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.

 

Just In: Obama Accused By Congressman Of Illegal Action At Bundy Ranch

page: 2
41
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Snarl
a reply to: thesaneone

This started in 93 not 2008.

So it begs the question ... why Now?


Five Letters

O
B
A
M
A




posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

What?
A Republican Congress member capitalized on a news story to accuse Obama of something illegal????? You're kidding!

LOL!



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bilk22
Yes let's attack the messenger.


If the messenger is a moron, he is fair game



It's apparent that those who side with the BLM also feel they're not required to follow the rules as they expect Mr. Bundy to do.


That is emotional statement that doesn't even mean anything, what rules?

Do most people have cattle and expect to graze for free?

Mr Bundy broke the rules




It's clear the BLM did not follow the rules. What is also clear is Dirty Harry didn't say "hey those are residents and constituents in my state. They're being treated like terrorist and not citizens of the US.: Oh wait he does believe they're terrorists. My bad. Guess anyone getting in the way of him fleecing America are terrorists in his eyes.


Oh spare us the drama.

The US government treats terrorists

They take them, cover their eyes and lock them up for as long as they please. Or blow them up no questions asked

Now tell me how these people have been treated like terrorists?



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Olivine

You cite the authority established in the California Conservation area.

Is there similar language for anything in the Gold Butte area?

Gold Butte is in Nevada, and Gold Butte may not be a "Conservation" area established by legislation. The legislation for that has not passed Congress yet, it's only a proposed bill.

The Gold Butte area is being used to transfer the environmental impacts caused by the solar installation at Dry Lake SEZ.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Snarl
a reply to: Flatfish
Please state for the record that you believe absolutely zero bias exists in the courts.


It doesn't matter what bias may or may not exist in the courts.

If they feel they have received a bum ruling, they can appeal it to a higher court. Nowhere does it say that local law enforcement are to serve as judges or juries, deciding the issues for themselves. It's their job to enforce the courts rulings, whether they like them or not. Anything less IMO, is just grounds for their dismissal as law enforcement officers.

Mob rule has no place here in America.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flatfish

originally posted by: Snarl
a reply to: Flatfish
Please state for the record that you believe absolutely zero bias exists in the courts.


It doesn't matter what bias may or may not exist in the courts.

If they feel they have received a bum ruling, they can appeal it to a higher court. Nowhere does it say that local law enforcement are to serve as judges or juries, deciding the issues for themselves. It's their job to enforce the courts rulings, whether they like them or not. Anything less IMO, is just grounds for their dismissal as law enforcement officers.

Mob rule has no place here in America.


Sounds like mob rule to me.

Silly Republicans, America is a Republic lol



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Flatfish

It doesn't matter what bias may or may not exist in the courts.

In which courts should this matter have been addressed?



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: spurgeonatorsrevenge

originally posted by: Snarl
a reply to: thesaneone

This started in 93 not 2008.

So it begs the question ... why Now?


Five Letters

O
B
A
M
A


And,

H
a
r
r
y

R
e
i
d

He's the common denominator.

And the hidden one is the companie(s) involved with the Dry Lake solar project.

It all goes back to the renewable energy projects like Solyndra was involved in.

Big money with the Democrat campaign money bundling.






edit on Apr-18-2014 by xuenchen because:




posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Flatfish

right,,, lol




posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Once, when we were homeless, in '95, we camped on Public lands while we went to town for our jobs.

They made us leave our spot every two weeks.

I don't know why cows get such special treatment.

I sure wish my fellow americans had rescued me and my children.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:24 AM
link   
Having read the article in question the following can be stated:

The Senator is correct and incorrect in his assessment of the situation in Nevada. Unless the Senator can produce evidence that directly links Obama to what happened in Nevada, then the President is completely innocent and should not be touched.

However, the Senator is correct that most agencies have no real authority to do what they desire, or to act as law enforcement. Nor do they have the authority to use lethal force against the public at any time or constrain the public. That is not their mandate, nor should be. They are there to advise and work with local law enforcement and to take the back seat and provide the evidence to the correct agencies to work with and resolve the problems that come up.

For far too long the regulatory agencies have been taking more and more power, and authority that was not theirs, and the congress has been granting them that authority every time it gets a chance, growing and bloating them to be a lumbering giant that thinks that they can do no wrong. Perhaps this is a lesson that the senator should look to and give to the oversite committee in congress to look into and maybe take the leash and bring the various federal agencies back into line and force them to heel. Cause if they can get away with using force now, then in the future they will believe that they can as well.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

You are correct, Section (e) I quoted was for California, but the 1st paragraph quoted, enabling the Sec. of Interior to establish and train LEO, applies to all BLM land.

