#Login Register


  • 2 Vote(s) - 5 Average
Home 


One Hundred FBI Agents Descend on Indiana Property: Agency says Agents Seizing Ancient Artifacts!
04-07-2014, 02:39 AM #31
UniqueStranger Art in my heart
Posts:14,898 Threads:420 Joined:Jun 2012
(04-07-2014, 02:27 AM)Kreeper Wrote:  
(04-07-2014, 02:15 AM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  
Quote:"It was pretty neat stuff. I was really interested in looking at all of it," said Runnebohm. He saw the collection while working on the plumbing at Miller's house. He said Miller was proud to show it off.

"He had a head with an arrowhead stuck in it, like a skull and all kinds of Indian artifacts from arrowheads to hatchets to peace pipes to just anything," explained Runnebohm.

I don't know if this is true, but isn't that like grave robbing from the native peoples?

He didn't just have Native American artifacts. He had artifacts from all over the world.

Yes, I am aware of that. I was pointing out that it is against the law and treaties.

04-07-2014, 03:42 AM #32
jaydoom i am doom
Posts:290 Threads:57 Joined:Mar 2011
dam. that's a bit excessive, 100 agents ? wtf2.gif
04-07-2014, 04:37 AM #33
Below Average Genius Member
Posts:1,799 Threads:138 Joined:Apr 2013
(04-07-2014, 02:15 AM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  
Quote:"It was pretty neat stuff. I was really interested in looking at all of it," said Runnebohm. He saw the collection while working on the plumbing at Miller's house. He said Miller was proud to show it off.

"He had a head with an arrowhead stuck in it, like a skull and all kinds of Indian artifacts from arrowheads to hatchets to peace pipes to just anything," explained Runnebohm.

I don't know if this is true, but isn't that like grave robbing from the native peoples?

It was reported somewhere he bought items as he traveled to different parts of the world rather than robbing graves. He did a lot back in the 1940's when it was all legal.

But the feds ignored his 4th amendment protection raiding him without probable cause. They didn't have evidence he had broken any laws, just suppositions.

In some quarters there is a school of thought that artifacts belong in public museums rather than being privately held. That's a high falutin way of saying a bunch of people have opinions. Their opinions are not law. It's just their opinion.

But if they can get the FBI on their side to do their bidding, WTH.

Pray for me. hug.gif
04-07-2014, 05:42 AM #34
jaydoom i am doom
Posts:290 Threads:57 Joined:Mar 2011
(04-04-2014, 02:43 AM)Beyond Smolensk Wrote:  
(04-03-2014, 04:58 PM)yankees Wrote:  I think the "Artifacts" story is just the cover story.
Maybe but not if someone found strange out of place out of time artifacts that if made public knowledge would crush tptb version of human history that they've been force feeding us for so damn long while destroying and exposing the lies of their currently enforced belief structures that mainstream archaeologists and scientists and astronomers are forced to strictly adhere to and follow along without question or they would loose their financial fundings...

Just like these hushed up and suppressed objects > http://www.s8int.com/page6.html
thanks for the link a lot of good reading on this site!
04-07-2014, 03:14 PM #35
UniqueStranger Art in my heart
Posts:14,898 Threads:420 Joined:Jun 2012
(04-07-2014, 04:37 AM)Below Average Genius Wrote:  
(04-07-2014, 02:15 AM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  
Quote:"It was pretty neat stuff. I was really interested in looking at all of it," said Runnebohm. He saw the collection while working on the plumbing at Miller's house. He said Miller was proud to show it off.

"He had a head with an arrowhead stuck in it, like a skull and all kinds of Indian artifacts from arrowheads to hatchets to peace pipes to just anything," explained Runnebohm.

I don't know if this is true, but isn't that like grave robbing from the native peoples?

It was reported somewhere he bought items as he traveled to different parts of the world rather than robbing graves. He did a lot back in the 1940's when it was all legal.

But the feds ignored his 4th amendment protection raiding him without probable cause. They didn't have evidence he had broken any laws, just suppositions.

