Thread: MY TWO CENTS: THE BUNDY RANCH & FREEDOM IN AMERCIA

Western Journalism
18 April, 2014

Who’d Have Thought This Could Lead To Criminal Charges Against BLM?

It's funny how the most unlikely thing could bring the whole operation down..

---

B. Christopher Agee — April 18, 2014

As Western Journalism reported yesterday, a series of photos from the scene of a federal government standoff in Clark County, Nev. indicate Bureau of Land Management agents slaughtered multiple cows on the Bundy Ranch. After alleging the ranch’s owner, Cliven Bundy, had failed to pay federal grazing fees for a number of years, armed BLM agents swarmed the area, resorting to physical violence against members of the family and threats toward those who arrived to support them.
Allegations this week, in the aftermath of BLM’s decision to back down in the face of growing opposition, are perhaps even more outrageous. According to one report, federal officials systematically gunned down numerous head of cattle, allowing others to be trampled in unorthodox herding practices.

The agency was apparently so preoccupied with removing the cattle from the ranch in an effort to punish the Bundys that its agents disregarded safe protocol. Michele Fiore, a Nevada assemblywoman who has been on the front lines in defending the ranch against the government’s excessive force, detailed the atrocities she said occurred on the property.

After posting a number of photos of dead cows, she appeared on the Pete Santilli radio show to offer some context. She said officers shot cattle from the air as they flew overhead in helicopters, explaining numerous calves were left defenseless after their mothers were taken down or displaced.
“I personally helped save a calf who still had an umbilical cord attached to her as she was separated from her mom,” Fiore said.
Photo Credit: Facebook/Assemblywoman Michele Fiore

She called the ordeal “disgusting,” explaining BLM agents “don’t herd cattle, they slaughter cattle.”
Attempts to move the livestock by force led to countless preventable deaths, she said.

“This is the BLM’s practice,” Fiore explained, noting officers “herd animals with helicopters, ATVs, and shotguns”; and if any “get out of line, they get a bullet in the back of the head.”
Crude attempts to bury the animals failed, she explained, as shallow graves left body parts exposed.

While more and more critics are demanding legal action against the agency in an effort to expose the cruel behavior, some have accused left-leaning activist groups including People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals of remaining silent on the issue. Western Journalism contacted PETA for comment and received a statement from Senior Vice President of Communications Lisa Lange that seemed to equate the actions of federal agents and the ranchers.

“These animals shouldn’t be killed either by the government, or by the rancher who plans to send the cows off to slaughter,” she stated. “The best thing anyone can do to stop the suffering of animals is to go vegan.”
Fiore had a direct message to special agent Daniel Love, who alleged the BLM did not kill cattle on the ranch.
“He’s a flat out liar,” she said, “period.”


Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/all...KI7L5oky3bG.99

The Folly Of The Bundy Ranch Rebellion

By Gracy Olmstead April 17, 2014


It’s the stuff of Westerns: a showdown on the desert plains, the big bad government against an underdog farmer.

Though the story has only grabbed national headlines in the past several days, rancher Cliven Bundy has illegally grazed cattle on the Nevada land surrounding his farm for over 20 years. He hasn’t paid grazing fees since 1993, and refuses to renew the necessary grazing permit. Things came to a head this past week, when the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) seized almost 400 cattle belonging to Bundy. In response, angry protesters formed an armed rebellion, opposing BLM federal workers. The BLM’s ensuing retreat has gotten a lot of attention, and some called it a huge triumph for state sovereignty. Says TIME Magazine, “At a press conference on April 14, [protesters] invoked battles against the British and shouted quotes from the Scottish revolutionary William Wallace, memorialized in the Hollywood blockbuster Braveheart.” Others are calling Bundy a “folk hero.”

But before we venerate Bundy as a freedom fighter, we might stop to consider the facts.