(2) The Secretary may authorize Federal personnel or appropriate local officials to carry out his law enforcement responsibilities with respect to the public lands and their resources. Such designated personnel shall receive the training and have the responsibilities and authority provided for in paragraph (1) of this subsection.


One other possible reason for the "timing" of the removal of the tresspass cattle could be that environmental groups have threatened to sue the BLM for not doing their job.


edit on 4/18/2014 by Olivine because: clarity



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Flatfish


It doesn't matter what bias may or may not exist in the courts.


Really?

Really??

So if bias exists and cannot be overcome through the "regular channels," what other options are there?



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bilk22
It's up to the states to determine if the federal government has overstepped it's bounds. Hopefully, one day soon, the states will decide enough is enough.


I don't know exactly where you got the idea that it's up to the states to determine when and if the federal government overstepped it's bounds, but I'd wager that you pulled it from a spot where the sun don't shine. If I'm not mistaken, that's the job of the courts. More specifically, the Supreme Court.

On the other hand, let's just assume you're right. Using your own premiss, you stated that it was up to the "states" to decide. I would assume that the use of the word "states," (being plural) would imply that it would take a majority of the states coming to the conclusion that the federal government had overstepped it's bounds.

All I've seen is this particular instance is a relatively small group of ignorant right-wing radicals rallying behind a common criminal just for the sake of opposing the government because after all, they are the enemy we should all be fearing.


And what a pathetic bunch of "patriots" they are too! Hiding behind women and all. More like a bunch of cowards if you ask me. I wonder how their strategy of putting their women out front would have gone over at the Alamo?
edit on 18-4-2014 by Flatfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

I am glad someone is saying it in congress, thank you Mr. Stockman.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010
So Obama was president in 98? This started long before Obama became president.

Why the BLM Battle at Bundy Ranch Matters


In response to Bundy’s argument, officials from the National Park Service and BLM have pointed out that the removal of the cattle is based on two U.S. District Court orders from two different judges, the first of which was issued in 1998, yet Bundy has thus far failed to comply with the order. But the federal officials’ message has been lost amongst the claims of a police state and an overreaching federal government from Bundy’s supporters, which has included conservative media outlets.


The court gave the BLM the authority to remove the cattle not Obama.


You'd think a person who ran for office based on trust and his dedication to the people would have a say in it .



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Olivine
a reply to: xuenchen

You are correct, Section (e) I quoted was for California, but the 1st paragraph quoted, enabling the Sec. of Interior to establish and train LEO applies to all BLM land.

xuenchen, one other possible reason for the "timing" of the removal of the tresspass cattle could be that environmental groups have threatened to sue the BLM for not doing their job.



Yup.

one more to add to the many possibilities.

Do you know if they are threatening to sue over the Dry Lake project ? (at least partly)



edit on Apr-18-2014 by xuenchen because:




posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: BobAthome

And you think what happened at the Boston Tea Party relates to this situation?

Wow!

Seeing how we're all about freedom and liberty here, who am I to step on your right to embrace willful ignorance?



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flatfish

originally posted by: Bilk22
It's up to the states to determine if the federal government has overstepped it's bounds. Hopefully, one day soon, the states will decide enough is enough.


I don't know exactly where you got the idea that it's up to the states to determine when and if the federal government overstepped it's bounds, but I'd wager that you pulled it from a spot where the sun don't shine. If I'm not mistaken, that's the job of the courts. More specifically, the Supreme Court.

On the other hand, let's just assume you're right. Using your own premiss, you stated that it was up to the "states" to decide. I would assume that the use of the word "states," (being plural) would imply that it would take a majority of the states coming to the conclusion that the federal government had overstepped it's bounds.

All I've seen is this particular instance is a relatively small group of ignorant right-wing radicals rallying behind a common criminal just for the sake of opposing the government because after all, they are the enemy we should all be fearing.


And what a pathetic bunch of "patriots" they are too! Hiding behind women and all. More like a bunch of cowards if you ask me. I wonder how their strategy of putting their women out front would have gone over at the Alamo?
Big talk from an anonymous poster on the internet.



posted on Apr, 18 2014 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: Flatfish


It doesn't matter what bias may or may not exist in the courts.


Really?

Really??

So if bias exists and cannot be overcome through the "regular channels," what other options are there?


You could try electing different judges or those who appoint them, but that would mean that you would have to garner a majority of voters who agree with your ideology and seeing how it's fueled by pure ignorance and fear, I doubt that will ever happen.







 
41
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join