.2, good for seventh in the league, but he was an All-Star for the fourth straight year. He shot a career-best .844 from the free-throw line and ranked second on the Hawks with 117 steals. Basketball writers selected him to the All-NBA Third Team at season’s end. The Hawks added Reggie Theus and Moses Malone to the team in 1988–89. Malone averaged 20.2 points and finished fourth in the league with his 11.8 rebounding average. Theus averaged 15.8 points. Without 7-foot (2.1 m) Kevin Willis, however, who missed the entire season with a fractured left foot, Atlanta lost to the Milwaukee Bucks in the first round. Wilkins averaged 27.2 points in the playoffs.

    Wilkins returned to dunking prominence in 1989–90 by edging out the Sacramento Kings’ Kenny Smith for his second NBA Slam-Dunk championship. He averaged 26.7 points to finish fifth in the NBA scoring race. He led the Hawks in steals for the first time since 1985–86, finishing with 126. His .484 field-goal percentage was the best since his rookie season, and for the sixth straight year he did not foul out of a game. Nonetheless, Atlanta struggled to a 41-41 record in Mike Fratello’s last season as head coach, failing to make the playoffs for only the second time in Wilkins’ career.”


  7. Dingbert | May 6, 2014 at 9:59 am |

    Good God, dude. I think you may have a problem. More than the rest of us, even.

  8. Ted Heistman | May 6, 2014 at 10:58 am |

    I grew up around the Adirondack mountains of upstate, NY, as a kid and lived there off and on as an adult. Its a very unique park, being the largest State Park in the lower 48 and composed 50% of private land. It takes a certain balance to preserve the character of the area. There are hard core libertarians out there too, who champion private property rights, as well as extreme left wingers. A lot of people own property there, but basically don’t want anybody else to move in.

    For the most part I think what they do there works, and the majority of the people would like to see it retain its Wilderness Character.

    As far as owning 11,000 acres of Wilderness. It must be nice. I really don’t think one individual should be allowed to just do whatever they want with property like that. I think a person with any class would preserve it for posterity.

      • Ted Heistman | May 6, 2014 at 12:09 pm |

        Well, That’s what East Coast Blue Bloods do anyway, deed it to “the Nature Conservancy”

    • Number1Framer | May 6, 2014 at 1:36 pm |

      Posterity is private subdivisions and golf courses. The way God’s country was intended to be. On a personal level I can’t find much reason to sympathize with this guy either. From a strictly fact based angle, there’s obviously alot we don’t know – like a whole other side of the story. My suspicion is he’s an opportunist riding the Bundy wave to push for his subdivision – which is BTW exactly what the drought-ridden southwest needs more of right now.

      • Ted Heistman | May 6, 2014 at 1:40 pm |

        exactly. I think we see eye to eye on this and to be Frank, I am no fan of regulation. For example if I want to buy 5 acres of woods and live in a yurt, I think I should be able to without having to follow some stupid code. So I am by no means a Pro big Government Liberal.

        • Number1Framer | May 6, 2014 at 2:03 pm |

          I agree 100% you should be able to live on your own land on your own terms. But if your outhouse runs off into the nearby stream and pollutes my adjacent downstream plot, I may call the DNR to come protect my right to exist on my own terms. These environmental big-picture regulations are a knife that cuts both ways on a case by case basis. I tend to lean toward protecting the land since it is after all a finite resource and once it’s tarnished it’s never the same again.

          • So do you have ANY evidence that anyone being harassed and threatened here has done ANYTHING wrong whatsoever? Isn’t it convenient that the “precautionary principle” explicitly removes any need for scientific proof of their arguments of future potential damage, all in the name of “preservation” and “sustainability”. Do you see my point?

          • Number1Framer | May 7, 2014 at 9:06 pm |

            Do you see my point above that there’s a whole other side to this story that is not being told by this post? If we just accept that everything is exactly as this one particular man says it is, then we are doing a disservice to the ideas of rationale and objectivity you claim so strongly to espouse. Did anyone talk to the planning commissioners? The Zoning committees? His neighbors? The local politicians or a representative of MSHC? No, this is one man’s rant that proves nothing – especially with regards to the UN.

            If I were to try a little misinfo project and make a video complaining about the government not allowing me to build a water fluoridation plant on my land, how do you think that would be received? Would you stand up for me and post my video here? It’s my land, right? My point is that this is one man who obviously has his own Agenda. This isn’t news or journalism, it’s one guy bitching (and not about Agenda 21 or the UN I may add with strong emphasis). My original challenge for proof of AGENDA 21 OR UN infringement on US soil still stands. And also, how about those proposals for mitigating environmental hazards without delegating power to the government? Still nothing on that from you either.

