Posted on 04/11/2014 8:34:41 AM PDT by Kackikat
Cute!
Eighty years ago. The 1934 Taylor Grazing Act.
The only way you get that much blood from a taser dart is when you pull it out yourself, the wrong way.
Yeah..well they can kiss my posterior.
Hogwash...we paid for it. That was taxpayers money and now it belongs to the good citizens of Nevada.
5.56mm
The Bundy bought their land from someone and everyone that bought land after the treaty bought from people that were protected under the treaty.
Nevada administers and oversees the grazing rights. The BLM does not have a clear case here. My bet is the state could file for an injunction against BLM. Reports say the Nevada governor is angry with the feds. Congressional members from Nevada are also lining up against federal agencies.
Your argument is not solid, far from it.
If he didn’t sign a contract, he doesn’t have a contract and I don’t care what his reasoning is. No contract = illegal grazing for 20 years.
haven’t already lost in court several times?
I’m sympathetic to their cause but it seems the law is not on their side.
So far there is no shooting so that is good
Nobody said the Bundys don’t have rights to the land they purchased whether from an individual or from a state or federal entity.
That isn’t the issue. They are grazing their cattle on land that was purchased by the U.S. through treaty. Even Cliven Bundy acknowledges that. What he disputes is that the federal government owns all rights and title to the land on which he’s grazing his cattle.
No, Nevada does not oversee and administer the grazing rights. That would be the BLM, to whom Bundy paid grazing fees for years before he decided he wasn’t going to anymore.
If you want to assert that Nevada’s disclaim of the land in question was unconstitutional, you need to make the arguments outlined at the following link, which I support, BTW.
http://www.npri.org/publications/solution-of-the-week-liberate-nevada-from-its-federal-occupation
> “...that land becomes property of the government.”
No, it does not become the property of the conqueror. It becomes a territory in terms of jurisdiction, of control.
Read the treaty, it is clear that property of any kind would be respected along with rights.
It does not matter if property at the time of the treaty was owned by Bundy. Bundy family bought property from someone and the rights to the property and the grazing rights were all covered under US law which also includes the treaty.
If I buy property 100 years after a treaty, all the rights accorded the original property owners pass to me.
What federal agencies like the BLM have done is to grab land, a ‘land grab’ which the EPA and BLM often does on a pretext of protecting some cross-eyed mouse or red-spotted lizard. But in my experience there is often some NWO environmentalist Soros-funded leftist ideologue behind such grabs. And such grabs seem to be much more frequent and egregious when democrats control the executive branch.
On a related topic I just heard today that the only thing holding oil from crossing the border between the USA and Canada is a presidential permit note. I was told that environmentalists told Obama that if he oks that presidential permit they will crucify him.
The land was not purchased by the US government. See post #143.
The Bundy family have a right to the ranch land they bought and to the grazing allowed on public land next to it.
It’s no different than buying a farm with rights to upstream water supply.
I’ve lost in lower court many times but more often than not I prevail in higher court.
People who are not used to litigation often lose in their first brush with it because they do not know how to choose a competent and devoted lawyer or because the judge was biased or the venue was changed to favor the other party, etc.
But as time marches on people eventually learn how to fight and win in the legal arena. Perhaps Bundy is making that transition. I hope so.
The Bundy's paid grazing fees from 1870 to 1993. Only when CLINTON's BLM decided to change the deal did Bundy finally have enough.
The bigger picture... You are missing it.
And if the contract says, “these terms will eventually drive you out of business, just like it did your neighbors...”
Would you still have signed it?
It’s plain oil and plain gas that came out of rock.
Precisely, fracking just makes the extraction more efficient.
I will further state that there are two mentalities at work here: One conservative and old school and the other Liberal and Green.
The conservative/old school view is that pioneers, ranchers, farmers, factory workers, surburbanites, are the backbone of America and we should always cherish their hard work and pioneering spirit. In other words, these are the people that MADE our country great. We owe them.
But the other mentality is one of progressivism where anything human is bad, and any thing Anglo-Saxon, White, American is especially bad. That needs to be nipped n the bud! A turtle, a fly, a baitfish, whatever; all are more important than some old white racist land stealer Gaia destroyer.
http://www.infowars.com/breaking-sen-harry-reid-behind-blm-land-grab-of-bundy-ranch/
So I guess you are okay with the Reid/China plan for a Solar Plant being built on Bundy Ranch, once BLM gets it?
There are so many issues that have nothing to do with the illegal grazing.
I believe the carbon dioxide is liquid going down the well, then becomes gas and expands as you said - expands is a better description than exploding. I know sand and pellets are used to hold fractures open. Also know water is used. What I don’t see are toxic chemicals the writer said was used and the nearest component to “toxic” would be the carbon dioxide which wouldn’t be toxic to end up in human beings as I believe the writer intended to imply. The point is, none of those “ingredients” used is toxic.
Dang, I was a hoping to *git* me some of that higher octane, more volatile, been fracked out of the ground gasoline, LOL!
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.