Breaking! Bundy Ranch Double Cross? More Feds, Cops, Vehicles, Equipment Arriving!

Snarl
reply to post by Logarock

 

I'd guess the government collects their fair share in taxes when he takes his cattle to market. Isn't that enough? If his cattle aren't grazing on that grass, it's just gonna die after awhile.

Ah, the old, "If we don't harvest these last remaining redwood trees, they are just going to rot" argument.

Everybody needs beauty as well as bread, places to play in and pray in, where nature may heal and give strength to body and soul alike.

- John Muir, The Yosemite (1912), page 256

The Gold Butte area has multiple uses; it is not Bundy's private foraging gounds.

Cattle ranchers are not necessarily millionaires. Most cattle ranchers have had to cut their hears in the last few years due to drought and low prices. But, you ask, if cattle prices are so low, why am I paying $21.00 for ground beef in the store. Well, the only people making money on beef right now are the slaughter houses. Unionized, high paid slaughter houses.
Buy low, sell high. Make the union rich...thank you Mr Obama!

Olivine

Snarl
reply to post by Logarock

 

I'd guess the government collects their fair share in taxes when he takes his cattle to market. Isn't that enough? If his cattle aren't grazing on that grass, it's just gonna die after awhile.

Ah, the old, "If we don't harvest these last remaining redwood trees, they are just going to rot" argument.

Well, not exactly. Mowing your lawn and grazing stimulate growth. Cows fertilize too. YMMV.

daveinats
Cattle ranchers are not necessarily millionaires. Most cattle ranchers have had to cut their hears in the last few years due to drought and low prices. But, you ask, if cattle prices are so low, why am I paying $21.00 for ground beef in the store. Well, the only people making money on beef right now are the slaughter houses. Unionized, high paid slaughter houses.
Buy low, sell high. Make the union rich...thank you Mr Obama!

We aren't talking about all Cattle Ranchers, we are talking about Bundy. He is in fact a millionaire, and the cattle in question on federal lands are worth over $2 Million. He owes over $1 Million from the past 20 years where a low ball estimate puts him at making close too $7 Million, more so with the corporate welfare that is him using federal lands to feed his cattle.

lol and somehow you are blaming the union for something? wtf? awwwww.... poor rich ranchers and slaughter houses have to inspect their meat and pay descent wages because of big bad Unions

You guys make me laugh, the rich one here is not the Union, its Bundy and all of you mouth pieces of the Right getting played like a fiddle. Aren't you against welfare!?? This is welfare, worse its welfare abuse plain and simple!

link

On Saturday, the bureau released about 400 head of cattle it had seized from Bundy. The operation had been expected to take a month to collect as many as 900 cattle.

reply to post by Logarock


Is there a soundbite we can get of this for prosperity?

ThichHeaded
reply to post by Logarock

 

Is there a soundbite we can get of this for prosperity?

I listened yesterday. Tuned in to Glenn Beck live interview. Don't know if that can be posted, might be on YT.

reply to post by nighthawk1954


It's my understanding that this rancher was allowing his cattle to graze on public lands without paying a usage fee. And now, after nearly 20 years of the government trying to get this rancher to either pay up, or move his cattle, the government is now moving the cattle themselves. This is apparently upsetting the rancher and his neighbors. Is my understanding not accurate? Am I missing some details? If not, it sounds like this rancher has been getting a free ride for almost 2 decades, allow his cattle to graze on land he doesn't own. How am I mistaken?

reply to post by Logarock


Thanks man, If I get around to it today I will find it and post it here I suppose.

reply to post by TownCryer


After listening to this guy yesterday I was disappointed. If the guy wants to be a radical state rights guy that ok but he should have his ideas pounded out into something a great deal more discernible after all these years. He did make some points but for Petes sake they have apparently not made a great deal of effort out there to get laws changed or anything as far as I could tell. Just been setting around the ranch for 20 years reading some radical pamphlets and hoping it would all magically go away is what it sounded like.

He said he didn't have to deal with the Feds it was a state issue. Apparently he feels he and others can change the nature of the land holding without actually doing something with the state legislature. It doesn't sound like a movement with much steam more like a clustermuck.

If anyone knows of any legislative efforts please chime in here.

reply to post by HanzHenry

the corrupt foreign controlled bankster owned govt unglued, unhinged, and removed the nails. We had been left to float down a river, but now we hear the rumble of the waterfall ahead.

Bundy Ranch could indeed be the spark. Far too long the Americans have been distracted by drugs, personal greed, apathy, TV/sports, etc.

