It’s getting interesting in Oregon: Here’s another official statement in which the Bundy group announces its first concession to the media: it adopts a name: they are now the Citizens for Constitutional Freedom. In these quickly evolving first days, it is still hard to get a ‘fix’ on things, but I would like to make an initial, tentative assessment. (For an even more initial and tentative assessment, with several links see yesterday’s post, and scroll down.)
But do have a listen to the newest statement, done before the press, well, the alternative and foreign press. My guess is that mainstream media will splice a few words to make it sound threatening and focus on the guy in sunglasses in the back. Please attend both to the complaints and the proposals voiced here.
This is a more “official” statement than the last, and includes a long, very coherent list of grievance filed. In his informal comments Ammon Bundy is not an eloquent man, you need to be patient, but he has something to say. Here, he and several others give strong personal as well as legal angles to these matters. The considered arguments offered here will surprise most critics: the reality is about as far from the mass media story as on the foreign front where the US is actually portrayed as an enemy of ISIS. (Yes, some still think they are “Islamic” rather McCain’s army or the Israeli Secret Intelligence Service).
Bundy and his colleagues make a good argument against what I call “hidden patrimonialism,” which has crushed the aged Hammond family through extortion, plain and simple. Our federal government portrays itself to lazy-minded bleeding-heart liberals as requiring vast subsidies for the ‘welfare state’ but in the real world only corporations and banks ever see any welfare. The left is utterly oblivious to this basic fact of contemporary power. They are mostly “house slaves”, thinking they are free. They do not know they are controlled by the same people who control those they oppose, and as perfectly: the “family” structured consortium of international banksters and military-industrial corporate leaders that have co-opted the “Federal Government” (and mass media) in increasingly big bites since 1913 (creation of Federal Reserve, etc.) and 1947 (creation of National Security State). We may add 2001, when totalitarian control was made more or less complete, evinced by the laughably despotic events of “too big to jail” 2008 when murderous crooks were not so much let out of jail free, but given trillions for the trouble of losing billions of their clients money.
Ammon Bundy’s group no doubt has its nuts, but he is not one. He is nothing like the fanatic that, say, Hank Paulson or John McCain is. Neither do the other ‘voices’ of the group presented in this video sound crazy to me. No Lindsay Grahams or Ted Cruzs or Donald Trumps that I saw today. Actually, they sound quite reasonable; they certainly know the law and the Constitution better than the afore-mentioned lunatics, and certainly better than their massmedia critics, sadly (since I hail from that direction) especially from those on the left.
Are these just a bunch of big rich ranchers who only speak up when their lands are threatened but don’t give a damn about the rights of urban American blacks or Middle Eastern ‘ragheads’? Probably that defines more than a few. Still, thats better than the backers of al-CIAduh and the CIAliphate. Let’s consider the worst, I mean among real possibilities. That Bundy and the leaders I’ve seen are “terrorists,” “white supremacists” and other such epithets leveled by the press is just idiotic slander as far as I can tell.
The most damning of realistic suggestions I’ve heard — but given without evidence — is that the Bundy/Fed showdown in 2014 was over gold on the property that neither party wanted to acknowledge. Cliven Bundy may not look good in this scenario, but even if its true, in the other corner you have the world’s principle purveyor of “Islamic” terrorism, the good ol’ US of A, Inc.
We need to remember that the American Revolution too was fueled by rich, slave-holding plantation owners who were far from perfect. Nor was their Constitution perfect perhaps, but their idea was significantly ‘better’ than British tyranny. Did some sign on to the Revolution duplicitously ?– no doubt, they did. Alexander Hamilton is a full-blooded traitor in my book, and when we abolish the Federal Reserve and jail the banksters we should properly vilify the first US Central Bankster. Despite the imperfection of the Revolution and the Revolutionaries, the force of the Constitution –and a general social awareness of Constitutional principles — gave a potential ‘opening’ for social classes to rise that may have been systematically oppressed by the rich landowners. Awareness went first, then the Constitution.
So now too, anyone who wants to strike at the world’s worst abuses of power must not wait for a White Knight on a White Horse (or Black, or what you will) but ally with mulattos and mutts. We will need to use the bad against the worse, in successive stages, and this may go on for some time. Actually Ammon Bundy is not bad; at least, I do not get any bad vibes so far about either him or cause, fully admitting I know only what I’ve pretty much posted here. I have no doubt that less savory types may be in his ranks, and no doubt that some of them have been planted by the Masters of War, who have proven themselves not so much masters, but avid if sloppy students of false flag events.
This sums it up nicely; graphic is from Anthony Freda.com