THE BUNDY DAUGHTER SPEAKS OUT ON GOVERNMENT TERRORISM AGAINST HER FAMILY! (Nevada Rancher)

America's Freedom Fighters ^ | Apr 9, 2014 | Clark Kent

[xzins]

By SHIREE BUNDY COX:

I have had people ask me to explain my dad’s stance on this BLM fight.

Here it is in as simple of terms as I can explain it. There is so much to it, but here it is in a nut shell.

My great grandpa bought the rights to the Bunkerville allotment back in 1887 around there. Then he sold them to my grandpa who then turned them over to my dad in 1972.

These men bought and paid for their rights to the range and also built waters, fences and roads to assure the survival of their cattle, all with their own money, not with tax dollars.

These rights to the land use is called preemptive rights.

Some where down the line, to keep the cows from over grazing, came the bureau of land management. They were supposed to assist the ranchers in the management of their ranges while the ranchers paid a yearly allotment which was to be use to pay the BLM wages and to help with repairs and improvements of the ranches.

My dad did pay his grazing fees for years to the BLM until they were no longer using his fees to help him and to improve.

Instead they began using these money’s against the ranchers.

They bought all the rest of the ranchers in the area out with their own grazing fees.

When they offered to buy my dad out for a penence he said no thanks and then fired them because they weren’t doing their job.

He quit paying the BLM but, tried giving his grazing fees to the county, which they turned down.

So my dad just went on running his ranch and making his own improvements with his own equipment and his own money, not taxes.

In essence the BLM was managing my dad out of business.

Well when buying him out didn’t work, they used the indangered species card.

You’ve already heard about the desert tortis.

Well that didn’t work either, so then began the threats and the court orders, which my dad has proven to be unlawful for all these years.

Now they’re desperate.

It’s come down to buying the brand inspector off and threatening the County Sheriff.

Everything they’re doing at this point is illegal and totally against the constitution of the United States of America.

Now you may be saying,” how sad, but what does this have to do with me?” Well, I’ll tell you.

They will get rid of Cliven Bundy, the last man standing on the Bunkerville allotment and then they will close all the roads so no one can ever go on it again.

Next, it’s Utah’s turn. Mark my words, Utah is next.

Then there’s the issue of the cattle that are at this moment being stolen. See even if dad hasn’t paid them, those cattle do belong to him.

Regardless where they are they are my fathers property. His herd has been part of that range for over a hundred years, long before the BLM even existed.

Now the Feds think they can just come in and remove them and sell them without a legal brand inspection or without my dad’s signature on it.

They think they can take them over two boarders, which is illegal, ask any trucker. Then they plan to take them to the Richfeild Auction and sell them.

All with our tax money.

They have paid off the contract cowboys and the auction owner as well as the Nevada brand inspector with our tax dollars.

See how slick they are?

Well, this is it in a nut shell. Thanks”

[crz]

Oh he pulled some crap in Bullhead City AZ and got caught.

His buddy, who tried some shit down in the area that I live in got Caught.

[SpeakerToAnimals]

I do not believe the fedgov needs to manage anything. Let them run a desert and there will be a shortage of sand. The land of the free is dead. We are about to find out if the USA is still the home of the brave. This hill or another, someone, somewhere will make a stand against this evil fedgov.

I saw a movie where the people did not resist. Schindlers List.

[x1stcav]

‘Agreed. I wish I knew a federal agent I could ostracize.’

If we’re successful in ostracizing them, one day they’ll have to live in their own compounds with their own schools and other support infrastructure.

Then we’ll be in for it. It’ll really be us against them.

But, at least, they’ll not be in our midst.

Shades of 1984.

[CatherineofAragon]

"BTW, I never did say I thought there was a wax dummy in a casket,"

Posts #633 and 643

Sarcasm. Just kidding. Uh-huh.

[TigersEye]

The Five on Fox News is about to air the video of the standoff in a couple of minutes.

[Kackikat]

“I do not believe the fedgov needs to manage anything. Let them run a desert and there will be a shortage of sand. The land of the free is dead.”

