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.

 

Cliven Bundy, called 'lawless and violent,' to stay in jail

page: 5
20
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 05:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Gryphon66

First off I hardly doubt the "people" agreed to that. 2nd, the federal government cannot override the constitution, which guarantees all states equal rights. 3rd, the possession of land by the federal government ONLY allows them what the constitution dictates, parcels of land, for mainly military purposes.

It is written clear as day.


Wrong again on every count. You've already been shown, repeatedly, that you're utterly mistaken about your claim that the Constitution restricts the US from owning land. Now you're just being specious with that.

Other than that ...

Try reading the Constitution of the State of Nevada:



ORDINANCE

Slavery prohibited; freedom of religious worship; disclaimer of public lands. [Effective until the date Congress consents to amendment or a legal determination is made that such consent is not necessary.]  In obedience to the requirements of an act of the Congress of the United States, approved March twenty-first, A.D. eighteen hundred and sixty-four, to enable the people of Nevada to form a constitution and state government, this convention, elected and convened in obedience to said enabling act, do ordain as follows, and this ordinance shall be irrevocable, without the consent of the United States and the people of the State of Nevada:
First. That there shall be in this state neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, otherwise than in the punishment for crimes, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.
Second. That perfect toleration of religious sentiment shall be secured, and no inhabitant of said state shall ever be molested, in person or property, on account of his or her mode of religious worship.
Third. That the people inhabiting said territory do agree and declare, that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within said territory, and that the same shall be and remain at the sole and entire disposition of the United States; and that lands belonging to citizens of the United States, residing without the said state, shall never be taxed higher than the land belonging to the residents thereof; and that no taxes shall be imposed by said state on lands or property therein belonging to, or which may hereafter be purchased by, the United States, unless otherwise provided by the congress of the United States.




posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 05:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Vector99

Its referring to the Federal Capital

What exactly is that?


Question - Are you American?


Yes, now please answer what is the Federal Capital please.


Well for starters I would be going back to the schools where you received your education and demand a refund. This is American history / civics 101.

now -
I did.. You apparently failed to read the post of mine that you just responded to.
" My post was pointing out the info you presented applies to the US (Federal Capital) - Washington DC.

It does not apply to anything else.
"

Here it is again -
The info you posted about the federal district and 10 square miles applies only to the nation's capital - Washington DC. It does not apply to anything else.


To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States.


Last line - "Becomes the seat of the government".
edit on 18-2-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-2-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 05:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Get ready to be asked how the whole Government can sit in one chair ...

... or some other such foolishness.

Random Chance forbid.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 05:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I'll just reference some material from your source

All political power is inherent in the people[.] Government is instituted for the protection, security and benefit of the people; and they have the right to alter or reform the same whenever the public good may require it.


Exemption of property from execution; imprisonment for debt.  The privilege of the debtor to enjoy the necessary comforts of life shall be recognized by wholesome laws, exempting a reasonable amount of property from seizure or sale for payment of any debts or liabilities hereafter contracted; And there shall be no imprisonment for debt, except in cases of fraud, libel, or slander, and no person shall be imprisioned [imprisoned] for a Militia fine in time of Peace.


If you can't see the clear writing saying the federal government is not supposed to own land whatsoever, no debating with you will show you that.

The constitution is the very thing that limits the federal government from overreach, once a state is a state, it's no longer a territory. The federal government has legal ownership of territories, as very clearly defined in the constitution.

There are no territories remaining in the continental US, all of those land right have been granted to states.

Have a great day, I'm done here.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 05:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Do you mean the Capitol of the US? I've never heard of it referenced as the federal capital.

The info I posted doesn't stop at DC, it extends to every federal territory, check with a lawyer.

Limitations were placed in the constitution for a reason.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 05:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

Going back to the whole separate sovereign conversation. Washington DC is the Federal Capital of the US as a whole. States have their own state capitals.

and no - its specifically states seat of government and has absolutely no other applications when it comes to land ownership by the federal government.

As for the lawyer comment feel free to provide the lawyer source where they claim its applies to everything federal. I am curious how they are getting around the property clause of the constitution.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 05:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Capitols, not capitals.




and no - its specifically states seat of government and has absolutely no other applications when it comes to land ownership by the federal government.

right, so 10 square miles as defined per the constitution, is in regards to the seat. A 10 square mile seat. (Just for you gryphon)
edit on 18-2-2016 by Vector99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:02 AM
link   
Meanwhile black lives matter members assault vets based on their skin color, their leaders call for violance and they get treated as hero's by the same people demonizing a guy who hasn't hurt anyone.
edit on 18-2-2016 by TheBulk because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:03 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Are you a rancher? ...didn't think so.

My family has been ranching in the west since before Montana (USA) and Alberta (Canada) existed. For generations we have managed a ranch that crosses an international border, is surrounded by Federal Land (BLM) in the US and Crown Land in Canada.

We have grazed cattle on BLM and Crown land for decades. A good rancher, in it for the long haul, must be a Steward of the land and work with his neighbours. Along with the BLM and Crown Land as neighbours we also have a National Park and two native reserves.

The Bundy's of the world don't want that land for "Public Use", they want it for THEIR use. For free. They are a plague and are hated by ranchers that worry us all - on both sides of the border.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheBulk
Meanwhile black lives matter members assault vetsbased on their skin color, their leaders call for violanceand they Gert treated as hero's by the same people demonizing a guy who hasn't hurt anyone.

Wrong BLM.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Leonidas

Do you pay grazing fees? Are you required by permit to maintain the ground your herd feeds on?



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

and it only applies to washington dc. If the federal government no longer wanted to have DC as a federal district itt would revert back to Maryland, if they choose to accept it back.
edit on 18-2-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Correct!

That is the ONLY federal territory that legally remains to this day.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

No its the only federal district as its the seat of government.

All other federal property is lawful. Please read the property clause. Im getting tired of repeating myself every time you make a false claim.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

Yes, of course we do. In Alberta and Montana.

We (all ranchers) receive a benefit from grazing (fattening) our cattle. By using government land we can have more cattle (inventory) to raise and profit from.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

The property clause applies to territories.

Are states not sovereign entities part of as union?

Wording is very crucial, you know that.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Leonidas

What does the government do with your funds to restore those grazed lands?



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

Depends on the government (two Federal, one provincial, one state, two counties and an M.D.), and it depends on the specifics of the land, leases/rights/waterways/right-of-ways involved. But for the most part we look after it ourselves.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Xcathdra

The property clause applies to territories.

Are states not sovereign entities part of as union?

Wording is very crucial, you know that.


Wrong again -


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.[10]


States are sovereign which is why they have to approve land acquisition by the Federal government. The antiquities acct also applies.

Yes wording is crucial so I am unsure why you are telling me that when you are ignoring the very words in question.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 06:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

So are states sovereign or not? There is a clear article in the constitution regarding territories. I was under the impression once a state became a state it no longer is a territory.




top topics



 
20
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join