In some quarters there is a school of thought that artifacts belong in public museums rather than being privately held. That's a high falutin way of saying a bunch of people have opinions. Their opinions are not law. It's just their opinion.

But if they can get the FBI on their side to do their bidding, WTH.

The fact still remains that he has stolen property of the native peoples in his possession and he should have known the laws/treaty laws back in the 1940's because that particular treaty law existed then and not purchased anything.

I think that maybe the pillaging and theft of cultural artifacts may be much worse than we know.
04-07-2014, 05:02 PM #36
Below Average Genius Member
Posts:1,799 Threads:138 Joined:Apr 2013
(04-07-2014, 03:14 PM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  
(04-07-2014, 04:37 AM)Below Average Genius Wrote:  
(04-07-2014, 02:15 AM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  
Quote:"It was pretty neat stuff. I was really interested in looking at all of it," said Runnebohm. He saw the collection while working on the plumbing at Miller's house. He said Miller was proud to show it off.

"He had a head with an arrowhead stuck in it, like a skull and all kinds of Indian artifacts from arrowheads to hatchets to peace pipes to just anything," explained Runnebohm.

I don't know if this is true, but isn't that like grave robbing from the native peoples?

It was reported somewhere he bought items as he traveled to different parts of the world rather than robbing graves. He did a lot back in the 1940's when it was all legal.

But the feds ignored his 4th amendment protection raiding him without probable cause. They didn't have evidence he had broken any laws, just suppositions.

In some quarters there is a school of thought that artifacts belong in public museums rather than being privately held. That's a high falutin way of saying a bunch of people have opinions. Their opinions are not law. It's just their opinion.

But if they can get the FBI on their side to do their bidding, WTH.

The fact still remains that he has stolen property of the native peoples in his possession and he should have known the laws/treaty laws back in the 1940's because that particular treaty law existed then and not purchased anything.

I think that maybe the pillaging and theft of cultural artifacts may be much worse than we know.

But it WAS legal. There is no evidence anything was stolen.

The FBI doesn't have any evidence that his artifacts are illegal, so their raid is a violation of the 4th amendment. Just because the gov't suspects something is not adequate reason for the gov't to take someone's private property.

It is no more pillaging than if a person in the US decided to sell an heirloom from their family to someone from a foreign country who is a collector.

I suspect this raid was instigated by a museum that wants to get their hands on this man's property.

Pray for me. hug.gif
04-07-2014, 05:10 PM #37
Wicked Oblivion Member
Posts:10,778 Threads:720 Joined:Oct 2012
(04-07-2014, 03:42 AM)jaydoom Wrote:  dam. that's a bit excessive, 100 agents ? wtf2.gif
Artichokes?...Oooops...I mean artifacts...well if this was anything alien then the military would be there most likely,so usually the fbi gets involved with a crime scene i think? so maybe someone unearthed an old mass grave of native americans who were murderd and buried there by the us cavalry? but then why the fbi? well whatever it is do they really need 100 friggin fbi there i mean like surely 50 could have handled it and so could 25 like wtf but i suppose everyone wants to jump on the "im so concerned" band wagon and get their greedy fingers into some over inflated overtime pay?!
04-07-2014, 05:48 PM #38
UniqueStranger Art in my heart
Posts:14,898 Threads:420 Joined:Jun 2012
(04-07-2014, 05:02 PM)Below Average Genius Wrote:  
(04-07-2014, 03:14 PM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  
(04-07-2014, 04:37 AM)Below Average Genius Wrote:  
(04-07-2014, 02:15 AM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  
Quote:"It was pretty neat stuff. I was really interested in looking at all of it," said Runnebohm. He saw the collection while working on the plumbing at Miller's house. He said Miller was proud to show it off.

"He had a head with an arrowhead stuck in it, like a skull and all kinds of Indian artifacts from arrowheads to hatchets to peace pipes to just anything," explained Runnebohm.