Back in November, the Las Vegas Sun warned that trouble was already brewing:

“Officials say Bundy and his son are illegally running cattle in the 500,000-acre Gold Butte area, a habitat of the protected desert tortoise. In July, U.S. District Court Judge Lloyd George ruled that if Bundy did not remove his cattle by Aug. 23, they could be seized by the BLM.”

By 1995, writes the Washington Post, “Cliven Bundy had racked up $31,000 in fees for grazing on federal land without a permit. Helicopters often hover over his herd, counting up the cows so he can be fined appropriately.” In 1998, a federal judge issued a permanent injunction against Bundy. He ordered cattle off the land. But in US vs. Bundy, the rancher argued “that his Mormon ancestors worked the land long before the BLM was even formed, giving him rights that predate federal involvement,” says the Las Vegas Sun.

“The federal government has seized Nevada’s sovereignty … they have seized Nevada’s laws and our public land. We have no access to our public land and that is only a little bit of it,” Bundy told CNN at the time.

When Bundy’s family homesteaded in Nevada in 1877, it was a very young state—open and free for the taking. But land ownership in the state today is starkly different—the federal government now owns over 80 percent of Nevada’s land. Though the citizenry of Nevada remains individualistic and libertarian at their core, the very fabric of their state sovereignty is shifting beneath them.

This hasn’t kept Nevada political leaders from coming out in support of Bundy—interestingly, in an interview with FOX News, Nevada Sen. Dean Heller said he told BLM Director Neil Kornze “very clearly that law-abiding Nevadans must not be penalized by an over-reaching BLM.”

But does Bundy really qualify as a law-abiding Nevadan? Atlantic contributor Matt Ford pointed out Monday that Article 1, Section 2 of the Nevada Constitution directly contradicts Bundy’s actions:

“... Whensoever any portion of the States, or people thereof attempt to secede from the Federal Union, or forcibly resist the Execution of its laws, the Federal Government may, by warrant of the Constitution, employ armed force in compelling obedience to its Authority.”

Bundy isn’t upholding state sovereignty—he’s upholding his own personal conception of state sovereignty.

The story reminded me of John Dickinson, a lesser-known Founding Father who opposed going to war with Great Britain. He feared the colonists had no chance and would foolishly expose themselves to slaughter. But when the Declaration of Independence was signed, writes Wilfred M. McClay, Dickinson accepted the decision and immediately joined the Continental Army, “making him one of the few among the Founders to do so. His devotion to the Patriot cause was total, and it proved stronger than his personal pride.”

The problem with Bundy’s stance is that he has no higher end in this fight than his own interests. Though it’s true that the federal government’s takeover of Nevada land is decidedly frustrating to many, there are other methods of protest—less flashy and attention grabbing, perhaps, but methods which appeal to both parties and grasp the importance of compromise and persuasion. But Bundy is not interested in such methods. Rather than using the avenues and pathways presented to him, Bundy has staunchly declared his own law and allegiances.

Unfortunately, reality doesn’t work this way. If only it did—we could rebel for paying stupid taxes, refuse to ever attend jury duty, sell whatever we want on the streets without a license. Maybe our world would be better for it—or maybe it would become chaotic and anarchical, characterized by a tyrannical majority that insists on whatever it wills for its own good.

We can sympathize with Bundy. But we should also remind him that true patriots pick their battles wisely — and they know when to concede.

http://thefederalist.com/2014/04/17/...nch-rebellion/

Conservative Lady

Outrage!! OBAMA GESTAPO PLANS LARGEST LAND GRAB IN HISTORY OF THE WORLD! - Conservative Infidel



Outrage!! OBAMA GESTAPO PLANS LARGEST LAND GRAB IN HISTORY OF THE WORLD! - Conservative Infidel

conservativeinfidel.com

Outrage!! OBAMA GESTAPO PLANS LARGEST LAND GRAB IN HISTORY OF THE WORLD!