I think you are onto something and we will be tested. Several Militias are on their way to Nevada to stand with the Bundy’s.

There are moments that are defining for a nation, I had thought it would be the denying of water to farmers in CA over some minnow pushing food prices higher in a bad economy, destroying jobs in a state already consumed with illegals....but ‘no’. However it may be Nevada? Or will this too fade away in submission to Tyranny?

Is this what Zero wanted to declare Martial Law? How would the soldiers who took an oath to protect America act if forced to fire on private citizens?

[ConstantSkeptic]

Nice threadjack.

/snark

[unixfox]

So this is her side of the story. The government has their side of the story. The actual truth is somewhere in between.

Sure. Like the government would NEVER lie?

I'll take her word any day before I trust ANYTHING this POS government says.

[Kackikat]

In WNC the Vanderbilts donated thousands of acres of land for the people to be used by them and their descendents FOREVER, and I saw the deed years ago personally. A few years ago the Fed agency began closing the public use of that Campground by putting rocks in camping spots and planting grass not normal to the area.

Trees were cut and thrown into the river so the children could no longer tube there, but fishermen were allowed to buy licenses and fish there. Now, we are fishermen too, however there are miles and miles of river for that...children are being pushed out so families won’t come for the day or camp there.

Their excuse was they couldn’t afford to patrol the area but never asked for volunteers or donations. Only a few spots remain within an observable area and are rented out to people who make money overseeing the park, so a few tourists can visit with their RVs.

[bicyclerepair]

YOU ALL FAILED !

Not ONE picture of Christina Applegate.

[dragnet2]

The government has signs posted in some forest areas of CA..It says forest adventure passes available...For a fee... Like it's some private federal amusement park...

[butterdezillion]

Your reading comprehension is terrible. I don’t wish to hijack this thread so I’ll just say to anybody looking at this to go look at that post - or anywhere in that thread or anyplace else - and show me where I said there WAS a wax double in the casket. My argument is that there was nothing resembling a body in that casket - based on the one inside-casket image that we know is genuine from that funeral. Sheesh. What do they teach in schools these days anyway?

What I brought to this thread was the same standard/epistemology that was applied to me: that if somebody decides that the conclusion you might reach is unacceptable, they will forbid your evidence.

You, CatherineofAragorn thought it was laughably crazy to think that the regime (or whoever) would fake a death, complete with faked funeral, so you watched the other thread with amusement and agreed when I was told not to speak of the evidence any more.

Did you do the same in the thread about dozens of Benghazi witnesses being given new identities to evade Congressional investigation? It’s the same thing, CatherineofAragorn. Is that such an incredible, ridiculous, BATSH!T CRAZY conclusion that you got great entertainment out of watching the people who brought forth evidence being ridiculed and silenced in that thread?

Oh, wait. That didn’t happen to them, did it? Why not? How do you suppose they give new identities to people? How do they get rid of the old ones?

If somebody suggests in this thread that the EPA or other federal agencies are trying to keep land from being farmed to produce food - for Agenda 21 purposes, anti-fracking purposes, or whatever - will their theory and any evidence of it be called “batsh!t crazy” and shut down?

What I’m talking about here is an epistemology. I go where the evidence takes me. If that’s not acceptable - if some evidence is out of bounds for “respectable” people - then I and any other evidence-based people are in the wrong place, and people here better be careful what they say. Better look over their shoulder before speaking just like they have to do with the regime.

Is that really how we want things to be here?

[BlueMoose]

What is FR doing ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fl7IdpUq7ug

[CatherineofAragon]

If my reading comprehension is terrible, I sure am not the only one.

Apologies to all for the thread hijack.

[RandallFlagg]

D-OHH!!!

[P-Marlowe]

It’s not his land. His cattle are grazing on federal land. At the end of the Mexican-American War in 1848, Mexico and the U.S. signed the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo which granted title to that land to the U.S., for which the U.S. paid Mexico $15 million.