          • Rhoid Rager | May 7, 2014 at 10:16 am |

            Or you could just loan him the book Humanure, and encourage him to teach himself how to properly dispose of human waste.

          • Do you have any evidence that Bundy was in anyway actually hurting anyone though?

          • Number1Framer | May 10, 2014 at 12:02 am |

            In my opinion, land that is public is not intended to be used in a deleterious way for one’s own personal money-making endeavors. Can I bring my cows to the local city park and let them graze and shit on the grass 10 feet from the popsicle stand? Can I go camping in a national park and walk away from a camp fire because it’s ‘basically my land?’ Public land should mean ‘it’s everyone’s, so let’s lay down some common ground rules,’ as opposed to ‘it’s everyone’s, so it’s mine and I can do whatever I want.’ Apparently a great deal of people see things in a similar way, hence the outcry against Bundy.

            The harm he was causing was in the form of tax-dodging and unauthorized, destructive use of the land. Don’t care so much about the fee aspect, though I understand the logic behind charging the fees to keep up the land in the aftermath of his cattle. Whether those fees actually get used for that is a whole ‘nother debate. But as I’ve said, I always err on the side of natural preservation since the Earth is undeniably finite. That’s just me.

        • That term, “liberal” has come to take on some serious negative baggage for me. It has come to mean clueless Obama dembots and rich west side (Santa Monica/Venice) “industry” douchebags gentrifying the shit outta everything in site and making life hell for anyone making less than half a mil per year.

          • Gotta love the stereotypes and they way they make individual people just poof! disappear. Who wants to deal with people on an individual basis, anyhow? That gets just so, well, messy.

        • Regulations/zoning also protects you from someone buying the 5 acres next to you to store 50 gallon leaky drums of dioxin-laden waste, too. Or, 5 acres of force-fed, screaming, immobilized geese. A man’s yurt should be his castle but your neighbors can make it your personal hell.

          • Ted Heistman | May 6, 2014 at 11:28 pm |

            well it goes too far. I am not talking about people not being allowed to store toxic waste, I am talking about being forced to build certian types of structures instead of building alternative structures, like being forced to have a stairway to the loft in your cabin instead of a ladder, stuff like that. Having to get a permit to build a shed or a chicken coop.

          • Oginikwe | May 7, 2014 at 8:33 am |

            We’ve never gotten a building permit for anything. We build everything on skids: you only need permits for permanent buildings but then we live in an area where the neighbors mind their own business.

          • The best way to learn that zoning regulations are necessary is to go to Houston.

          • Number1Framer | May 7, 2014 at 12:27 am |

            Please elaborate. I’m interested (guessing petroleum is involved).

          • Not really, besides the pollution. Houston basically has no zoning regulations, and it shows. It’s often used as *the* case study in zoning law and urban planning courses. A Google search for Houston zoning will give you plenty of reading, although I’m adamant that the positive articles are by people who never left the district their hotel was in.

            Here’s a good start: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1076&context=ndjlepp

            But it could always be worse:

          • Number1Framer | May 8, 2014 at 1:00 am |

            Regardless of zoning, I can’t understand the appeal of high-rise condos. The 2 tallest and most exclusive in my city are a block apart. I’ve been in both towers for work related assignments, and paying millions for the privilege of being on the 30th floor facing a stone wall a street’s width away is just beyond my comprehension. The Houston thing you posted is pretty interesting. I’m definitely not rich enough to have a say there :/

            If I lived in Kowloon, I would have opened a heroin-nightclub and made a wall of old TVs for the lighting display. lol

        • Amacai Zerand | May 7, 2014 at 8:15 pm |

          “I want to buy 5 acres of woods and live in a yurt”
          The name of my next band.

  9. Brave New World | May 6, 2014 at 11:37 am |

    So basically this guy wants unmonitored access to his land so he can make money developing it, rather than someone else developing it. What a noble cause! Freedom!

    • Necessity (of gov’t. oversight) is the plea for every infringement of human liberty; it is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” – William Pitt
      British House of Commons

  10. I feel like a dead American Indian when I say this, but with such an expanding population, how does one individual even own 11,000 acres of land? The guy sounds like he’s trying to fight the “have’s” speaking as a “have not”, but the issue is he is more like the former than the latter. Given its only natural to not want to be pushed toward the latter if given the chance.

    • Ted Heistman | May 6, 2014 at 12:08 pm |

      That’s what a “local notable” is. Local millionaires are the backbone of the Tea Party right.

      Their opponents are billionaires and “rabble rousers” who have the means to manipulate the governmental apparatus to their own ends.

