[editor-surveyor]

Thanks for the ping. - Some are going to be double pinged here, but it is for the right cause :-)

Should we be suing to dissolve the National Forests? - Is there another way?

[headsonpikes]

Stop Rural Cleansing...By Any Means Necessary.

Busting enviral judges couldn't be a bad start. ;^)

[Eustace]

I've read some books that say our courts were turned into admirality courts in 1938 in a trial involing the railroad. I've also read numerous articles saying that our courts are corportate courts and because of the numerous licenses/contracts we have entered into with the government, ie drivers licenses, hunting licenses, social security, marrage licenses, birth certificates, W2's and so on, we are seen as corporations of the government and tried under corporate law.

I've seen this stuff so often and from so many directions, I'm courious if anyone here knows if it's true. The BAR is an English organization, lawyers accept the title of Esquire from England. I've read the contracts between Ben Franklin and England for money to keep our country running after the Revolution, and read other contracts from other countries that we had borrowed money from for the same reason, that the king of England bought up.

I've also noticed in some reading that America is refered to as an experiment and never escaped Englands rule.

Other reading says that "incorporation" goes back before 400BC in Greece and that Ceasar made good use of it as has England.

Incorporation simply means the State has control. The Christians that were persecuted in Rome by Ceasar, were not persecuted because of who they worshipped but because they refused to get a license from the State (incorporation)to worship Jesus. This may appear to be off subject but could possibly be on target to what we are facing in America's courts today. Most of our Churches have been incorporated since the 50's Incorporation .

Have we ever escaped Englands rule?

I look hard for the Truth and try to share it, maybe someone can help on this issue.

It does appear that as American's we are being tried in the wrong "court".

[cva66snipe]

Should we be suing to dissolve the National Forests? - Is there another way?

We should keep them at about the 1980 level. Many of the land grabs were unjust. I have nothing against raesonable grazing rights and reasonable forestry management. IOW Don't overgraze the leased land and don't come in and clear off whole mountain sides and leave them barren. The persons downstream do not appreciate the floods from it. Old usage agreements made for National Forest should be honored by the DOI.

[sistergoldenhair]

Thanks for the ping.

More than 50 state's rights activists, ranchers and other critics of federal management of public lands rallied in front of the U.S. courthouse, then packed the courtroom to show their support.

This warms my heart.

"They don't follow the law just as they see it; they follow the law."

The judge must have thought Mr.Gardner was a sheep rancher. :-)

[Victoria Delsoul]

Thanks for the flag.

[jrewingjr]

They are taking our land thousands of acres at a time and turning the whole rural part of our nation into "The King's Woods" just as in feudal England. We must destroy the system and concept of National Forests, as it is the scythe of rural cleansing.

[E.G.C.]

BTTT!!!!

[philman_36]

...an 8-year feud with the Forest Service...
Isn't that such a cute "phrase".
The modern day equivalent of the Hatfields and McCoys? Or is it so only in the eyes of the author or the Forest Service. Nothing in quotes so there is no way to tell.
"We been feudin' with them Feds for nigh on eight years now..."
Oh yeah, nice terminology.
Who is servant and who is master?

[cascademountaineer]

Theres a balance to be struck.

Currently, even if you take the opposite side in this and contend with the radical greens, environmental policy as practiced by Gvt. just is not working in any way shape or form. Its not doing what they claim it is - protecting valuable acreage but instead actually ends up trampling upon the rights of people whose livelihoods are dependent on farm/ranchland.

There is another option.

Those who are concerned about environmental issues can begin to invest in land and acreage themselves to protect it and steward it as opposed to expecting an agency of some sort to do it for them. Its an approach that gives the maximum amount of rights and freedoms to the individuals whose livelihoods depend on their land not being confiscated or taken away while giving the option to protect valuable acreage around the US.

Its a complex issue and thats just an idea. But there are options that can be win/win solutions.