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.

 

Arizona Demands Return of Federal Lands - A Step in the Right Direction?

page: 3
16
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by stanguilles7
 



Well, technically speaking, I think the people which border AZ in CA, UT, NV and NM might at least be able to argue that whatever AZ does indeed impacts them as well.


Argue to who? Actually they have NO SAY unless they pay taxes in Arizona.




But as for your argument that this somehow represents the will of the entire state of AZ, I'm a bit skeptical. This wasn't something voted on by the public. It's being proposed by a handful of legislators. I mean, it *might* pass. But it hardly represents the lockstep will of all of Arizona.


Did Obamacare pass with unanimous consent? As far as I can tell Obamacare affects us all yet 49% of American’s don’t want it. You can’t change the voting criteria to benefit you just because you don’t support a certain issue. What percent is "lockstep" just so we're all clear?



Nothing I have stated here is a defense of the Federal Government


I hear you…Devil’s advocate.



edit on 25-4-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 10:15 PM
link   
Say what you will about the National Park system, to ignore the fact that Arizona wouldn't even HAVE these resources to ponder liquidating for tax revenue without that protection for the past decades is missing an important point.

Sure, give the power to the State. But I seriously doubt the same fools in Arizona who sold of their state house and then bought it back at a loss are going to make any resource deals that actually end up benefiting anyone other than themselves.



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by stanguilles7
 





But as for your argument that this somehow represents the will of the entire state of AZ, I'm a bit skeptical. This wasn't something voted on by the public. It's being proposed by a handful of legislators. I mean, it *might* pass. But it hardly represents the lockstep will of all of Arizona.


Did Obamacare pass with unanimous consent? As far as I can tell Obamacare affects us all yet 49% of American’s don’t want it. You can’t change the voting criteria on things you don’t support.



What the hell does 'obamacare' have to do with this?

Where have I stated anywhere my approval of 'obamacare'?



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 10:17 PM
link   
reply to post by stanguilles7
 



So now you want to count all of the oil in the US as property of Arizona? What an odd change of heart. And here I thought we were specifically talking about the resources within Arizona.


I provided an example of where STATE RESOURCES benefit STATE CITIZENS…try to keep up.



Also, why do you think oil is the only resource I am referring to? Your claim was that Arizona has enough resources under it's feet to last for the next 200 years. Now you want to talk about how much oil the US has?


My point is that its none of your business what they want to do with their land, sir!


If they want to burn it to the ground you still have no say!



Back on Topic:

If the entire state of Arizona really wants to sell off their land to the highest bidder, personally I say go for it. But it's an idiotic move, andwrapping it in some notion of 'states rights' is just the way the companies who will actually profit from those sales packages it to people who most certainly will not reap any substantial, long-term gain from a multi-national corporation coming in and sucking up every last ounce of wood, water, and every mineral they can market

But sure. Put it on the ballot this year. Make it a true 'vote of the people' and see if it passes.


It is up for signature by the governor….it’s already been voted on!



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by stanguilles7
 



Say what you will about the National Park system, to ignore the fact that Arizona wouldn't even HAVE these resources to ponder liquidating for tax revenue without that protection for the past decades is missing an important point.


That is a backwards argument. It’s the state’s land!
They don’t need the FED to protect it. If it had been in the state’s control all this time who knows what it would look like? You’re merely speculating.



Sure, give the power to the State. But I seriously doubt the same fools in Arizona who sold of their state house and then bought it back at a loss are going to make any resource deals that actually end up benefiting anyone other than themselves.


Why do you think 1) you know what they will do, and 2) you have any say in the matter?


Get over yourself!



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 10:24 PM
link   
How can they miss the fact that Arizona had those resources long before they joined the union?

Bottom line is it is their land their say and unless you live there anyone telling them what they should be doing is moot.
edit on 25-4-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by stanguilles7
 



What the hell does 'obamacare' have to do with this?

Where have I stated anywhere my approval of 'obamacare'?


Do you have a hard time remembering your own arguments?

YOU SAID:

it hardly represents the lockstep will of all of Arizona.


And I pointed out that NOTHING is EVER lockstep with everyone and I used Obamacare as a current example. Try to keep up!! Maybe you should READ SLOWER?


edit on 25-4-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Oh, sweet lord. You implied I somehow support "obamacare', which I haven't made any kind of comment on whatsoever.

Your trolling is obvious. You want to paint me as a 'liberal' merely because I point out a flaw in your logic. Just because someone disagrees with you doesnt make them an Obama supporter. To be honest, I feel sorry for people who can only think in such absolutes.

