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 ...
This has Harry Reid fingerprints. Not choom puppet’s.
It is not straightforward, as anyone who researches it a tiny bit knows. 95% of Nevada is owned by Feds. What more do they want?
Indeed, what about the cows, have they comfiscated and killed the whole herd yet? If so, why are they still there. I'm not sure but I think I heard dead cows can't graze anywhere much less on THEIR property.
Amen.
The Constitution doesn't specify so pretty much anything I would assume. Article IV, Section 3: "The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to prejudice any claims of the United States, or of any particular state."
Go to hell!!!
Hannity talking about this now west coast 1150 AM on the dial. Says Bundy on at top of the next hour.
I'm worried about that too, and I can't tell if any of the militia is on the family's side. I doubt that the "militia" is even on a single side. I worry about provocations, which the left specializes in - what if the left decides that shooting a couple of rangers would serve their agenda?
I do not think so. They want this.
Wouldn’t put it past them.
“This has Harry Reid fingerprints. Not choom puppet’s.”
Ask and ye shall receive. Here you go http://www.futurnamics.com/reid_bundyranch.php
bump
States need to start protecting their citizens from these alphabet agencies. They are making up laws as they go along. Kansas has told the BATF to leave its people alone. Holder objected. I think Montana has said the same. States need to say “This needs to go thru our state courts first and foremost. Look at the map. This land is part of our state.”
“If the bureaucrats at the BLM can get a valid eviction order from the court, then they should get the county sheriff to serve it.”
They have a court order. The sheriff normally does not evict cattle from public land.
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Bundy is permanently enjoined from trespassing on the New Trespass Lands.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States is entitled to protect the New Trespass Lands against this trespass, and all future trespasses by Bundy.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Bundy shall remove his livestock from the New Trespass Lands within 45 days of the date hereof, and that the United States is entitled to seize and remove to impound any of Bundy’s cattle that remain in trespass after 45 days of the date hereof.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States is entitled to seize and remove to impound any of Bundy’s cattle for any future trespasses, [*8] provided the United States has provided notice to Bundy under the governing regulations of the United States Department of the Interior.
DATED this 9th day of July, 2013.”
Please notice the court orders says the UNITED STATES is entitled to “seize and remove”.
If property rights mean anything, then someone running cattle on someone else’s property is trespassing.
I’m no fan of the BLM. They are worse than the USFS, and the USFS has turned into an enviro-wackie organization. And yes, CONGRESS should address these issues. But if we support the US Constitution, and the USA, then we ARE citizens of the USA & Congress can make laws and enforce them if it does so IAW the US Constitution.
We once “rallied” over “tea” in Boston........
This dispute has nothing to do with “cattle”............after the last 5 years of Obama, Holder, Pelosi, Reid, Biden, Czars, Benghazi, Fast and Furious, IRS, Solyndra and on and on endlessly, AMERICANS ARE JUST PISSED!!!!!
Self ping to #54. Well said!
I found this earlier this morning and posted it on another thread but I thought I’d share it again.
BIGGER THAN CLIVEN BUNDY: NV Stand-Off, “The Feds Are Coming After Our Lands … Setting Precedence with Bundy”
Read more at http://clashdaily.com/2014/04/bigger-cliven-bundy-nv-stand-feds-coming-lands-setting-precedence-bundy/#0Up83R9wdi3cYG6D.99
Sfl
Well, it’s been my understanding that the county sheriff is responsible for serving eviction orders and that the feds do not have jurisdiction is such local matters. Maybe I’m all wet.
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.