Posted on 04/11/2014 11:23:53 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy’s decades-long battle against the federal government over grazing rights has heated to the point where militia groups have joined in and taken up spots against the feds who’ve circled his land — and talk is, they’re not afraid to open fire.
A spokesman for the one of the militia groups said as much to local 8 News Now: I’m not “afraid to shoot,” he said.
Margaret Houston, Mr. Bundy’s sister and a cancer survivor, said at a town hall gathering this week that the situation “was like a war zone” and that she felt “like I was not in the United States,” The Daily Mail reported. The Las Vegas Review-Journal described it this way: “Serious bloodshed was narrowly avoided,” in a story about how dogs were unleashed on a woman who was pregnant while the rancher’s son was hit with a taser.
On Tuesday, armed Bureau of Land Management agents stormed Mr. Bundy’s property, escalating a court dispute that’s wound for two decades over the rancher’s refusal to pay for grazing fees.
~~snip~~
Now militia groups are on the scene, promising to help the Bundys keep up the fight.
“This is what we do, we provide armed response,” Jim Lordy, with Operation Mutual Aid, told the local broadcast station. “They have guns. We need guns to protect ourselves from the tyrannical government.”
Mr. Lordy also said “many more” militia groups are coming to the site to join in the Bundy family defense.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Hey! Stop that! Most posters here do NOT want the facts!!! The government is overreaching and that is the meme to be followed! So knock it off!!
For those doubters, you will NEVER find a pure cause.
A whole lot of people are tired of the police state that has been built up.
Sure I liked your Chess analogy, but I am not wrong. The Constitution is based on natural law. The Constitution is not just for the government. It’s a contract between the federal government and every single American citizen.
But it’s not a suicide pact. The federal government is in breach of contract. It’s time to terminate their rights under that contract and transfer those rights to a federal government who will abide by that contract. But I repeat myself.
Desert tortoise faces threat from its own refuge August 25, 2013Back at the conservation center, a large refrigerator labeled "carcass freezer" hummed in the desert sun as scientists examined the facility's 1,400 inhabitants to find those hearty enough to release into the wild. Officials expect to euthanize more than half the animals in the coming months in preparation for closure at the end of 2014.
More glaring proof that the FedMob is incapable of managing lands or wildlife.
Could it be envy? I can’t say, but judging from his posts, he sure has a hard on for him. Bundy has gotten under his skin severely for some reason.
Mark your calendar for 4/19.
That’s a fair point.
We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.
No, actually, Bundy needs to erect the fence. It’s his cattle roaming on land to which he has no rights.
I’m going to leave for awhile. You may post me or email me. I’ll be waiting for your answer.
Paying the fees to the wrong entity does not give Bundy rights to land of another entity unless the two entities have an agreement.
There are limits and definitions for land which the gubmint may own.
A turtle habitat isn’t an expressly defined constitutional purpose.
Crappy sentence. typing fast on muh phone.
The word here is “Enumerated”
.
well its either gonna start here or Connecticut.
No it was not you, but your “promotion” of the “forced out” clause of the poster to which you responded. But yes, I thank you for that because “why” the others left would be important to know.
Yes, exactly right. But still, the offending party is squatting in our government. They won’t leave. We can try to play by the rules all we want, but there is nothing forcing them to leave. Voting? Voting is rigged through years of intentional dumbing down. Convention of the states? Why would the feds recognize anything that comes out of that? They don’t recognize what’s in the current constitution. Plus the convention process will fail.
Remember we’re talking about our response to the Bundy situation. Bundy recognized he was dealing with an illegitimate partner, in breach of contract. He acted unilaterally, as a free citizen. Just because he acted alone, doesn’t mean he’s a criminal.
The question remains. What should be our response when/if they bring the hammer down on him?
good one. lol
New wave of solar plants could worsen air quality
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/apr/26/new-wave-solar-plants-could-worsen-air-quality/
1. I hope that nobody is hurt, unlike some here I do not want a Civil War. I have seen what it looks like in Syria and it ain’t pretty. Maybe one day we will need to raise arms against the government, but this is still give or take the most free nation on earth.
2. I hope this is the start of a push back against the federal government on all fronts from every day civil disobedience, to politics, to jury nullification. I am not even sure that the rancher is right in this particular case, I just like seeing the government reminded that there is a limit to its power over me.
The BLM loses almost 5% of its budget each year administering its subsidized grazing program. It's dated, but here's a 2005 GAO report.
"The grazing fee BLM and the Forest Service charge, which was $1.43 per AUM in 2004, is established by formula and is generally much lower than the fees charged by the other federal agencies, states, and private ranchers. The other agencies, states, and ranchers generally established fees to obtain the market value of the forage. The formula used to calculate the BLM and Forest Service grazing fee incorporates ranchers' ability to pay; therefore the current purpose of the fee is not primarily to recover the agencies' expenditures or to capture the fair market value of forage. As a result, BLM's and the Forest Service's grazing receipts fell short of their expenditures on grazing in fiscal year 2004 by almost $115 million. The BLM and Forest Service fee also decreased by 40 percent from 1980 to 2004, while grazing fees charged by private ranchers increased by 78 percent for the same period. If the purpose of the fee were to recover expenditures, BLM and the Forest Service would have had to charge $7.64 and $12.26 per AUM."
Is the BLM doing enough 'land management' to justify charging ranchers to graze livestock under a program that costs the taxpayers over $100 million per year?
Mark Levin wants us to use Article V. I’m willing to give that a try. If that fails, it’s time to starting physically dragging them out of D.C. They can go willingly or not. The choice is theirs.
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.