I've stated several times in this thread that I have no problem with Arizona passing this law. I'm merely pointing out that calling it 'the will of the people' is hyperbole.

If you want to call this bill, passed by a handful of legislators the 'will of the people', then put it on the ballot in November. It's a very reasonable statement..
edit on 25-4-2012 by stanguilles7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by detachedindividual

Do you not think that the people of that state should be the one to make that kind of decision?



I have to get to my writing so I'm going to keep this brief.

Technically, in cases like this, we do. Everybody in the State Capitol building who is voting on this were voted in by the citizens of Arizona. So by virtue of that, technically we ARE having a say in it. but not really. Our state representatives and politicians are supposed to be just that; representing us. That's their job. Problem is, cases like this where the Federal Government is involved are not put to a public vote. Just a house vote. That's how the system here in America works. In cases like this politicians kind of have to read our minds and GUESS what we the citizens would want.

But you're right, we in Arizona should have a say in it since it is PUBLIC land.

And just for the record, I think Brewer is going to sign it




posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 11:55 AM
link   
Actually, a process has already been undertaken by virtually all of the states to free themselves from the corporation of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Many are as yet incomplete. Check here to see if yours has made the list!
westernfrontamerica.com...



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by MiddleClassWarrior
 



If we are so worried about "lands" being taken away, why doesn't Arizona hand over their entire state back to the Indians?

Come on Freedom bleeding lovers!


Really???


If liberals are so worried about freedom of choice then why don’t they stop worrying about what states do with their own land? Isn’t it the state’s choice?

Last time I checked the FED was supposed to honor state’s rights.


Funny stuff. It was all Federal land before it was state land. I'm sure that some of that land will be made available to the state in the future...for fair market value.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag

Last time I checked the FED was supposed to honor state’s rights.


Sure. And The Fed will honor their rights...to shut down the Interstate into and out of Arizona. See how that works?



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by usernameconspiracy
 





Funny stuff. It was all Federal land before it was state land. I'm sure that some of that land will be made available to the state in the future...for fair market value.


By Federal, do you mean " Crown " land in this statement? You should read the Declaration of Independence.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   
State anarchy is nothing new, look at CO and CA and their support for marijuana for instance.

What is really interesting about all of this is whether or not this particular legislation - state control issue - will be the one that sets off the Fed militarily. Assume this passes? How many other states, if any, will be allowed to kick sand in the Feds face and live to tell about it?

Think back to Lincoln, he had a breaking point too.

It doesn't ake much in this day and age of instant commo before the momentum of this kind of anarchy catches the wind. I doubt this will be The One Incident but could it be The Starting Incident?



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Notice how they are called "Interstate" and not "Interfed" highways. The power was from the beginning and remains to this day vested with the states! Easily checked by anyone should you doubt that!

Also, last I heard through the pipe-line was that the majority of the military backs the people!

edit on 26-4-2012 by ajay59 because: to add



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Arizona has become like a crazy Uncle
no one visits anymore. His trailer is falling apart,
(But he's got Satellite TV and limitless ammo).
People try to say "Hey crazy Uncle, see no one
tried to take your trailer or your guns."
But then he just shoots at you. Muttering something
about Mexicans and that devil president.



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by sealing
Arizona has become like a crazy Uncle
no one visits anymore. His trailer is falling apart,
(But he's got Satellite TV and limitless ammo).
People try to say "Hey crazy Uncle, see no one
tried to take your trailer or your guns."
But then he just shoots at you. Muttering something
about Mexicans and that devil president.


If what it takes is a crazy ol'e drunken uncle to get the job done I say, give him a case of ammo and a case of his favorite booze! At least the job would be getting done, albeit reclously!



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by ajay59
 



If what it takes is a crazy ol'e drunken uncle to get the job done I say, give him a case of ammo and a case of his favorite booze! At least the job would be getting done, albeit reclously!


You got that right!


I'm kind of partial to crazy uncle Joe and crazy aunt Jan over there in Arizona. This country would be much better off with more people like those two. Nobody is perfect but at least they both draw a line in the sand (no pun intended) once in a while. 

If Arizona succeeds I'd like to see Arizona president Brewer and Arizona secretary of defense Arpiao. That beats the two bozos holding those two federal positions.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 





How can they miss the fact that Arizona had those resources long before they joined the union?


What about the Indians?

Not willing to go back that far heh?

no problem we all get it. No need to explain.




posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by MiddleClassWarrior
 


So let the Government keep it?

No need to explain.



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join