The ELites have turned the children of America into donkeys like in the story of Pinocchio, worrying about fun for decades.

America was stabbed in the back by Woodrow Wilson and had been on life support since FDR's new deal.

It's odd for me, to have grown up during the times of distraction you speak of.
It was a magical time I spent, running thru sun baked musterd plant fields of
Chino Ca. With only an occasional assassination to remind us all, that something
sinister was at work and would someday rear it's ugly head. I knew even then
as very young boy, what I know now. And have dreamed my whole life, of being
able to do something about it. Alas, my heart now weeps for a nation, as it once
did inside a four year old boy, for his President. And another four year old boy
whos father was that President. May they both RIP, but be remembered in
these times.

AND REMEMBER THE ALAMO !

Logarock
reply to post by TownCryer

 

After listening to this guy yesterday I was disappointed. If the guy wants to be a radical state rights guy that ok but he should have his ideas pounded out into something a great deal more discernible after all these years. He did make some points but for Petes sake they have apparently not made a great deal of effort out there to get laws changed or anything as far as I could tell. Just been setting around the ranch for 20 years reading some radical pamphlets and hoping it would all magically go away is what it sounded like.

He said he didn't have to deal with the Feds it was a state issue. Apparently he feels he and others can change the nature of the land holding without actually doing something with the state legislature. It doesn't sound like a movement with much steam more like a clustermuck.

If anyone knows of any legislative efforts please chime in here.

Agreed. I see it as he's a states rights guy because it's convenient and sounds good. He's not, he's a money guy - as in wants more of it easier, wants to raise his cattle as he has been for 20 years for free and @ ten times the amount of cattle per acre as legal and make many more millions. The conspiracy here is how he was able to get all these folks riled up in defense of his private fortune, over such a non-issue, making them look bad too anyone with an iota of critical thinking, why? Can it really just be about his money? Maybe it's so when there is a real issue next time no one listens. I sure as hell will be taking whatever the "oathkeepers" say from now on with a large grain of salt. Whether knowingly or unknowingly they are shills of the corporate elite testing the waters of private fortunes against the government and so is anyone who supports Bundy.

to quote a post of mine on another thread, link to lawsuit discussed below:

seaez
reply to post by stormcell

 

Thanks for that info. Per the link provided:

“While the federal agencies and county superficially attempted to meet the requirements, the reality is that because of their willful neglect, critical habitat has been steadily degraded by the trespass grazing,” said Mrowka. Recent surveys by the BLM have found 700 to 1,000 or more cattle in the Gold Butte area — an amount 10 times above what was legally permitted even before the tortoise’s protection. Grazing reduces vegetation the tortoises need to live and spreads noxious weeds by disturbing the soil with hooves and fur that carry invasive seed. Last month, the local office of the Bureau of Land Management had planned a roundup of the trespass cattle, but the operation was canceled at the last minute by higher-ranking agency officials. “We’ve tried to work with the BLM and county constructively to achieve a good resolution to this problem, but with the recent cancellation of a roundup of the trespass cattle, our only option for helping these tortoises is to take them to court,” said Mrowka.

So, not only was Bundy involved in non-licensed use of the land, he was illegally over populating his cattle in Gold Butte. I guess if you are going to ignore the necessary economic relationship, why give a flying cow about criminally over populating the same area so you can bilk 10 times as much money from the tax payers.

Most of the anger here is misdirected, regardless of how you feel about habitat protection for wild animals, there is recourse to take within the law. Mr. Bundy is egregiously outside any legal bounds and has riled up the fool easy to rally to the defense of his profits.

Mamatus
reply to post by nighthawk1954

 

The big bus "paddy wagon" is a clear clue that they plan on arrests. Now we will see if the Militias, Bundy, friends family and supporters will have the balls for what is next.

I am still on the fence regarding Bundys right to grave on BLM land as there has been no clear proof he had any rights to it. However I am all for seeing the someone actually grow the balls to risk their lives and or freedom for what they believe is right.

IMO they will make a lot of noise when it's time to be arrested. However I would be willing to bet that not a single protestor, militia member fires a shot in defense of their beliefs.

And all of this (allegedly) over soon to be extinc turtles. The way the government is snatching up farmers cows....they will be extinct as well soon.

Bundy sounds almost senile and quotes Ed Presley in his explanation of why he doesn't think the Federal Government really owns the land his cows graze on, this is who you people are supporting? I wonder who's pulling his strings, besides the $ signs in his eyes not allowing him to see, he has to be a pawn of someone more sinister - or bat# insane.

