Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How is this any different than the police observing while slowly driving by in a police car?
So you are saying you don't know the difference between seeing something from a car and seeing something from the superior vantage point of a plane? Get out much?
Another way to look at this story. It was a civil matter of who owned the cows.
According to local reports, these cows were not alleged to be stolen, they had wandered onto the Brossart farm. According to certain local reports, Mr. Brossart believed these animals to be unclaimed and, in accordance with certain open range laws, the cattle belonged to him. When questioned in court, he answered repeatedly, that the cattle were "his property." Because of this property dispute, legally speaking, this is now a civil matter. Yet, the Sheriff's office served a criminal warrant to look for these cows.
When Mr. Brossart refused to honor the warrant, he was tazed and placed into custody. Mr. Brossart was not armed. Mr. Brossart's sons also refused to honor the warrant, and told law enforcement officers to get off the property. Initial reports say the boys had long guns, and later reports claim high powered rifles. This all resulted in a standoff where no shots were fired and no one was harmed.
Now, as a former prosecutor, who has a deep respect and appreciation for law enforcement and the dangers they face, I understand the problem with people brandishing guns in the presence of officers. But it appears to me that the situation was incited by criminalizing a civil dispute. This was reasonably a civil dispute over livestock ownership which would require a review by a judge andfull hearing involving all parties before property is taken.
But here is the really disturbing part. The next morning, a tip to law enforcement told officers that the boys were out on tractors harvesting and were not armed. Did the officers now come to the property and attempt to serve this warrant peaceably? No, they responded with MASSIVE force.
"Next thing they knew – a mini army and a Predator B drone have been called in. State Highway Patrol, a regional SWAT team, a bomb squad, ambulance, deputy sheriffs from three other counties and a drone arrived at the scene, reports the Los Angeles Times."
And now "the rest of the story." Apparently, the residents of this farm are members of the Sovereign Citizens Movement, a so-called "anti-government group which the FBI considers extremist and violent," according to the LA Times article. The primary reason for this is that Terry Nichols was a Sovereign Citizen. However, don't forget who else DHS considers potential terrorists. Remember the report that claims veterans returning from Iraq and US citizens who are against abortion are also "potentially violent terrorists?" Here is an excerpt:
"Right-wing extremism," the report said in a footnote on Page 2, goes beyond religious and racial hate groups and extends to "those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely… It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration," said the report, which also listed gun owners and veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as potential risks."
Take some time and read what the ADL says about the Sovereign Citizens. If you refer to yourself as a Constitutionalist, you might be a terrorist. If you believe that government governs best when it governs closest to home, you might be a terrorist. If you take issue with the 16th or 17th amendments, the Federal Reserve, Fiat Money, or you believe in the Gold Standard, you might be a terrorist.
Just a week ago the crafters of the SB1867 said they could not conceive of the extraordinary powers given to DHS being used against US citizens; it only applies to "terrorists." Now we have military drones being employed in the US in police actions against citizens. How inconceivable is it for US citizens to be subjected to the extraordinary powers outlined in SB1867? I believe the purpose of SB1867 is to manipulate We the People into having given permission for this abuse of power in the name of security; in the name of fighting terrorism. Are we to believe that they didn't have this in mind when they wrote that bill?
Americans United for Freedom is an organization of morons. Neither Habeus Corpus nor the Posse Comitatus Act has suspended. S. 1876 only pertains to POWs taken during time of war. Like it or not, Public Law 107-40 is still in effect, and so long as it is in effect, we are in a state of war. POWs are held indefinitely while the war continues. Only after the war is over are POWs either released from captivity, or put on trial for their crimes.
Just like the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, a state of war existed between the US and Vietnam from August 1964 until the resolution was repealed in December 1974. The War Against Terrorism resolution went into effect on 09/18/2001 and will remain in effect until Congress repeals the resolution.
None of this has anything to do with the use of civilian UAVs.
and what does that have to do with this thread? Off topic.
The gov't cannnot take your Constitutional rights away from you, but you can give them away. Dylan Ratigan is one of yours, listen to the discussion on his show. This is mission creep, from securing the border to spying on American citizens, or even worse. Use your imagination.
Americans United for Freedom is an organization of morons. Neither Habeus Corpus nor the Posse Comitatus Act has suspended. S. 1876 only pertains to POWs taken during time of war. Like it or not, Public Law 107-40 is still in effect, and so long as it is in effect, we are in a state of war. POWs are held indefinitely while the war continues. Only after the war is over are POWs either released from captivity, or put on trial for their crimes.
Just like the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, a state of war existed between the US and Vietnam from August 1964 until the resolution was repealed in December 1974. The War Against Terrorism resolution went into effect on 09/18/2001 and will remain in effect until Congress repeals the resolution.
None of this has anything to do with the use of civilian UAVs.
Do you really think this "war on terror" has an end, or even a definition of what a terrorist is? I'll define terrorist for you, anyone that dares to go against the government, by action, by speech, by thought. That is where we are going.
The war on terror will end, when the war on drugs ends - all I see is escalation. That means encroaching loss of individual liberty's in the name of the common good. Wake up!
The gov't cannnot take your Constitutional rights away from you, but you can give them away. Dylan Ratigan is one of yours, listen to the discussion on his show. This is mission creep, from securing the border to spying on American citizens, or even worse. Use your imagination.
The government can take your constitutional rights away from you, and they can do it legally. The constitution may be amended, and it has been 27 times.
The government can take your constitutional rights away from you, and they can do it legally. The constitution may be amended, and it has been 27 times.
Very true,when was the Constitution amended to allow warrantless searches?
No,the FBI can get a NSL and doesn't require a warrant.
Doesn't do the same thing ad a warrant would.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
