Click the Chicks
Spend a Lot of Time at Free Republic? Get Fed a Lot of Information?
Haven't donated yet?
Sign up to donate monthly
and a sponsoring FReeper will contribute $10
Posted on 07/13/2011 10:04:57 AM PDT by Nachum
Remember when the Army Engineers blew the Birds Point levee in early May? Now we know the real reason. ~Ed.
By Ann Barnhardt Cattle commodities broker June 24, 2011 (See her June 26 Update below)
Two HUGE intel leads in my email box this morning from way-back contacts that I’ve had for years, that are actually somewhat connected concepts.
1. File this one under “Now It All Makes Sense.” A Missouri farming and ranching contact just got off a conference call wherein he was informed that the federal government is sending out letters to all of the flooded out farmers in the Missouri River flood plain and bottoms notifying them that the Army Corps of Engineers will offer to BUY THEIR LAND.
Intentionally flood massive acreage of highly productive farmground. Destroy people’s communities and homes. Catch them while they are desperate and afraid and then swoop in and buy the ground cheap. Those evil sons of bitches.
(Excerpt) Read more at foodfreedom.wordpress.com ...
A lot like California turning off the water supply in the Central Valley supposedly to “save the delta smelt”. Funny how that also managed to force all those conservative farmers out of the state.
There are no coincidences in Demonrat politics.
Obama and his government take from the people to give to themselves.
*
And aren't they broke?
And underfunded?
Soooo .. where does this 'army' get the money?
Just a silly question ....
If this land floods every couple years, and every couple years the US Gov’t has to pay to have the flood damage fixed up - wouldn’t it eventually make sense for the US Gov’t to simply buy the land; so no one else builds in a flood zone, and then files a flood claim every couple years.
Not knowing the specifics, as the paragraph had very little detail - just a question.
Bump for later.
Bump
Has the flavor of SA and Zimbabwe doesn’t it? Here instead of sending mobs of ‘impoverished’ they send lawyers and police.
>A lot like California turning off the water supply in the Central Valley supposedly to “save the delta smelt”. Funny how that also managed to force all those conservative farmers out of the state.<
Yes. My first thought was about what they did to the Ca central valley.
Buying our liberties with our own money? Sounds like a plan to me!
“wouldn’t it eventually make sense for the US Gov’t to simply buy the land; so no one else builds in a flood zone, and then files a flood claim every couple years.”
And do what, rent it back to the farmers? I think that is one sure way to get control of the food supply. Especially as the government is trying very hard to just take over private land under the guise of ‘Green’ programs, or ‘Smart’ programs. These are population control measures under the UN’s ‘Agenda 21’ IMHO.
Here are my miles on the subject if you would like:
http://www.nachumlist.com/agenda21.htm
“The land was flooded intentionally to save a minority community elsewhere. Others who know better will hopefully correct or confirm my post.”
Interestingly, these areas are called Flood Plains for a reason and the reason they are called Flood Plains is that these plains are used for controlled flooding as opposed to having uncontrolled floods in densely populated areas.
That system worked this year along the Missouri River and also worked down in Louisiana along the Mississippi River where spillways constructed 60 years ago were utilized to save Baton Rouge and New Orleans from flooding.
These flood control systems function well and save the American tax payer billions upon billions of dollars.
I see this locally and I think it has happened all over.
My theory...
Government (municipal, State, Federal) starts doing work, building bridges, reservoirs, dams; commercial interests build malls, etc., with many sq. miles of pavement. New housing projects spring up; they are required by government regs to plan water runoff, they do. They put in miles of drains.
The net result is dramatic changes to above-ground and underground water flows.
Mind you, water always flows downhill.
The engineers who design all these things know this and abide by government oversight.
But the big picture, the big plan..... winds up..... taking many square miles of what used to be the natural lay of the land, and making it, essentially, a big water-catch for rain. And, invariably, the “big picture”, which could only be analyzed by the government, is never really correctly analyzed and planned for in the designs of all these pieces. It sort of is, but somehow...
And there we go, we keep seeing more and more flooding over the years.
Back before 1980, businesses could and often would have DIRT parking lots. Not now. Everything is paved. All the rainwater runnoff goes into storm drains. All those eventually wind up in rivers. All that rainwater, before the pavement, would have soaked into the ground near where it fell, instead of being put into a drain and then dumped directly into the river a few miles away. If it soaks directly into the ground, the ground functions as a big sponge, or storage tank, storing water which then gradually makes it’s way to the river. When you get rid of natural forest or grassland cover and replace it with man-made structures, rainwater runnoff has to be handled to account for the “floodiest” time of year by somehow making some kind of storage. Some company was actually selling a pavement that is water-permeable for this very reason, I don’t know their status now.
During high rain periods, the flow volume through rivers is now, I’m theorizing, greatly expanded compared to 50 years ago. There still was flooding back then. The government and developers have just made matters a bit worse. I tend to think that the big rivers in the midwest are subject to the same kind of issues; but over a wide area.
Well, yes and no; it’s weird. The only reason the Feds would be involved is because people took out flood insurance. There’s plenty of places in Texas that flood every other year or so; but no one builds there....when it’s dry they graze cattle and raise coastal bermuda; when it floods they move the cattle but there aren’t any “structures” to insure.
“But after about thirty years of operation, as the environmentalist movement gained strength throughout the seventies and eighties, the Corps received a great deal of pressure to include some specific environmental concerns into their MWCM (Master Water Control Manual, the “bible” for the operation of the dam system). Preservation of habitat for at-risk bird and fish populations soon became a hot issue among the burgeoning environmental lobby. The pressure to satisfy the demands of these groups grew exponentially as politicians eagerly traded their common sense for “green” political support.
Things turned absurd from there. An idea to restore the nation’s rivers to a natural (pre-dam) state swept through the environmental movement and their allies. Adherents enlisted the aid of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), asking for an updated “Biological Opinion” from the FWS that would make ecosystem restoration an “authorized purpose” of the dam system. The Clinton administration threw its support behind the change, officially shifting the priorities of the Missouri River dam system from flood control, facilitation of commercial traffic, and recreation to habitat restoration, wetlands preservation, and culturally sensitive and sustainable biodiversity.”
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/06/the_purposeful_flooding_of_americas_heartland.html
By 22 Feb 2011, the Corps of Engineers had stopped dam runoff release. The Corps’ decision, from what I have read, was subsurvient to environmental/EPA demands.
Koster’s suit.
http://ago.mo.gov/newsreleases/2009/Koster_attempts_to_stop_Missouri_River_diversion/
Search NEPA.
And here’s a piece of the puzzle, from the Corps: http://www.nwk.usace.army.mil/Flood/rehab2007/Brunswick-EA.pdf
I’m no big fan of Westlands water district or of MWD who are the main customers of the Central Valley Water Project.
Their ‘Bay Delta Conservation Plan’ is just a maskirovka for a massive water grab from Northern California. I’m frankly glad that a federal judge has stopped them. They don’t have a right to other people’s water and it’s about bloody time someone said so.
Great links, thanks.
I am making use of them :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.