Posted on Thursday, April 17th, 2014 at 5:59 pm.
by: Benjamin Franklin


By Rick Wells

The EPA is in the process, right this very minute, of seizing control over all private land in the United States. They are following the United Nations blueprint, their minion Gina McCarthy is implementing it, and B. Hussein Obama is facilitating it.
Anywhere in America where it rains or where water collects or through which water moves will now, according to this new rule change they are implementing, be under their control. Not because Congress or the people give them that authority or jurisdiction, but simply because they are seizing the power. It is just another component of the illegitimate tyranny which is oppressing the American people.
the agency which operates as the misnamed Environmental Protection Agency unveiled their proposed change to the Clean Water Act, which would extend their regulatory control to temporary wetlands and waterways.
This definition consists of any water, including seasonal ponds, streams, runoff and collection areas and irrigation water. It could include runoff from watering your lawn, or puddles on your own property. They will control the presence of and can prohibit through regulation, your right to the water and your actions regarding water upon your own land. The opportunities for their abuse would be limitless.
Louisiana Senator David Vitter, the ranking Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, offered an understated precautionary objection stating, “The … rule may be one of the most significant private property grabs in U.S. history.”
The EPA proposal would extend their authority to include “pollution regulations” to “intermittent and ephemeral streams and wetlands” – which are created temporarily during wet seasons or following rainfall.
Recognize this for what it is America; The EPA is giving themselves legal jurisdiction to replace our rights with their permissions anywhere it rains or water exists.
They are expanding the same kind of California fish-based drought or Nevada tortoise land restrictions or Oregon spotted owl tyranny to every square inch of the United States.
The EPA is asserting that all ground water, whether temporary or not and regardless of size is part of the “waters of the United States.”
Their position is in contradiction to the Supreme Court rulings in 2001 and 2006, restricting the EPA to flowing and sizeable, “relatively” permanent bodies of water such as “oceans, rivers, streams and lakes.” Of course, progressives just keep trying until they get what they want, and they never have enough.
The proposed rule change is now in a 90 day comment period during which they will assess just how much they can get away with, based upon public outcry and pushback.
Senator Vitter accused the EPA of “picking and choosing” their science and of attempting to “take another step toward outright permitting authority over virtually any wet area in the country.” He also warned that if approved, more private owners could expect to be sued by “environmental groups.”
Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) shares Vitter’s concerns, warning of potential economic damage and questioning the EPA’s motivations.
She said, “[I]t appears that the EPA is seeking to dramatically expand its jurisdictional reach under the Clean Water Act. If EPA is not careful, this rule could effectively give the federal government control of nearly all of our state.
Of course, that is exactly what they are after, as well as 49 other states and territories.
http://gopthedailydose.com/2014/04/1...nd-in-america/

http://www.conservativeinfidel.com/o...history-world/

The control of all natural resources was one of the FIRST things that the Democrats did when they had control of all three branches of government in 2009. It is a shining example of Socialist Democrats intent. The Omnibus Bills were seen as the first step for the transfer of the control of all natural resources to a Global government.. GREEN IS THE NEW RED.

Read here:
Senate proceeds to placeholder bill for natural resources omnibus

By ERIC BONTRAGER AND NOELLE STRAUB, Greenwire

Published: March 17, 2009


The Senate yesterday approved the first step of a Democratic plan designed to get the omnibus public lands, water and natural resources bill to the White House.

By a 73-21 vote, the Senate approved a cloture motion allowing it to proceed to a placeholder bill for S. 22 (pdf), the collection of more than 160 lands and water bills it first passed in January.

Senate leaders now plan to strip the contents of H.R. 146(pdf), a proposal to protect Revolutionary War battlefields, and replace it with the omnibus lands bill in an attempt to make it palatable to the House. A cloture motion to cut off debate is likely before moving to final passage later this week.

The plan demonstrates the lengths lawmakers are going to in order to avoid another lengthy delay in the Senate or a potentially difficult vote on GOP amendments in the House.