      Its hard to find many heros in these dramas. But I would like to think that ecology transcends property rights in certain cases. I mean, even from a doctrinaire Libertarian perspective an individiuals rights end where they infringe on others rights. So slaughtering wildlife, polluting the air and water, all that stuff can’t happen just because its “your Land”

      To think that a single individual can own an entire little eco system and just do whatever they want with it doesn’t sit well with me either.

      But you know, there are big land owners that are in with the right people and can basically do that. This guy must be on the outs with some bigger fish in his region.

  11. Phew, it’s a relief to know that privileged landrapersowners have someone like Cameron to stick up for their “rights”… Because they have such a tough time of it, compared to most.

    Oh, wait…

  12. Theres a dead horse joke and a distant drum roll somewhere in this mess.

  13. Apathesis | May 7, 2014 at 3:59 am |

    So I looked up what some properties have sold for in Temecula, CA at a per acre cost.

    For just $8,921.27 per acre, you can own own 39.12 acres at a total cost of $349,000.

    Now that same acre cost times 11,000 acres? That’s a cost of $98,133,970.

    But wait, $8921.27 per acre was the lowest price I had found per acre! I’ve seen other properties go for $12,500/acre and $22,186.25/acre. And these are prices way down at the bottom of the price range.

    Yup, makes me really care about this guy’s problems with the Feds. 0_o

    • Rhoid Rager | May 7, 2014 at 4:58 am |

      Amazing how cheap oil makes owning/buying that much land at that mark up even remotely feasible. I look forward to the day when the Land Export Model consequences kick in. Fuck bubbles.

    • When did he acquire the land? Isn’t the point of investing to buy cheap and let the value accrue over time?

    • Number1Framer | May 7, 2014 at 9:16 pm |

      This makes sense. I think you may have just cracked the code. And surprise – not the UN, but the extraction industry.

      • Did you know that Article 17 of the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others,” and “no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property?”

        • misinformation | May 7, 2014 at 10:53 pm |

          Then they throw this little doozie in on Article 29 (3):

          “These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations”

          • Number1Framer | May 8, 2014 at 1:15 am |

            Closest to any proof I’ve seen yet from anyone but still requires a stretch of imaginative interpretation.

          • And said purposes and principles can be anything you or I want to say they are!

          • misinformation | May 8, 2014 at 9:53 am |

            I doubt you or I have any say in the purposes or principles of the UN.

          • Given the existence of the Security Council, I doubt the UN has any purposes or principles.

          • misinformation | May 8, 2014 at 7:44 pm |

            Hard to argue with that.

          • So Article 29 (3) really means there’s essentially nothing opposing the other rights and freedoms.

          • misinformation | May 10, 2014 at 1:01 am |

            That’s not how I interpret that clause. If I read you correctly, my response is…

            you brought up what Article 17 of the UN blah blah blah says, indicating that the UN wishes or mandates (or whatever) that statement.

            In my understanding of ineffectual political speak, Article 29 (3) indicates that, essentially, the UN says, “Regardless of what we’ve said before, whatever we say now, goes”. In other words, the UN Declaration is sacrosanct unless the UN decides it’s not.

            And, slightly deviating, for what it’s worth, when I said, “Hard to argue with that”, it’s my belief that an argument COULD be made, iIt’s just not easy and I’m uninterested.

  14. Lookinfor Buford | May 7, 2014 at 6:31 pm |

    Then let Anarchy Pony mind his own business, if he has nothing to add to the discussion.

    • Perhaps, if there is a discussion being had. Using this word would suggest that there is some sort of back and forth. Instead we get some “trivium” dog and pony show.

  15. Tuna Ghost | May 8, 2014 at 4:44 am |

    You are not wrong in assuming that.

  16. Post a link and quotes in context. Onus is on you.

    • Also an ad hominem attack is a daily occurence here, pointing it out means i am trying to raise the level of discourse. If you disagree prove anything you’ve said with posts not taken out of context and links so as to enable checking. Pretty simple right?

      • Tuna Ghost | May 10, 2014 at 2:17 am |

        An ad hominem attack is when someone says “you’re wrong because you’re stupid”, not when someone — or many someones, in this case — says “you’re wrong and you’re stupid”. You’ve never understood this distinction.

    • Tuna Ghost | May 10, 2014 at 2:15 am |

      Here’s an example: every single time I’ve ever tried to reason with you. Chose any one of those, they’re all perfect examples of what he and several others are talking about.

  17. So what of the other links that appear to bolster the non arguments against Bundy? Seems fair to me to have a tit for tat back and forth, tell me do you troll on those posts or only on the ones you disagree with. If you aren’t trolling then please present an argument, don’t kill the messenger and stick to the facts.

Comments are closed.