It is his land and it is OUR land. From California to the New York Islands.

If you want to play real estate law, then since the Treaty with Mexico was signed under duress after a questionably legal war, the land actually belonged to Mexico under the Land Grants from Spain. Since contracts signed under duress are not valid, the title to the land belongs to Mexico. The US Government has no legal right to the land any more than Mr. Bundy. When Mexico finally finishes it's ongoing invasion, the land will eventually revert to Mexico.

My guess is that Obama wants to take back the land so that he can give it freely to Mexico before he leaves office. It's an act of love, you know.

At any rate when the government allows free use of land for over 100 years, the precedent that is set requires that the government show good cause as to why they are rescinding the grazing rights and since Mr. Bundy has been paying for grazing rights for over 100 years, he does have a property interest in the land and the government would have to compensate him for it.

As she said Utah is next. I have ridden ATV's on the open range in Utah and if they close that down, then you can kiss your $10 a pound filet minon steaks goodbye. You'll be paying $10 a pound for cheap ground beef. This whole thing just may be a way to reduce global warming by denying cattle the food the consume to make farts.

[Alright2BRight]

I don't think it's as obvious as you think it is. I don't have time to do all the legal research to know whether Bundy or BLM is correct. But, I feel certain, Bundy and the rest were doing just fine before the feds came in with an idea to regulate their actions. See this 1967 article from the “Montana Law Review” and see if you can easily conclude that the fed has the right to confiscate Bundy’s herd: http://scholarship.law.umt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2167&context=mlr

[taxcontrol]

Hold on ponygirl, you need some context here. My original position was that the US Federal government could do with it’s land the same as any other land owner under the concept of property rights. The operative fact being that the US Government owned the land in question.

The response was an attempt to assert that since grazing fees were not listed in Article 1 section 8 that the Federal government should not own the land at all.

I responded by showing that even by that most narrow of interpretations of Article 1 section 8 that there were still “...other useful buildings” (per the exact language of the Constitution) that clearly shows that the US Government owns the land and that it is no constitutional violation for that ownership. The Hover dam being within the land area in question (Lake Mead National Recreational Area) and being a useful building.

I also showed where Bundy’s cattle are grazing on lands within the LMNRA and that is the government’s complaint.

If you want to try and refute a point ... show where the US government does not own the land in question. Or that Bundy has in fact paid the mandated fees.

[familyop]

The Vern Wagner Saga - A modern-day Western of one man against the State of Colorado and the Park County Sheriffs
http://denverdirect.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-vern-wagner-saga-modern-day-western.html

[taxcontrol]

Ok, here is some legal and historical background:

At the end of the Mexican-American War in 1848, Mexico and the U.S. signed the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo which granted title to that land to the U.S., for which the U.S. paid Mexico $15 million.

Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, includes the Treaty Clause, which empowers the President of the United States to propose and chiefly negotiate agreements between the United States and other countries, which become treaties between the United States and other countries after the advice and consent of a super-majority of the United States Senate. Upon the signing of the treaty, the US government to position and title of the land.

March 3, 1849 Creation of the Home Department consolidating the General Land Office (Department of the Treasury), the Patent Office (Department of State), the Indian Affairs Office (War Department) and the military pension offices (War and Navy Departments). This is what we call the Department of the Interior.

Sixteen years later in 1864, Nevada became a state. A provision of the Nevada Statehood Act of 1864 promised that Nevada would disclaim all rights to the unappropriated public lands lying within its boundaries, and that such land would remain at the sole disposition of the United States. Again, at this point in time the US is the owner of the land.

1873 Congress transferred territorial oversight from the Secretary of State to the Secretary of the Interior.

The Taylor Grazing Act of 1934[1] (P.L. 73-482) is a United States federal law that provides for the regulation of grazing on the public lands (excluding Alaska) to improve range land conditions and regulate their use.

1946 Interior’s General Land Office and Grazing Service are merged into the Bureau of Land Management.

At no time has the US government sold or transferred title to Bundy or any other person for the land in question. The US government owns the land.