The Senate first passed the omnibus in January, 74-21. But last week, the House fell two votes shy of passing the bill under suspension of the rules, a maneuver that shields legislation from amendment or a motion to recommit but requires a two-thirds majority for passage.

Because H.R. 146 has already passed the House, the House Rules Committee could approve a closed rule that would block a motion to recommit, the House parliamentarian said last week. That would eliminate the GOP's best procedural chance to stymie the bill. House Democrats could also choose to bring up the bill under suspension again, if they believe they can reach the two-thirds threshold.

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), who held many of the bills in the omnibus for months over the last year, said he will once again attempt to block the measure as the Democratic leadership prevents attempts to amend it. "I plan on using every tool, every tool, that I can to delay and obstruct this piece of legislation, because it's not in the best interest, long-term interest of our country," Coburn said prior to yesterday's vote.

After the vote, Coburn said he will see whether Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will allow him to offer amendments. Coburn declined to say which amendments he would want, adding, "Well I'd love to offer a hundred, but that's not what I'm asking."

A preliminary discussion on the floor went nowhere. "He said, 'I'm too tired to deal with it,'" Coburn said.
But Coburn said it is not a personal dispute with Reid. "He's got a tough job, he's got to run the floor and I understand his position and I'd probably be taking his same position -- but I'm not taking his same position."

A bill too far? critics ask

The omnibus would designate more than 2 million acres of wilderness in nine states and would establish three new national park units, a new national monument, three new national conservation areas, more than 1,000 miles of national wild and scenic rivers and four new national trails. It would enlarge the boundaries of more than a dozen existing national park units and establish 10 new national heritage areas.

It would also authorize numerous land exchanges and conveyances to help local Western communities address water resource and supply issues, and includes provisions to improve land management.

"This is collectively one of the most significant conservation measures considered by this body in the past decade," Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), whose committee put the omnibus together, said on the floor yesterday.

The revised omnibus bill will also include language from Rep. Jason Altmire (D-Pa.) meant to ensure that the omnibus would not close off lands that are already open to hunting and fishing.

But Coburn and House Republicans say the bill goes too far. Coburn noted that several provisions in the omnibus would preclude the opportunity for energy development on public lands, including one bill that would block the development of natural gas and oil in Wyoming.

"We're setting a precedent for a very weak foundation for our future energy needs," Coburn said.

Senate Energy Committee ranking member Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who supports the omnibus, noted that federal agencies have certified that none of the wilderness designations will negatively impact on the availability of oil or gas because the land was being managed for conservation purposes already. She said the country can maximize domestic energy development while protecting natural resources.

"I do not believe that this is an either-or situation," she said, adding that the Wyoming provision has the strong backing of the state's two Republican senators.

As for cost concerns, she said the bill does authorize some expenditure of funds, but each is dependent on future appropriations and the oversight that comes with the committee process.

While saying the omnibus process is not her "preferred method" for passing legislation, she urged senators to support it. "Overall this package will improve the nation's management of public lands and parks and will be a long-term benefit," Murkowski said.

More News From Greenwire

• Poor data, weak agencies hamstring U.N. environmental oversight
• With academics in DOE's top slots, some see need for D.C. experience
• McCain blasts Interior nominee over lobbying, Reagan legacy
• Senate committee approves stalled NOAA, science nominees
• Obama admin faces power grid vs. public lands conundrum

http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/03/17/17greenwire-senate-proceeds-to-placeholder-bill-for-natura-10150.html

This was in the "Omnibus Bill also. The Socialist Democrat's idea of responsible government. These laws were created by, passed and signed into LAW by Democrats, the new Socialist Party of the US. It is not all about Obama, Now we must "adhere" to the rule of this law, that was passed without regard to the Constitution.

Giant Omnibus Bill Includes $7.7 Billion in Earmarks for Bugs, Pigs, Parking – and La Raza

March 6, 2009 - 6:30 PM

Termite research, walrus rehabilitation, pig manure and the National Council of La Raza are among the more than 8,570 earmarks to be funded by the omnibus spending package currently before the Senate.  

