Rushmore Blockage Stirs Anger in South Dakota

maybe someone else can find a link to an article about story they can link, I tried to link the article and I couldn't because of copywright infringement laws, or some such...

atm.. you have to use Snowmobiles..

There is a link to that here. And more.


Thread: Complilation of Obummer's Park Service bullshit antics

Granted Mt Rushmore is one of the biggest waist of government spending ever, and a complete insult to the Sioux nation. Someone should just blow it up anyway, but the fact that they have gone to incredible length , and man power , to block any and all pullovers so you cannot take a picture of the monument is very strange indeed.

Well,strange isn't the right word, I am actually at a loss of words for this ,ineed ,strange event. I mean WTF ?

Keep in mind the tremendous loss to the National Park system in loss of revenue from entrance fees. It is costing a fortune to close these parks. This doesn't add up, doesn't make sense, why are they doing this ? Any ideas ?

Right most of them should be self sufficient, operate on their money taken in.

There is an ongoing theory here that all of this is actually in preparation of a sizable event coming. I know that in my own little community, it is endangering everyone with winter on the way. No one can get wood permits or get into the forest to cut, at a time when everyone is doing that! We get nights of -20F here, it's proving to be a dangerous situation. We are a little off-grid, a little on-grid, but I wonder if this isn't an effort (partially anyway) to starve out those who aren't living in big cities by cutting off resources.

Espcially the big parks like Yellowstone, 1,000s a day just in entrance fees, 25.00 for each vehicle. Not sure how many are going thru the gates this time of years, but it is still in the 1,000s I am sure. Fall is a popular time to see the park.

I read thru your thread, didn't see anything about the above mentioned Black Hills incident ? do you have a link to article you can put on here ?

South Dakota, eh? Not a good idea. Lot of crazy people out there.

haha, crazy people everywhere. Define crazy.

Most of them are run with state funds and state personnel.
That's why Wisconsin's governor told Obama to stuff it.

It just occurred to me. Obama is shutting down money that comes back into the states. It's starving out people who live in the small towns and village resorts inside the parks. People who live there depend on those businesses in their daily lives.

Oh, he has declared war economically on the states and the citizens of those states.

The real doom is when they do re-open the park.......

Barry's mug will have been installed amongst the real presidents sculptures. Who the hell would drive up there to see that ? Unless it's to piss on it.

Well considering all the money they are spending closing these parks, barricading them, and paying the rangers patrolling these barricades, you would think they would be better off leaving them open and collecting the entrance fee's...

Won't work, Rushmore is white granite...

Between A) the public's response being utterly predictable, and B) the statements of certain rangers saying they were told to essentially be as big a pain in the ass as possible, we know the inconvenience, pain, and in some cases outright illegal harassment is absolutely intentional.

Since it is intentional, and since the "reasons" they give are barefaced lies ("out of money", "for our safety"), and since they're not complete fools unfamiliar with human nature, i.e. they knew in advance that the Republicans wouldn't get the blame instead of those who were actually ordering the needless closures, we're left with the following situation:

Our government, out in the open (or with the barest excuses which are not expected to be believed), is assaulting the public's good will, in full knowledge that they'll be blamed for it.

Why? What could they possibly gain from this?

Well, there's at least a few possibilities - and probably more than I can think of right off hand. In no particular order:

* Revenge (it seems this has been cooking since Obama's childhood)

* A demonstration of power

* Setting the stage for having to use massive force to "repel" a revolt. This would be not so much a "false flag" situation, per se (those involve blaming an uninvolved party), but rather more akin to "entrapment" since students of human nature can generally (without precision) predict what a given society will stand. Not always, of course, but these guys are nothing if not data crunchers and analyzers.

* All of the above and more.

So if this is a setup situation, who is being set up?

We are.

Without trying to sound too conspiracy-oriented, I don't think it is unreasonable to suggest that all of our genuine and justified outrage might be A) predicted, B) expected, C) desired, and D) causing us to play right into their hands.


-----

On the other hand, we'll still win - because we're Americans, all the way down to our culture. Although most of them are "Americans" too, they really don't understand what it means to be one of us, they really don't understand us (or at least not as well as they think they do), so they're bound to miscalculate greatly and perhaps already have.

That's what I was thinking, don't you be pissing off those South Dakotans. Not cause they're crazy, but because they're serious.

Crazy like a fox.

The states actually runs on a budget SURPLUS, which is crazy in this current bizarro version of the USA.

And almost half the average crime rate for the USA.
Only 23 murders in the whole state in 2010 with one of the highest gun ownership per capita.

"Mount Rushmore Blockage Stirs Anger"
[link to www.argusleader.com]

Never heard that before. Source? Examples?

Fuck MT Rushmore all the time. That is native land stolen from the Lakota nation. Every year they go up there for a reclamation ceremony and sometimes raise hell, and usually get arrested for it. The natives should go up there and tear down whatever barriers are put up.

No, you've got to get your facts straight. The native Americans, Lakota included, certainly got shafted, abused, etc., BUT their land wasn't "stolen". You're talking about the conduct of nations, whether formal or no, and what happened to the Lakota and others was that they were CONQUERED.

And being conquered has consequences.

Now before you freak out, please understand I'm not trying to justify what happened to them as a people - not at all. But this isn't even "late in the game" - this is what? a century+ after the game is over?

Their land wasn't stolen, and we (as a nation) aren't obliged to give it back. They and their land were conquered, for good or for ill - and obviously we're talking "for ill" here. The only way they'll ever get (all) their land back is by force, and that's not going to happen. You'll notice their "reclamation ceremony" is getting them exactly nowhere.

Last Edited by Shelgeyr on 10/06/2013 02:06 AM

That is THEIR land. It WAS STOLEN. They were offered money for it, but they refused it, and said it was not for sale so they STOLE IT anyway.

And the reclamation ceremony is SYMBOLIC. They are not stupid. They know they will never get the land back, but that land IS theirs.

Look, I actually sympathize (not that you can tell), but you're speaking in a conflict of terms. You can't say "they know they will never get the land back" and also say "but that land IS theirs".

That simply isn't true.

You can say "...but that land WAS theirs", which is beyond dispute, or "...but that land WAS theirs and was taken forcibly from them", which is also true, but like it or not, and moral or not, the current owner of the land is a matter of public record, and it isn't them.

Sentiment doesn't win here.

It isn't their land. Certainly "was", and maybe "should be", but it "isn't".