100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Another WACO/Ruby Ridge occuring in Nevada | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Since public property is a collectivist fiction, since the public as a whole can neither use nor dispose of its property,that property will always be taken over by some political elite, by a small clique which will then rule the public,a public of literal, dispossessed proletarians. Ayn Rand http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/public_property.html And just how does that apply here? Ayn Rand (bless her soul) wrote fiction based on a philosophy, a grand philosophy but still a philosophy. So how does that relate to these united States law of the land? Is it a predisposal to the idiocy of the masses or the inherent trait of man to greed? Just what are you insinuating? Because you see, in this land there is no provision of the Federal government to own lane, none at all. They may purchase land for forts or buildings, but only with the permission of the state. So where is that argument? Is this but an attempt to mislead, well the government does that all by itself very effectively, no help needed thank you. The simple reason,that "Public Property" is a Fallacy! Barron's Law Dictionary: Public property That which is dedicated to the use of the public, see 84 P. 685, and/or that over which the state has dominion and control. Thus the term may be used either to describe the use to which the property is put, or to describe the character of its ownership. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is an agency within the United States Department of the Interior that administers America's public lands. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureau_of_Land_Management The BLM thugs attacking the protesters w/ tasers and German Shepherds is a clear violation of the limited administrative authority they possess. In such a situation, the protesters are allowed to defend themselves. And yes, if necessary, to use deadly force to protect themselves. Nevada's 'stand your ground' law goes back 140 years www.reviewjournal.com/ news/ crime-courts/ nevadas-stand-your-ground-law-goes-back-140-years |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since public property is a collectivist fiction, since the public as a whole can neither use nor dispose of its property,that property will always be taken over by some political elite, by a small clique which will then rule the public,a public of literal, dispossessed proletarians. Ayn Rand http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/public_property.html And just how does that apply here? Ayn Rand (bless her soul) wrote fiction based on a philosophy, a grand philosophy but still a philosophy. So how does that relate to these united States law of the land? Is it a predisposal to the idiocy of the masses or the inherent trait of man to greed? Just what are you insinuating? Because you see, in this land there is no provision of the Federal government to own lane, none at all. They may purchase land for forts or buildings, but only with the permission of the state. So where is that argument? Is this but an attempt to mislead, well the government does that all by itself very effectively, no help needed thank you. The simple reason,that "Public Property" is a Fallacy! Simple reason, just what does that imply? Just where is the fallacy? Is their a source of this profound knowledge? This seems to be one of those theories that has never made it to the investigative stage, much less proof. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
now they are attacking the protesters.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=UUYr9ruxjGbBB1MOpuU6tpAQ&v=LhJ6H9vlEDA Looked like a retreat to me, but then.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Bobby1050
on
Thu 04/10/14 11:17 AM
|
|
now they are attacking the protesters.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=UUYr9ruxjGbBB1MOpuU6tpAQ&v=LhJ6H9vlEDA Looked like a retreat to me, but then.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhJ6H9vlEDA Looks to me like there is at least one agent provocateur in the crowd of protesters. There always are at events like this. The AP's cause trouble and the anti-Christ media then uses their actions to discredit all of the protesters. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
now they are attacking the protesters.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=UUYr9ruxjGbBB1MOpuU6tpAQ&v=LhJ6H9vlEDA Looked like a retreat to me, but then.... Did you hear the guy ask the "local media" cameraman at 9:00 "are we on Riverside"...and the camera man replied..."I don't know" ? I think the woman being interviewed at 8:00 is a crisis actor. Whining about the bruises the mean old BLM gave her when they"threw her down"...and she didn't have a mark on her. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Barron's Law Dictionary: Public property That which is dedicated to the use of the public, see 84 P. 685, and/or that over which the state has dominion and control. Thus the term may be used either to describe the use to which the property is put, or to describe the character of its ownership. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is an agency within the United States Department of the Interior that administers America's public lands. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureau_of_Land_Management The BLM thugs attacking the protesters w/ tasers and German Shepherds is a clear violation of the limited administrative authority they possess. In such a situation, the protesters are allowed to defend themselves. And yes, if necessary, to use deadly force to protect themselves. Nevada's 'stand your ground' law goes back 140 years www.reviewjournal.com/ news/ crime-courts/ nevadas-stand-your-ground-law-goes-back-140-years Public land goes back all the way to the common law, the administration of the commons. It is land that is to the benefit of all in common, such as highways, town centers and other areas required to benefit all without consideration of the individual. The BLM's pure roots go back to the Land Ordinance of 1785 and the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. These laws provided for the survey and settlement of the lands that the original 13 colonies ceded to the federal government after the American Revolution. As additional lands were acquired by the United States from Spain, France and other countries, the United States Congress directed that they be explored, surveyed, and made available for settlement. This was the original intention of the founders because now that the US had established our freedom, there was a huge mass of land that had to be addressed. Because the constitution restricted the government to owning a 10 square mile tract for the capital and to be able to acquire land for forts and other government needs but only with the permission of the states for the established purposes. The government was to devise methods to pass all other lands over to the people. All lands not granted to the people were to be turned over to the states as the territories were granted statehood. In 1812, Congress established the General Land Office in the Department of the Treasury to oversee the disposition of these federal lands. As the 19th century progressed and the nation's land base expanded further west, Congress encouraged the settlement of the land by enacting a wide variety of laws, including the Homestead Act and the Mining Law of 1872. Yellowstone the first national park was born by Lincoln but was given to the state that it may remain "public" land forever. In 1875, Mackinac National Park was created on a resort island in Lake Huron in Michigan, the second national park. As at Yellowstone, the army garrison at Fort Mackinac were in charge of supervising and improving the park. The fort and the national park were turned over to state control in 1895. But then came that infamous period in this countries history where the country was sold down the drain... U.S. cavalry units took up a position in California-controlled Yosemite Park in 1891 and took over some management duties. In 1906 the park was completely taken into federal control. ...The Antiquities Act of 1906 was designed to protect antiquities and objects of scientific interest on the public domain. It authorized the President, "to declare by public proclamation historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest" that existed on public lands in the United States. The Act declared these sites to be National Monuments. It prohibited the excavation or removal of objects on Federal land unless the a permit had been issued by the appropriate department. Between 1906 and 1933 three Federal agencies, the Departments of Interior, Agriculture and War, initiated and administered separate groups of National Monuments. Just another little usurpation of the constitution, no big deal. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Between 1906 and 1933 three Federal agencies, the Departments of Interior, Agriculture and War, initiated and administered separate groups of National Monuments.
--------------------------------------- So now public highways are considered to be "National Monuments"; when it comes to the Feds over reaching it's alleged "authority" ? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Between 1906 and 1933 three Federal agencies, the Departments of Interior, Agriculture and War, initiated and administered separate groups of National Monuments. --------------------------------------- So now public highways are considered to be "National Monuments"; when it comes to the Feds over reaching it's alleged "authority" ? Sorry lost me there, not sure how the question refers to the three departments nor the usurpation of powers bestowed upon the federal government. And no the federal public highways are but another of the usurpation of the powers allowed the federal government, normally by the use of the "commerce clause". And while congress may honor something as a "National" monument, it may not own or control such unless in DC and with a state's permission on a military base or other duly endowed federal property. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Between 1906 and 1933 three Federal agencies, the Departments of Interior, Agriculture and War, initiated and administered separate groups of National Monuments. --------------------------------------- So now public highways are considered to be "National Monuments"; when it comes to the Feds over reaching it's alleged "authority" ? Sorry lost me there, not sure how the question refers to the three departments nor the usurpation of powers bestowed upon the federal government. And no the federal public highways are but another of the usurpation of the powers allowed the federal government, normally by the use of the "commerce clause". And while congress may honor something as a "National" monument, it may not own or control such unless in DC and with a state's permission on a military base or other duly endowed federal property. The you tube video didn't make it clear but I am presuming where they were protesting was the designated "free speech" zone. An area the BLM had absolutely no jurisdiction over and indeed had no right to be there antagonizing the protesters. Were I the Rancher in question, I would have allowed the protesters on my land to protest. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Thu 04/10/14 01:25 PM
|
|
Between 1906 and 1933 three Federal agencies, the Departments of Interior, Agriculture and War, initiated and administered separate groups of National Monuments. --------------------------------------- So now public highways are considered to be "National Monuments"; when it comes to the Feds over reaching it's alleged "authority" ? Sorry lost me there, not sure how the question refers to the three departments nor the usurpation of powers bestowed upon the federal government. And no the federal public highways are but another of the usurpation of the powers allowed the federal government, normally by the use of the "commerce clause". And while congress may honor something as a "National" monument, it may not own or control such unless in DC and with a state's permission on a military base or other duly endowed federal property. The you tube video didn't make it clear but I am presuming where they were protesting was the designated "free speech" zone. An area the BLM had absolutely no jurisdiction over and indeed had no right to be there antagonizing the protesters. Were I the Rancher in question, I would have allowed the protesters on my land to protest. NO! They only posted their own sign stating "Free speech is NOT a zone!" while passing thru the area to confront the Feds |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Thu 04/10/14 01:27 PM
|
|
Perhaps a look at the past will shed some light on the real subject of this siege. KLAS TV, CBS 8, Las Vegas. Maybe it's not about cows stomping out the endangered tortoise, but more about oil. Government loves bending over to big oil no matter who/what gets hurt as a result. Perhaps now in 2014 it's time to start fracking (the ranchers over in the name of the humble tortoise). "Four times each year, the Bureau of Land Management holds public auctions where wannabe wildcatters can be for the mineral rights on government land. The minimum bid is 2 bucks per acre, but spirited competition can drive the price much higher." "...It's a fascinating process, for the gamesmanship if nothing else. Bidders play their cards close to their chests. Since anyone can nominate a parcel to the auction, cagey oilmen have been known to pad the auction list with less desirable parcels as distractions for the competition. " http://www.8newsnow.com/story/4877010/nevadas-hidden-treasur 2004 CBS 8, in-nevada - "Nevada has long been known for other underground riches, but some oil experts think our state's petroleum potential could dwarf all of the gold and silver resources combined. 'There is no doubt, I can assure you 100% you are sitting on some of the greatest wealth in this country and the world,' said Chuck Laser, an oil wildcatter. He adds, 'It's just a matter of time.'" Has that time now arrived ten years later? - http://www.8newsnow.com/story/2058132/oil-exploration-in-nevada |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The simple reason,that "Public Property" is a Fallacy! Simple reason, just what does that imply? Just where is the fallacy? Is their a source of this profound knowledge? This seems to be one of those theories that has never made it to the investigative stage, much less proof. Well being this was never answered, I will finish it. PROPERTY. The right and interest which a man has in lands and chattels to the exclusion of others. 6 Binn. 98; 4 Pet. 511; 17 Johns. 283; 14 East, 370; 11 East, 290, 518. It is the right to enjoy and to dispose of certain things in the most absolute manner as he pleases, provided he makes no use of them prohibited by law. See Things. 2. All things are not the subject of property the sea, the air, and the like, cannot be appropriated; every one may enjoy them, but he has no exclusive right in them. When things are fully our own, or when all others are excluded from meddling with them, or from interfering about them, it is plain that no person besides the proprietor, who has this exclusive right, can have any, claim either to use them, or to hinder him from disposing of them as, he pleases; so that property, considered as an exclusive right to things, contains not only a right to use those things, but a right to dispose of them, either by exchanging them for other things, or by giving them away to any other person, without any consideration, or even throwing them away. Rutherf. Inst. 20; Domat, liv. prel. tit. 3; Poth. Des Choses; 18 Vin. Ab. 63; 7 Com. Dig. 175; Com. Dig. Biens. See also 2 B. & C. 281; S. C. 9 E. C. L. R. 87; 3 D. & R. 394; 9 B. & C. 396; S. C. 17 E. C. L. R. 404; 1 C. & M. 39; 4 Call, 472; 18 Ves. 193; 6 Bing. 630. 