I don't know if this is true, but isn't that like grave robbing from the native peoples?

It was reported somewhere he bought items as he traveled to different parts of the world rather than robbing graves. He did a lot back in the 1940's when it was all legal.

But the feds ignored his 4th amendment protection raiding him without probable cause. They didn't have evidence he had broken any laws, just suppositions.

In some quarters there is a school of thought that artifacts belong in public museums rather than being privately held. That's a high falutin way of saying a bunch of people have opinions. Their opinions are not law. It's just their opinion.

But if they can get the FBI on their side to do their bidding, WTH.

The fact still remains that he has stolen property of the native peoples in his possession and he should have known the laws/treaty laws back in the 1940's because that particular treaty law existed then and not purchased anything.

I think that maybe the pillaging and theft of cultural artifacts may be much worse than we know.

But it WAS legal. There is no evidence anything was stolen.

The FBI doesn't have any evidence that his artifacts are illegal, so their raid is a violation of the 4th amendment. Just because the gov't suspects something is not adequate reason for the gov't to take someone's private property.

It is no more pillaging than if a person in the US decided to sell an heirloom from their family to someone from a foreign country who is a collector.

I suspect this raid was instigated by a museum that wants to get their hands on this man's property.

Well, there are laws in place for digging up artifacts and stiffer laws for digging up human remains (which he has in his collection) and who is to say he didn't dig them up say in the 1990's. If he did nothing wrong, then he has nothing to worry about. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. If I were to start digging around (wherever) looking for artifacts, I would surely research what is lawful and unlawful.

Anyway, it will be interesting to hear what the archaeologists and native people have to say about his collection.

http://www.falls-society.org/Ancient%20s...ndered.htm

Quote:Metke told CTV that police took the object when they raided his home on Jan. 22, and he is unclear why investigators went public with the story now.

Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/edmonton-ma...z2yDD1Eauu

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/edmonton-ma...-1.1684753

So, it looks like raiding homes of suspected artifact thieves is the norm here in Canada and the U.S.A.
04-07-2014, 06:27 PM #39
Cynicalabsurdance Member
Posts:8,271 Threads:191 Joined:Feb 2011
just quoting here , and then my thoughts

" The fact still remains that he has stolen property of the native peoples in his possession and he should have known the laws/treaty laws back in the 1940's because that particular treaty law existed then and not purchased anything. "

point one :

this entire hemisphere is stolen property of native peoples

and it is Ironic for the THIEVES who stole it , to pass WHITE LAWS

for RED Artifacts


give that a think for a minute


like blasting a person with a Bazooka

then hand them a bandaid for the gaping wound you just caused


LAWS ?

freaking LAWS ?

F_CK LAWS MADE BY CRIMINALS

and that is what it is

right down to a parking ticket

THINK about it

a Nation of LAWS ?

well then your nation must be one f_cked up nation of criminals and controllers of them
04-07-2014, 07:08 PM #40
UniqueStranger Art in my heart
Posts:14,898 Threads:420 Joined:Jun 2012
http://www.cr.nps.gov/local-law/anti1906.htm

Doesn't it really come down to respect and protection of these historically important artifacts and not personal gain for any one citizen?
04-07-2014, 08:19 PM #41
Cynicalabsurdance Member
Posts:8,271 Threads:191 Joined:Feb 2011
Too bad Columbus didn't think of that .
04-09-2014, 06:45 PM #42
Below Average Genius Member
Posts:1,799 Threads:138 Joined:Apr 2013
(04-07-2014, 05:48 PM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  
(04-07-2014, 05:02 PM)Below Average Genius Wrote:  
(04-07-2014, 03:14 PM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  
(04-07-2014, 04:37 AM)Below Average Genius Wrote:  
(04-07-2014, 02:15 AM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  I don't know if this is true, but isn't that like grave robbing from the native peoples?

It was reported somewhere he bought items as he traveled to different parts of the world rather than robbing graves. He did a lot back in the 1940's when it was all legal.