By Matt Cover

National Council of La Raza event. (AP photo)

(CNSNews.com) – Termite research, walrus rehabilitation and pig manure are among the more than 8,570 of earmarks in the omnibus spending package currently before the Senate. Critics charge the bill is stuffed full of so many pork barrel projects -- $7.7 billion worth -- that President Barack Obama should veto it.

Perhaps the most controversial is a direct earmark for a Hispanic civil-rights group -- the National Council of La Raza -- worth $950,000. The group has been a lighting rod of controversy since it helped organize large protests in 2006 aimed at derailing efforts by conservative congressional Republicans to enforce U.S. immigration laws.

La Raza, which opposes raids and other aggressive law enforcement tactics, says that the federal money will go solely to its community action subsidiary, the Raza Development Fund, which it says provides loans for housing, education, and healthcare centers in Hispanic areas, according to information on the group’s website.

La Raza says that most of the fund’s money comes from private financial institutions, including Bank of America and Citibank.

The late Rep. Charles Norwood (R-Ga.) first criticized earmarks for La Raza in 2005 in the magazine Human Events saying federal money shouldn’t be used for groups who don’t support U.S. laws.

“We ought not to send taxpayer's money to people who absolutely advocate . . . using that money for the country not to follow the law of the land and not to secure our country's borders,” Norwood wrote.

CNSNews.com, meanwhile, has examined the entire list of declared earmarks in the bill and found other questionable projects ranging from honey bee labs and obesity research to million-dollar hiking trails and a parking garage.

Agricultural projects accounted for many of the most suspect requests including:

-- $6.6 million for Formosan subterranean termite research in Louisiana, requested by Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and Mary Landrieu (D-La.)

-- $1.7 million for the honeybee lab in Weslaco, Texas, requested by Sen. Jim Johnson (D-S.D.)

-- $1.1 million for mosquito trapping research in Gainesville, Fla.

-- $1.8 million for “swine odor and manure management” in Ames, Iowa, requested by Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa).

-- $1 million for “mormon crickets” in Utah, requested by Sen. Bob Bennett (R-Utah)

-- $935,000 for egg pasteurization in Michigan requested by former Rep. Joe Knollenberg (R-Mich.)

-- $2.9 million for “shrimp aquaculture” in Arizona, Hawaii, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas

-- $1.5 million for “pinniped research” in Alaska. Pinnipeds are a class of animals that includes walruses, seals, and sea lions.

Financing and land-use issues also accounted for considerable amounts of questionable projects such as:

-- $491,000 for the Baltimore City Public School System’s health care program

-- $950,000 for the Myrtle Beach International Trade and Convention Center in Myrtle Beach, S.C.

-- $100,000 for a “robotics training center” in the City of Union, S.C.

-- $300,000 for the Montana World Trade Center

Land and construction provisions provided probably the richest areas for pork-barrel spending, with projects ranging from parking garages to nature trails – all being funded by U.S. taxpayers:

-- $1.5 million for the California National Historic Trail Interpretive Center in Nevada

-- $2.2 million for the Arkansas River Special Recreation Management Area in Colorado

-- $500,000 for the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail in California

-- $332,000 for buses at the Bronx Zoo in New York City

-- $855,000 for the Chelsea Intermodal Parking Garage in Chelsea, Mass.

-- $1.9 million for the Pleasure Beach water taxi in Connecticut

-- $2.9 million for bicycle and pedestrian trail improvements in Illinois

-- $475,000 to renovate the façade of the Italian American Museum in New York City
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gian...ng-and-la-raza

http://www.alipac.us/f19/omnibus-bill-includes-earmarks-bugs-pigs-la-raza-141177/

Funny, N.Korea Government owns 100% of the land, US Government owns 85% of Nevada. Get my point?

Point is well made Reciprocity.