3. Property is divided into real property, (q. v.) and personal property. (q. v.) Vide Estate; Things. 4. Property is also divided, when it consists of goods and chattels, into absolute and qualified. Absolute property is that which is our own, without any qualification whatever; as when a man is the owner of a watch, a book, or other inanimate thing: or of a horse, a sheep, or other animal, which never had its natural liberty in a wild state. 5. Qualified property consists in the right which men have over wild animals which they have redueed to their own possession, and which are kept subject to their power; as a deer, a buffalo, and the like, which are his own while he has possession of them, but as soon as his possession is lost, his property is gone, unless the animals, go animo revertendi. 2 Bl. Com. 396; 3 Binn. 546. 6. But property in personal goods may be absolute or qualified without ally relation to the nature of the subject-matter, but simply because more persons than one have an interest in it, or because the right of property is separated from the possession. A bailee of goods, though not the owner, has a qualified property in them; while the owner has the absolute property. Vide, Bailee; Bailment. 7. Personal property is further divided into property in possession, and property or choses in action. (q. v.) 8. Property is again divided into corporeal and incorporeal. The former comprehends such property as is perceptible to the senses, as lands, houses, goods, merchandise and the like; the latter consists in legal rights, as choses in action, easements, and the like. 9. Property is lost, in general, in three ways, by the act of man, by the act of law, and by the act of God. 10. - 1. It is lost by the act of man by, 1st. Alienation; but in order to do this, the owner must have a legal capacity to make a contract. 2d. By the voluntary abandonment of the thing; but unless the abandonment be purely voluntary, the title to the property is not lost; as, if things be thrown into the sea to save the ship, the right is not lost. Poth. h. t., n. 270; 3 Toull. ii. 346. But even a voluntary abandonment does not deprive the former owner from taking possessiou of the thing abandoned, at any time before another takes possession of it. 11. - 2. The title to property is lost by operation of law. 1st. By the forced sale, under a lawful process, of the property of a debtor to satisfy a judgment, sentence, or decree rendered against him, to compel him to fulfil his obligations. 2d. By confiscation, or sentence of a criminal court. 3d. By prescription. 4th. By civil death. 6th. By capture of a public enemy. 12. - 3. The title to property is lost by the act of God, as in the case of the death of slaves or animals, or in the total destruction of a thing; for example, if a house be swallowed up by an opening in the earth during an earthquake. 13. It is proper to observe that in some cases, the moment that the owner loses his possession, he also loses his property or right in the thing: animals ferae naturae, as mentioned above, belong to the owner only while he retains the possession of them. But, in general,' the loss of possession does not impair the right of property, for the owner may recover it within a certain time allowed by law. Vide, generally, Bouv. Inst. Index, b. t. So in using this definition, the government is but a fiction created by a contract, the constitution. There if it is the right a man has in lands and chattels, then the government being a fiction cannot have property. PUBLIC. By the term the public, is meant the whole body politic, or all the citizens of the state; sometimes it signifies the inhabitants of a particular place; as, the New York public. 2. A distinction has been made between the terms public and general, they are sometimes used as synonymous. The former term is applied strictly to that which concerns all the citizens and every member of the state; while the latter includes a lesser, though still a large portion of the community. Greenl. Ev. 128. 3. When the public interests and its rights conflict with those of an individual, the latter must yield. Co. Litt. 181. if, for example, a road is required for public convenience, and in its course it passes on the ground occupied by a house, the latter must be torn down, however valuable it may be to the owner. In such a case both law and justice require that the owner shall be fully indemnified. 4. This term is sometimes joined to other terms, to designate those things which have a relation to the public; as, a public officer, a public road, a public passage, a public house. And this definition in the first instance defines a state so does that infer there is no such application to federal? LAND. This term comprehends any found, soil or earth whatsoever, as meadows, pastures, woods, waters, marshes, furze and heath. It has an indefinite extent upwards as well as downwards; therefore land, legally includes all houses and other buildings standing or built on it; and whatever is in a direct line between the surface and the centre of the earth, such as mines of metals and fossils. 