It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Feds seize another ranch, this time in New Mexico.

page: 3
40
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 04:32 AM
link   

MrSpad

HomerinNC

MrSpad
They should just sell that land to a developer. They get a nice bit of income from a new tax base and as a private owner the developer could just shoot the cows and the rancher when they came onto their property and ATS would be cheering them on for using the second amendment to give it to these corporate ranchers.
edit on 13-4-2014 by MrSpad because: (no reason given)


Youre so pro govt it reeks.
If they wanted to do that, they could have, they were apparently very happy ranching, whats wrong with that?>


I am pro consistancy. Why does this guy get special access to land he does not own and nobody else does? Why does this guy get to ignore the law and not pay his feas? If this was private land the owner could shoot him and the cows for coming on his property and ATS would cheer. Yet for some reason the Governmrent can not even collect and take the cows off its own land without people screaming about the evil guberment. It is a little thing called hypocrisy. Either you think it is ok for anybody to whatever they wish on any property no matter who owns it or you think that if you own a property that you can keep and defend it.


Well said, it is hypocrisy. You voiced opinions I hadn't even realized were my own. It's funny in a way, how silly the internet can get.




posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 04:41 AM
link   

ParanoidAmerican
reply to post by eXia7
 


This unfortunately is more common than many realize, California has a huge problem with land grabs by Sheriffs. Why did it take till now for people to get disgusted? Why till now to hold a large protest? There is more to the Bundy issue than they are letting on. It ain't about cows, tortoises, or grazing fees.....

Some call it Agenda 21...I see it as 'legal' thievery.
edit on 13-4-2014 by ParanoidAmerican because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-4-2014 by ParanoidAmerican because: (no reason given)


I see it as confiscation as a judgement against the disloyal and uncooperative. There's ranchers out there that cooperate with the government and still get easy living and a freedom distant to the likes of many Americans so I don't see why this particular case is sparking such outrage. After all the FED is basically a corporate empire, all of America is part of its' assets, every citizen along with it. This is why our economy is #1! And we still have an enormous amount of untapped potential at that.



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 07:01 AM
link   

On7a7higher7plane

I see it as confiscation as a judgement against the disloyal and uncooperative. There's ranchers out there that cooperate with the government and still get easy living and a freedom distant to the likes of many Americans so I don't see why this particular case is sparking such outrage. After all the FED is basically a corporate empire, all of America is part of its' assets, every citizen along with it. This is why our economy is #1! And we still have an enormous amount of untapped potential at that.


Like I said to another poster with your similar view on this situation.

Enjoy your $30 cheeseburger while you sip on harry reid's koolaid. Government is not always the answer, no matter how much you think government should be there to hold your hand.



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 07:12 AM
link   

eXia7

On7a7higher7plane

I see it as confiscation as a judgement against the disloyal and uncooperative. There's ranchers out there that cooperate with the government and still get easy living and a freedom distant to the likes of many Americans so I don't see why this particular case is sparking such outrage. After all the FED is basically a corporate empire, all of America is part of its' assets, every citizen along with it. This is why our economy is #1! And we still have an enormous amount of untapped potential at that.


Like I said to another poster with your similar view on this situation.

Enjoy your $30 cheeseburger while you sip on harry reid's koolaid. Government is not always the answer, no matter how much you think government should be there to hold your hand.


But government is the answer a lot of the time. The current trend can't stop or even slow down until the country and world is fixed.



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 07:37 AM
link   

On7a7higher7plane
But government is the answer a lot of the time. The current trend can't stop or even slow down until the country and world is fixed.



I don't understand what you mean by fix? How is the government fixing anything at all?

Pro-government supporters never really have a valid reason as to why they love government, they just do.
edit on 4/15/2014 by eXia7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by On7a7higher7plane
 


Thank you. Excellent point. What some americans have not grasped is, if private industry fails to provide the needs of our country, the Feds will.

If you want less government, stop giving away all our money and benefits to the rich and corporations and foreign wars. Anyone in america with a full time job should be able to buy food, shelter, and transportation to get to work. If millions keep falling into the low wage jobs, while the stockholders gets richer, someone will pay.



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by eXia7
 


Government is fixing society when it threatens to destroy, degrade or consume itself into catastrophic situations. It also fixes the nation by confining it so it doesn't over step its boundaries because that leads to big domestic problems. Disputing factions if left unchecked can lead to civil wars or violent internal conflicts. People can be crazy.
edit on 15-4-2014 by On7a7higher7plane because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-4-2014 by On7a7higher7plane because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


Not their land. ITS FED land and therefore these parasitic people need to understand the LAW.

IF you are using something that is NOT yours you have no right to complain when it's time to give it back.

It is black and white and everyone creating a big deal about this is simply looking for an excuse to start something over nothing.

Why dont we all just start up a little business on federal land and then cause a problem when they want it back!!!



posted on Apr, 15 2014 @ 12:44 PM
link   
ok, ATS peeps, I have not said anything and have read most of your arguments. The government does take land from individuals. The land they call "wet Zones" taking from individuals for the birds or any other kind of wildlife. Having a creek or a pond justifies them to do so. I know first hand. My brother had a very small piece of his land taken. To keep them from taking any of our land we make sure the ponds do not get any growth around them and never let any bird watcher on our property. This has been going on for years. I for one am sick of the government doing what they want to who ever they want. I applaud anyone that has the "money" and the "nerve" to stand up against them. At this point I no longer care who is right or wrong due to technical paperwork. What matters to me is that the American people are tired of the government working for their own pocket books and not for the people as they promised. Who gave the government the right to take the property as they seemed fit. In our area, Many years ago they took away the Shawnee Forest and Land Between the Lakes from private citizens.

Under the proposed rule, farmers, ranchers and every other landowner across the countryside will face a tremendous new roadblock to ordinary land use activities. - See more at: fbnews.fb.org... ash.4vRlUXe9.dpuf
edit on 15-4-2014 by RunForTheHills because: no reason



posted on Apr, 16 2014 @ 01:09 AM
link   
reply to post by projectbane
 


Unless, of course he wasn't informed of the repercussions that would be placed on him before hand. I wonder if he had been given a warning followed by subsequent fines or if he had been slapped with fines well after the fact without him even knowing what he was in for because that would be messed up. If that were the case then all this hubbub about the topic is warranted. If not and it was regular stuff like not paying taxes that you know are owed then this really should have been handled swiftly. Really all the feds needed to do was arrest him and possess his assets, why so complicated? If they did that soon after his first missed payments then he probably could have been let off with only having the ranch auctioned off and being re-compensated the difference between his debt and the selling price.

The government probably spent millions just in wasting operating expenses on this case, WTF feds you show off's.



new topics

top topics



 
40
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join