The lies of the Green extremists need to be more broadly exposed.
I have a 3 page .pdf Judgement and Declaratory Judgement sent to me by the Attorney, if anyone wants a copy.
Halleluja! Amen! Sanity at last in the legal system. I hope this result is NOT reversed on the inevitable appeal and serves to keep the whacko tree huggers at bay.
Would be nice if, instead of issuing the judgement aganst the "Center for whatever cr@ap" it was called, the judgements were entered against the INDIVIDUALS who called the shots. The Center can be folded up and the whackos can re-establish it with a new label otherwise.
With all due respect to the judge, the Endangered Species Act needs to be ABOLISHED - or limited to Bald Eagles.
Thanks for posting this.
Great article. Thanks for posting it.
Yes, Dorothy, there is a Santa Claus!!!! Praise the Lord!! A Judge who has rational thought processes!!!
Muleteam1
ping
Ping
time to sue Meryl Strep and a few other SPOKESMEN for false claims like Alar and apples or electric wires cause cancer.
|
February 16, 2005: In an unusual episode in the longstanding 'ranchers vs. environmentalists' drama, a jury awarded Arizona rancher and investment banker Jim Chilton $600,000 in actual and punitive damages to be paid by the Tucson-based Center for Biological Diversity. The non-profit environmental group, which since its founding in 1989 has made its reputation by filing lawsuits on behalf of endangered species, in July 2002 posted photos on its website allegedly depicting environmental damage caused by Chilton's cattle on a 21,5000-acre Forest Service allotment northwest of Nogales, Arizona. The center posted the photos as part of a campaign to bar renewal of Chilton's Forest Service grazing permit. Chilton, a fifth generation rancher, sued the group for libel, charging that photos and captions willfully misrepresented his ranching practices. The center's lawyer argued that the photos and other material represented the environmental group's opinions, and thus that they should be protected by the First Amendment right to free speech. Kieran Suckling, the center's director, was quoted as saying, "We did things with the best of intentions. If there were some mistakes, they were honest mistakes." After two-weeks of testimony, 21 witnesses and more than 100 exhibits the jury, in a 9-1 decision, ruled the claims made about Chilton were indeed, false, unfair, libelous and defamatory. Chilton promised that after paying for his legal expenses and reimbursing himself for costs he would donate the remainder of the award to the Arizona Cattle Growers' Association. Read the full story at: http://mobile.azstarnet.com/sn/pda/58068.html |
Best news of the day.
Whatever this rancher did to sue these a-holes should be copied a thousand times until these eco-fascists are broke and wearing signs that say "Will whine for a sandwich."
If he is going to give the money to charity, then donate it to a fund to help poorer ranchers sue the envirowackos like he did and bankrupt them.
There is a federal law that allows such groups to sue the government and then whether they win or lose, be reimbursed by the government. If we could get Congress to repeal that law, it would destroy most of the liberal groups that use the courts to make defacto laws.
One of the worst decisions was to grant these groups standing to sue on the basis that they represented the interests of the plants and animals or the public interest. How altruistic of them.
There is a coffee table book that was circulating in the early 1990s. I believe it was put together, in part, by the Sierra Club. It gave pictures of burned areas on Mt. Shasta and called them clear cuts. It also had a picture of serpentine soils with sparse trees (which is natural) and called it a clear cut.
It is the same as a recent story on the poor fishermen allocating chinook for next year and blaming it on the old fish die off. Heck, they way over-fished last year and they didn't come close to the minimum Magnusson Stevens Act threshold return numbers for the Klamath chinook. How the heck are we supposed to produce them if they never get here to spawn? But it is the irrigators fault.
Likewise, it has been determined that a huge number of juvenile salmon being produced in the Klamath tributaries are dying from disease (C-Shasta, columnaris and parvacapsula) when they hit the Klamath mainstem. But, no, it is the irrigators fault. -----phooey
good news ping