1 Inst. 4 a; Wood's Inst. 120; 2 B1. Com. 18; 1 Cruise on Real Prop. 58. In a more confined sense, the word land is said to denote "frank tenement at the least." Shepp. Touch. 92. In this sense, then, leaseholds cannot be said to be included under the word lands. 8 Madd. Rep. 635. The technical sense of the word land is farther explained by Sheppard, in his Touch. p. 88, thus: "if one be seised of some lands in fee, and possessed of other lands for years, all in one parish, and he grant all his lands in that parish (without naming them) in fee simple or for life; by this grant shall pass no, more but the lands he hath in fee simple." It is also said that land in its legal acceptation means arable land. 11 Co. 55 a. See also Cro. Car. 293; 2 P. Wms. 458, n.; 5 Ves. 476; 20 Vin. Ab. 203. 2. Land, as above observed, includes in general all the buildings erected upon it; 9 Day, R. 374; but to this general rule there are some exceptions. It is true, that if a stranger voluntarily erect buildings on another's land, they will belong to the owner of the land, and will become a part of it; 16 Mass. R. 449; yet cases are, not wanting where it has been decided that such an erection, under peculiar circumstances, would be considered as personal property. 4 Mass. R. 514; 8 Pick. R. 283, 402; 5 Pick, R. 487; 6 N. H. Rep. 555; 2 Fairf. R. 371; 1 Dana, R. 591; 1 Burr. 144. Now land is a pretty generic definition and doesn't connotate ownership there can be public lands but there is no ownership implied. So this leads to a fair question, can corporation really own property or is that just a holding for the owners, the stockholders? Interesting concept but yes public property is a fallacy. All the definitions are from: "A LAW DICTIONARY, ADAPTED TO THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND OF THE SEVERAL STATES OF THE AMERICAN UNION, by John Bouvier, Revised Sixth Edition, 1856. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps a look at the past will shed some light on the real subject of this siege. KLAS TV, CBS 8, Las Vegas. Maybe it's not about cows stomping out the endangered tortoise, but more about oil. Government loves bending over to big oil no matter who/what gets hurt as a result. Perhaps now in 2014 it's time to start fracking (the ranchers over in the name of the humble tortoise). "Four times each year, the Bureau of Land Management holds public auctions where wannabe wildcatters can be for the mineral rights on government land. The minimum bid is 2 bucks per acre, but spirited competition can drive the price much higher." "...It's a fascinating process, for the gamesmanship if nothing else. Bidders play their cards close to their chests. Since anyone can nominate a parcel to the auction, cagey oilmen have been known to pad the auction list with less desirable parcels as distractions for the competition. " http://www.8newsnow.com/story/4877010/nevadas-hidden-treasur 2004 CBS 8, in-nevada - "Nevada has long been known for other underground riches, but some oil experts think our state's petroleum potential could dwarf all of the gold and silver resources combined. 'There is no doubt, I can assure you 100% you are sitting on some of the greatest wealth in this country and the world,' said Chuck Laser, an oil wildcatter. He adds, 'It's just a matter of time.'" Has that time now arrived ten years later? - http://www.8newsnow.com/story/2058132/oil-exploration-in-nevada But by what right does the government do this? That is the question. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps a look at the past will shed some light on the real subject of this siege. KLAS TV, CBS 8, Las Vegas. Maybe it's not about cows stomping out the endangered tortoise, but more about oil. Government loves bending over to big oil no matter who/what gets hurt as a result. Perhaps now in 2014 it's time to start fracking (the ranchers over in the name of the humble tortoise). "Four times each year, the Bureau of Land Management holds public auctions where wannabe wildcatters can be for the mineral rights on government land. The minimum bid is 2 bucks per acre, but spirited competition can drive the price much higher." "...It's a fascinating process, for the gamesmanship if nothing else. Bidders play their cards close to their chests. Since anyone can nominate a parcel to the auction, cagey oilmen have been known to pad the auction list with less desirable parcels as distractions for the competition. " http://www.8newsnow.com/story/4877010/nevadas-hidden-treasur 2004 CBS 8, in-nevada - "Nevada has long been known for other underground riches, but some oil experts think our state's petroleum potential could dwarf all of the gold and silver resources combined. 