Posted on 04/10/2014 11:05:03 AM PDT by Lazamataz
Read more on this story here. The Bureau of Land Management has been taking Cliven Bundys cattle, claiming that he is improperly grazing them on federal land. Yet Bundy and his family have been grazing them on the same land since the 1880s, long before the creation of the Bureau of Land Management came into existence. Bundys son was thrown to the ground and arrested when he stood on a public road to take pictures of what the government was doing.
As the video above shows, the tension got even greater after the federal agents showed up with backhoes and clashed with protesters questioning the action. Agents tased one man repeatedly, allegedly hit people with slow moving vehicles and at least one woman was thrown or knocked to the ground at around :30.
5.56mm
That said, WHY in the hell does the federal government (or its agent) think it's a worthy cause to use such force against a rancher and his 900 cattle but NOT against 12 million (and counting) illegal aliens who are ALSO trespassing on land that doesn't freeping belong to them?
Damage to land from illegal alien trespassers:
Damage to land from trespassing cattle:
It’s all over Fox News. Dana Loech says Bundy has paid some fees the fees to “Nevada county”. The optics don’t look good for the Feds. Protesters, tasers, and daags.
*********************
Absolutely.
What part do you own?
I would opine that Obama’s secret bank account gets a large deposit, Reid gets his cut, and a good chunk goes into the DNC Treasury.
I hear, in Texas, they once hanged a man for cattle rustlin’.
Back when he was paying rent, what was your share of the rent money?
A lot of small issues lead to bad out comes.
Send email to BLM at this link. It is an online form at the BLM website
http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/National_Page/Contact_Us.html
You are missing the point. The snipers are just a wee bit over the top don't you think?
If you don’t think saying ‘this is my land, you must enter into a contract and pay a fee to graze on it’ is asserting a claim to ownership of property, then we’ll have to respectfully agree to disagree.
As you said, the 1993 change capped Bundy’s herd at 150 cattle on the Bunkeville allotment. That made Bundy’s approved usage of the land much less valuable, but not “worthless to him.” The 1998 ‘no-graze’ declaration made the land worthless to him.
if one has 5x cows on a property and the gub'ment sez now you are only allowed 1x cows you must now put the other 4x cows someplace else. Now understand this is open land so let us say you can put the cows on property next to the range in question. Cows wander because its open land so the gub'ment can claim you broke the rules you now have 1.01X cows on the land when bessie wandered over an imaginary property line etc.
However if the you put the 4x cows on another piece of land that is not adjacent then you now must split your efforts to maintain the cows at two different areas. Which increases your costs and time/effort. Which in essence makes the property worthless.
This was a calculated move by the Gub'ment to defraud the rancher and get him off the land. It was not a move to help the rancher in his business. The tortoises have coexisted with those cows since the late 1800s on that same property. The gub'ment will use such BS as the "endangered species laws" to bolster their claims in the name of saving the planet. But if that is their claim why are they selling fracking and drilling rights to the properties in question?
It's one big pile of BS and the gub'ment is using every trick in the book to hide their deception.
Don't fall for it!
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.