Glenn asked him to clarify since in the Nevada State Constitution that land Bundy’s cattle are grazing on was given over to the federal government. Below is a transcript of Bundy’s explanation:

CLIVEN: Let’s talk about the — Glenn, I really want to talk about that because that’s very important. You’re talking about the Enabling Act of the people of the territory of the state of Nevada. And remember, in the — section of the Constitution, we’re talking about territories of Nevada. Let me see if I can get that straight. What it says, it says the United States Congress will have power to dispose of all rules and regulations within the territory. Now, let’s think what we’re doing. We’re talking about the territory of Nevada. People of the territory of Nevada. As they — they do not have the Constitution. They’re within the territory and Congress had an unlimited power to make all the rules and regulations. Okay. The people of the territory petitioned the United States Congress to make this a state. And they have a clouded title. So in order to clear their title, they give up their public domain — forever. It sounds terrible. Forever? But let me tell what you they had to do. They had to give it up forever so Congress would have a clear title. And what did Congress do? It made a state of Nevada. Which [indiscernible] a lot of them — quote Ed Presley here. Here’s what Ed Presley said. It doesn’t matter what happened before statehood. What matters is what has happened at the moment of statehood. Now, if you think about that in the second. At the moment of statehood. What happened? At the moment of statehood the people of the territory become people of the United States with the Constitution with equal footing to the original 13 states. They had boundaries around them, a state line. And that boundary was divided into 17 subdivisions, which were county. I live in one of those counties: Clark County, Nevada. And in that county, Clark County, Nevada, we elect our county commissioners, which is the closest to we the peoplend we elect the county sheriff and we pay him to do what? Protect our life, liberty and property. I’m a citizen of that county. I abide by all the state laws.

Glenn Beck and I don't agree often but...

“So I think this is very clarifying to people,” Glenn said.

“It’s not BLM land. It’s Nevada land,” Bundy said.

“That is a different point of view than everybody else that is a rancher that I know,” Glenn said.

Based on the conversation on the radio show, Bundy’s fundamental issue isn’t with an out of control government taking control of his personal land, but that he disagrees with how that land became federal land when Nevada was founded in 1864.

reply to post by seaez


To me the problem here most important is that the state rights movement has been represented in a cumbersome manner. I really like what some states are doing at the legislative level to stave of Federal coercion. This sort of ad hoc resistance is not needed nearly as much as real action by state legislators.

If there is really an issue here he and his fellow ranchers should have had something of a more direct legislative actionable affair underway a long time ago.

Now having said that, this sort of Federal exercise of force should be stopped by the state in my opinion. Don't bring snipers to a cattle round up.

Logarock
reply to post by seaez

 

To me the problem here most important is that the state rights movement has been represented in a cumbersome manner. I really like what some states are doing at the legislative level to stave of Federal coercion. This sort of ad hoc resistance is not needed nearly as much as real action by state legislators.

If there is really an issue here he and his fellow ranchers should have had something of a more direct legislative actionable affair underway a long time ago.

Now having said that, this sort of Federal exercise of force should be stopped by the state in my opinion. Don't bring snipers to a cattle round up.

I'll give you that for sure, and also agree with what a lot of the states have been doing. I'm for the end of the so called war on drugs and appreciate the deviance of state's rights. This is not one of those issues, in fact all it does is detract from actual issues.

As far as bringing snipers to a cattle round up, the question I have is why were they needed in the first place? Bundy is in the wrong, the BLM employees should be allowed to do their job in peace. Instead, the usual "gun rights" echo chamber who want to walk down the street with their Ar-15s, as is their rights based on the 2nd amendment, has a problem with any officials (who are well trained one would hope) representing themselves with guns? Those snipers are citizens as well and I sure as hell would want them making headshots ASAP if the "protesters" out there with their assault riffles start shooting first and attempting to murder or harm other citizens at the BLM just trying to do their job and get some greedy rancher's cattle off Federal lands because he refuses to do it himself.

Logarock
reply to post by seaez

 

To me the problem here most important is that the state rights movement has been represented in a cumbersome manner. I really like what some states are doing at the legislative level to stave of Federal coercion. This sort of ad hoc resistance is not needed nearly as much as real action by state legislators.

If there is really an issue here he and his fellow ranchers should have had something of a more direct legislative actionable affair underway a long time ago.