'There is no doubt, I can assure you 100% you are sitting on some of the greatest wealth in this country and the world,' said Chuck Laser, an oil wildcatter. He adds, 'It's just a matter of time.'" Has that time now arrived ten years later? - http://www.8newsnow.com/story/2058132/oil-exploration-in-nevada But by what right does the government do this? That is the question. The falacy of imminent domain |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps a look at the past will shed some light on the real subject of this siege. KLAS TV, CBS 8, Las Vegas. Maybe it's not about cows stomping out the endangered tortoise, but more about oil. Government loves bending over to big oil no matter who/what gets hurt as a result. Perhaps now in 2014 it's time to start fracking (the ranchers over in the name of the humble tortoise). "Four times each year, the Bureau of Land Management holds public auctions where wannabe wildcatters can be for the mineral rights on government land. The minimum bid is 2 bucks per acre, but spirited competition can drive the price much higher." "...It's a fascinating process, for the gamesmanship if nothing else. Bidders play their cards close to their chests. Since anyone can nominate a parcel to the auction, cagey oilmen have been known to pad the auction list with less desirable parcels as distractions for the competition. " http://www.8newsnow.com/story/4877010/nevadas-hidden-treasur 2004 CBS 8, in-nevada - "Nevada has long been known for other underground riches, but some oil experts think our state's petroleum potential could dwarf all of the gold and silver resources combined. 'There is no doubt, I can assure you 100% you are sitting on some of the greatest wealth in this country and the world,' said Chuck Laser, an oil wildcatter. He adds, 'It's just a matter of time.'" Has that time now arrived ten years later? - http://www.8newsnow.com/story/2058132/oil-exploration-in-nevada But by what right does the government do this? That is the question. The falacy of imminent domain Fallacy would be the operative word. However, it looks like in the instant case, this is going to be challenged in a big way. I hope this goes all the way to the end, but alas it sounds like the Sheriff is a wimp hiding under his desk. but the governor seems interested, wonder just how he will play this out? But it still all hinges on the Sheriff. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Bobby1050
on
Thu 04/10/14 07:00 PM
|
|
About Time! Both Gov. Brian Sandoval and Sen. Dean Heller Stands Up To Federal Bureau Of Land Management
US Senator Joins Critics of Federal Cattle Roundup...A Republican U.S. senator added his voice Wednesday to critics of a federal cattle roundup fought by a Nevada rancher who claims longstanding grazing rights on remote public rangeland about 80 miles northeast of Las Vegas Sen. Dean Heller of Nevada said he told new U.S. Bureau of Land Management chief Neil Kornze in Washington, D.C., that law-abiding Nevadans shouldn't be penalized by an "overreaching" agency. Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval pointed earlier to what he called "an atmosphere of intimidation," resulting from the roundup and said he believed constitutional rights were being trampled. Heller said he heard from local officials, residents and the Nevada Cattlemen's Association. http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/nevada-governor-decries-blm-rancher-dispute-23265149 Both Gov. Brian Sandoval and Sen. Dean Heller have condemned the BLS for what they characterize as heavy-handed actions involving Bundy and other Silver State residents. No cow justifies the atmosphere of intimidation which currently exists nor the limitation of constitutional rights that are sacred to all Nevadans, Sandoval, a Republican, said. The BLM needs to reconsider its approach to this matter and act accordingly. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/07/nevada-officials-blast-feds-over-treatment-cattle-rancher-cliven-bundy/ It's not over, by a long shot. "They" are trying to pacify people, to keep it quiet. But we need to keep shouting, exposing to america how they are terrorizing this family. If no one opposes this tyranny, it will never stop----- SHARE Every story, every video of the confrontation needs to be shared far and wide, write about it, comment, email those that have not heard, post to Facebook groups, Twitter, and all the other social networking sites. CALL�� The Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval issued a statement of concern over the free speech area set up by the federal government, Rangers, BLM and other agents, but he hasn'��t got off his behind to show up in support of Mr. Bundy��.. call his office and express your outrage over what these terrorists in the US government are doing to him. Call the Senator, the sheriff ’s office, every media outlet you can think of that is NOT reporting this situation. EMAIL: Follow up with emailing all of the above entities, encourage your friends and family to do the same. Bureau Of Land Management Phone Number: (202) 208-3801 Brian Sandoval – Carson City Phone # (775) 684-5670 Brian Sandoval Las Vegas Phone # -(702) 486-2500 Phone #s For Heller�� Reno: 775-686-5770/ Las Vegas: 702-388-6605/ Washington: 202-224-6244 Sheriff Douglas Gillespi (702) 828-3231 or (702) 828 - 3111 Email: Sheriff@lvmpd.com Steny Hoyer: Phone (202)- 225-4131 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Bobby1050
on
Thu 04/10/14 07:21 PM
|
|
Look at the bio of the new director of the BLM and what is going on here is going to be very obvious.