But the feds ignored his 4th amendment protection raiding him without probable cause. They didn't have evidence he had broken any laws, just suppositions.

In some quarters there is a school of thought that artifacts belong in public museums rather than being privately held. That's a high falutin way of saying a bunch of people have opinions. Their opinions are not law. It's just their opinion.

But if they can get the FBI on their side to do their bidding, WTH.

The fact still remains that he has stolen property of the native peoples in his possession and he should have known the laws/treaty laws back in the 1940's because that particular treaty law existed then and not purchased anything.

I think that maybe the pillaging and theft of cultural artifacts may be much worse than we know.

But it WAS legal. There is no evidence anything was stolen.

The FBI doesn't have any evidence that his artifacts are illegal, so their raid is a violation of the 4th amendment. Just because the gov't suspects something is not adequate reason for the gov't to take someone's private property.

It is no more pillaging than if a person in the US decided to sell an heirloom from their family to someone from a foreign country who is a collector.

I suspect this raid was instigated by a museum that wants to get their hands on this man's property.

Well, there are laws in place for digging up artifacts and stiffer laws for digging up human remains (which he has in his collection) and who is to say he didn't dig them up say in the 1990's. If he did nothing wrong, then he has nothing to worry about. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. If I were to start digging around (wherever) looking for artifacts, I would surely research what is lawful and unlawful.

Anyway, it will be interesting to hear what the archaeologists and native people have to say about his collection.

http://www.falls-society.org/Ancient%20s...ndered.htm

Quote:Metke told CTV that police took the object when they raided his home on Jan. 22, and he is unclear why investigators went public with the story now.

Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/edmonton-ma...z2yDD1Eauu

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/edmonton-ma...-1.1684753

So, it looks like raiding homes of suspected artifact thieves is the norm here in Canada and the U.S.A.

There is a framework that even the FBI is supposed to respect. Warrants are only supposed to be issued if there is probable cause.

Suspicion doesn't meet the probably cause requirement. So even if the FBI and everyone else suspects the artifacts were illegally obtained, it is illegal for law enforcement to seize ANYTHING including artifacts.

As a separate issue, why are they using 100 agents at taxpayer expense for what really is a trivial matter compared to more serious crimes such as terrorism, bank robberies, etc?

The priorities are upside down.

Pray for me. hug.gif



Home 




 



DISCLAIMER / Terms of Service (TOS):
Kritterbox.com - Socialize anonymously, commentary, discussion, oddities, technology, music and more!  This website is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. kritterbox.com shall not be liable for any damages whatsoever, including, without limitation, those resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether or not advised of the possibility of damage, and on any theory of liability, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of this site or other documents which are referenced by or linked to this site.
This website exists solely for the purposes of exchange of information, communication and general entertainment. Opinions from posters are in no way endorsed by kritterbox.com. All posts on this website are the opinion of the authors and are not to be taken as statements of fact on behalf of kritterbox.com. This site may contain coarse language or other material that kritterbox.com is in no way responsible for. Material deemed to be offensive or pornographic at the discretion of kritterbox.com shall be removed. kritterbox.com reserves the right to modify, or remove posts and user accounts on this website at our discretion. kritterbox.com disclaims all liability for damages incurred directly or indirectly as a result of any material on this website. Fictitious posts and any similarity to any person living or dead is coincidental.
All users shall limit the insertion of any and all copyrighted material to portions of the article that are relevant to the point being made, with no more than 50%, and preferably less of the original source material. A link shall be visible in text format, embedded directly to the original source material without exception.
No third party links, i.e. blogs or forums will be accepted under any circumstances, and will be edited by staff in order to reflect the original source of copyrighted material, or be removed at the sole discretion of kritterbox.com.
Fair Use Notice:
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Users may make such material available in an effort to advance awareness and understanding of issues relating to economics, individual rights, international affairs, liberty, science, and technology. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for educational and/or research purposes.
This Disclaimer is subject to change at any time at our discretion.
Copyright © 2011 - 2017 kritterbox.com