Now having said that, this sort of Federal exercise of force should be stopped by the state in my opinion. Don't bring snipers to a cattle round up.

his "fellow ranchers" already paid their grazing fees, they obeyed the law, apparently they are not having a problem grazing their cattle on BLM land.

jimmyx

Logarock
reply to post by seaez

 

To me the problem here most important is that the state rights movement has been represented in a cumbersome manner. I really like what some states are doing at the legislative level to stave of Federal coercion. This sort of ad hoc resistance is not needed nearly as much as real action by state legislators.

If there is really an issue here he and his fellow ranchers should have had something of a more direct legislative actionable affair underway a long time ago.

Now having said that, this sort of Federal exercise of force should be stopped by the state in my opinion. Don't bring snipers to a cattle round up.

his "fellow ranchers" already paid their grazing fees, they obeyed the law, apparently they are not having a problem grazing their cattle on BLM land.

Not true. But it's nice to see that the federal propaganda works so well on you.

His fellow ranchers had already given up, they didn't want to fight the power.

The amount of range land they have access to keeps shrinking, and like good little obedient slaves they said OK and thinned their herds instead of standing up to the feds.

Bundy is cut from different cloth.

Illuminawty
And all of this (allegedly) over soon to be extinc turtles. The way the government is snatching up farmers cows....they will be extinct as well soon.

naw, it's not about turtles, and apparently, never was....

it's about harry reid, his friend(head of the BLM), harry's son, rory, a chinese company, a solar energy farm(and panel manufacturing plant), and some shady back room deals....

it isn't about turtles, or grazing fees, or any of that.....it's about rich, corrupt politicians, their rich families, and a rich chinese business tycoon, and his company, getting richer....

for the people massing in NV, it's not completely about cows, or this rancher....it's about them seeing that this is about the reids, and the chinese thing....it's also about every other crappy thing the government's done to us over the last decade or so...it's all coming to a head....

instead of seeing that though, some ignorant people would rather try to marginalize these people, and write them off as "state's rights nutjobs"(because really, what's "state's rights"?), and "rich ol' bundy's private army of idiots", as if they're all brainwashed tools, drooling over their chins, while rocking rythmicly to their own soft chanting of "..'murrica..'murrica..'murrica..". these people massing in NV are quite a bit brighter, and braver than some of the people in this thread.....these people see this for what it is...the systematic selling of america, to private foreign interests, for the benefit of a few already obscenely wealthy people...

open your eyes people, see this for what it is...this is much bigger than Cliven Bundy, his cows, a bunch of cockamamie turtles, or the pittance of grazing fees....

WAKE UP!

reply to post by FirePiston


Are you joking? I hope you are because that means you have very little regard for life. You pick your battles and opening fire on a cop is not a good way to get the rest of America on your side.

All you have to do in order to know what the intent of mandating these grazing fees (they were originally voluntary) is is take a look at what the outcome has been.

In letters last week to ranchers across Nevada, the federal agency has mandated removal of cattle from 1.7 million acres of public lands from March 1 to June 14. "We are concerned that cattle are in direct competition for forage and grasses that the tortoise depends on for food," says Sid Slone, chief biologist for the BLM's Las Vegas district.

They tell you flat out that the cattle are targeted.

The BLM says only 4 percent of the country's beef is produced on Western lands. But they acknowledge there is no proof that cattle grazing has direct impacts on the health or well-being of desert tortoises, according to Mr. Slone.

So the cattle (really, it's the ranchers), of which there is no evidence of direct impact, are being targeted for removal.

Having shown that tortoise populations have dropped 90 percent in the last 50 years - and in some areas of the Mojave declining 50 percent in seven years - environmentalists were able to get the tortoise emergency status on the federal list of endangered species in 1989. The emergency listing became permanent on April 2, 1990.

...

"This action is unfair and not founded on scientific evidence," says Mr. Connelley. He says studies have shown that the tortoise numbers reached their height in the 1960s when livestock numbers were at their height because tortoises thrive on cow manure. 

Bogus reason exposed, potential real reason also illuminated:

"This is one more attempt to turn the planet into a national park," Connelley says. "If we keep putting restrictions on our ability to produce, we are going to find ourselves more and more dependent on foreign sources." Some compromise

all emphases mine

America's manufacturing capabilities have been moved overseas and now we are ending our ability to produce healthy food untainted by GMOs.

What more is there for us to loose?

Desert Tortoise vs. Grazing Cattle


Btw, that's from 1992.

Way before solar farms were much more than feasibility studies.

And the real question is whether or not the federal government has overstepped its authority.