He is getting the ranchers off the land so they can develop the property for solar power. When he was working with Sunpower in California they did the same thing. He managed to get LA county "nuisance abatement teams" to throw people off their property for code violations and forced them to sell to solar power projects. The guy is a political science major, was an "international election monitor", then senior adviser to Harry Reid but before being Reid's adviser, he worked at kicking people off their land for solar power projects. "Kornze was a key player in the development of the Western Solar Plan and the agency's successful authorization of more than 10,000 megawatts of renewable energy, surpassing a congressionally-established goal 3 years ahead of schedule." They did this in part by kicking people off their land or using various "threatened species" to prevent people developing the land for any other purpose. AND... Release Date: 12/10/13 Contacts: Chris Rose , 775-861-6480 , crose@bml.gov News Release No. 2014-007 BLM Oil and Gas Sale Results Reno, Nev. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) generated $1,979,581 during its quarterly oil and gas competitive lease sale held in Reno on December 10, selling 54 parcels that comprised 93,816 acres. The sale high bid of $135,044 for a 2,548-acre parcel at $53 per acre was made by Housing Int., LLC., of Belvedere, California, for a parcel in Nye County. The high bid per acre was $54 by Contex Energy Co. for a 983.78-acre parcel in Nye County. The lease is for a period of 10 years with annual rentals of $1.50 per acre for the first five years and $2 an acre after that until production begins. Once a lease is producing, a royalty of 12.5 percent is charged. Half of the bid and rental receipts go to the state of Nevada. The BLM offered 178 parcels totaling 303,334 acres. Wait..how much? an acre in NYE county? 53 bucks an acre..and leased back at 1.50 an acre per year? The next quarterly competitive oil and gas lease sale is scheduled for April 15, 2014. The sale will feature parcels in the BLM's Elko District. The BLM manages more than 245 million acres of public land, the most of any Federal agency. This land, known as the National System of Public Lands, is primarily located in 12 Western states, including Alaska. The BLM also administers 700 million acres of sub-surface mineral estate throughout the nation. The BLM's mission is to manage and conserve the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations under our mandate of multiple-use and sustained yield. In Fiscal Year 2013, the BLM generated $4.7 billion in receipts from public lands. --BLM-- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
About Time! Both Gov. Brian Sandoval and Sen. Dean Heller Stands Up To Federal Bureau Of Land Management US Senator Joins Critics of Federal Cattle Roundup...A Republican U.S. senator added his voice Wednesday to critics of a federal cattle roundup fought by a Nevada rancher who claims longstanding grazing rights on remote public rangeland about 80 miles northeast of Las Vegas Sen. Dean Heller of Nevada said he told new U.S. Bureau of Land Management chief Neil Kornze in Washington, D.C., that law-abiding Nevadans shouldn't be penalized by an "overreaching" agency. Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval pointed earlier to what he called "an atmosphere of intimidation," resulting from the roundup and said he believed constitutional rights were being trampled. Heller said he heard from local officials, residents and the Nevada Cattlemen's Association. http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/nevada-governor-decries-blm-rancher-dispute-23265149 Both Gov. Brian Sandoval and Sen. Dean Heller have condemned the BLS for what they characterize as heavy-handed actions involving Bundy and other Silver State residents. No cow justifies the atmosphere of intimidation which currently exists nor the limitation of constitutional rights that are sacred to all Nevadans, Sandoval, a Republican, said. The BLM needs to reconsider its approach to this matter and act accordingly. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/07/nevada-officials-blast-feds-over-treatment-cattle-rancher-cliven-bundy/ It's not over, by a long shot. "They" are trying to pacify people, to keep it quiet. But we need to keep shouting, exposing to america how they are terrorizing this family. If no one opposes this tyranny, it will never stop----- SHARE Every story, every video of the confrontation needs to be shared far and wide, write about it, comment, email those that have not heard, post to Facebook groups, Twitter, and all the other social networking sites. CALL�� The Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval issued a statement of concern over the free speech area set up by the federal government, Rangers, BLM and other agents, but he hasn'��t got off his behind to show up in support of Mr. Bundy��.. call his office and express your outrage over what these terrorists in the US government are doing to him. Call the Senator, the sheriff ’s office, every media outlet you can think of that is NOT reporting this situation. EMAIL: Follow up with emailing all of the above entities, encourage your friends and family to do the same. Bureau Of Land Management Phone Number: (202) 208-3801 Brian Sandoval – Carson City Phone # (775) 684-5670 Brian Sandoval Las Vegas Phone # -(702) 486-2500 Phone #s For Heller�� Reno: 775-686-5770/ Las Vegas: 702-388-6605/ Washington: 202-224-6244 Sheriff Douglas Gillespi (702) 828-3231 or (702) 828 - 3111 Email: Sheriff@lvmpd.com Steny Hoyer: Phone (202)- 225-4131 WOW!!!! What else is there to say? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Bobby1050
on
Thu 04/10/14 10:12 PM
|
|
Could BLM leaseholds for fracking operations be the reason for recent Bundy Ranch standoff?
The same bureaucracy that sold dozens of land leases to fracking companies last year is responsible for the recent Bundy Ranch standoff By John Vibes BUNKERVILLE, NEVADA (INTELLIHUB) Earlier today, we reported on the intense standoff that is taking place at Bundy Ranch, where a rancher'��s land has been surrounded by federal agents who are seeking to forcibly remove his livestock from disputed land. The dispute has been initiated by a bureaucracy called The U.S. Bureau of Land Management, or BLM . Since 1993, the federal agency has been attempting to annex areas of land that have been occupied by the same family of ranchers for many generations. The land was occupied by this family well before the creation of the agency in 1946. In the most recent showdown between the BLM and the Bundy family, large groups of protesters have gathered in support of the ranchers. During the protests, police can be seen on film throwing pregnant women to the ground, setting dogs loose on people for no reason, and using tasers on people who were attempting to ask questions. The Bundys are not the only ones who have been harassed by this federal agency. Since its inception, the BLM'��s primary goal has been to claim large areas of land for the government, so it can then either be sold or used for military bases. Many times these plots of land are sold to corporations and even other governments. Just last year it was reported that the BLM sold 29 federal land leases which covered more than 56 square miles in northeast Nevada. The agency itself reported that the oil and gas leases in Elko County sold for $1.27 million to six different companies. Every single one of these leases were purchased under the pretense that they would be used for natural gas fracking, a process that is known to contaminate water supplies and destroy local ecosystems. The BLM claims that they are seizing land to preserve it, for environmental protection. However, it is obvious that environmental protection is not their goal if they are selling large areas of land to fracking companies. Although the land that was sold last year is 300 some miles away from Bundy ranch, the aggressive tactics that have been used by federal agents in this situation is raising the suspicion that this is another BLM land grab that is destined for a private auction. http://intellihub.com/blm-leaseholds-fracking-operations-reason-recent-bundy-ranch-standoff/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BLM Also Trying to Seize 90,000 Acres Along Red River Border Between Texas & Oklahoma http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sAbiO0SThQ&feature=youtu.be |
|
|
|
|
