Land Grab

USFREEDOM911 said:
But you could have just answered the question; but I know how difficult that is, when you have an agenda that you want to promote.
Click to expand...

since you're a statist, it wouldn't matter to you if there were evidence that Reid set this in motion to give the land to his contributors, since all the fines were applied fairly. perfectly legal land grab as far as you're concerned, right??
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
But you could have just answered the question; but I know how difficult that is, when you have an agenda that you want to promote.
Click to expand...

Your questions are irrelevant and do not begin to cover the scope and complexity of this case which has been going on for 20+ years. Again, trying to reduce it to a few basic questions shows that you have almost no understanding about whats happening in Nevada. Where's your question about Harry Reid? Where's your question about the desert tortoise? Where's your question about Harvey Whittemore? Where's your question about the 52 other ranchers that the government ran off the land and put out of business? Where's your question about the fees that Bundy HAS paid to Clark County? Where's your question about why the Feds would need to send 200 BLM and FBI agents with automatic weapons, sniper rifles, surveillance equipment etc, etc....
 
SmarterthanYou said:
since you're a statist, it wouldn't matter to you if there were evidence that Reid set this in motion to give the land to his contributors, since all the fines were applied fairly. perfectly legal land grab as far as you're concerned, right??
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that those fees and fines apply only to Bundy; but everyone else on BLM land gets a pass?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
Your questions are irrelevant and do not begin to cover the scope and complexity of this case which has been going on for 20+ years. Again, trying to reduce it to a few basic questions shows that you have almost no understanding about whats happening in Nevada. Where's your question about Harry Reid? Where's your question about the desert tortoise? Where's your question about Harvey Whittemore? Where's your question about the 52 other ranchers that the government ran off the land and put out of business? Where's your question about the fees that Bundy HAS paid to Clark County? Where's your question about why the Feds would need to send 200 BLM and FBI agents with automatic weapons, sniper rifles, surveillance equipment etc, etc....
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that those fees and fines apply only to Bundy; but everyone else on BLM land gets a pass?
 
indago said:
That was a nice rant...
Click to expand...
Rant? Yes. Loud? Yes.

Fact based? not even close. But, nobody seems to be interested in facts anyway.

Bundy owns 160 acres of his own. Why not just run cattle on his own land? The fee to use FEDERAL land is a pittance. To claim that these fees put ranchers out of business, is ludicrous.


The complex case of Cliven Bundy raises questions about grazing permits, tortoises and ranchers’ rights.

Here are a few answers:

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2014/apr/11/q-behind-bundy-blm-battle/
 
SmarterthanYou said:
it certainly wouldn't be the first time that a government destroyed lives to steal land, and it certainly won't be the last.
Click to expand...

But, but, but you've got your guns and freedom why don't you beat that wicked government down. Not only that, but you are the government and have the vote and it's all about freedom and freedom...and guns...and guns..
 
indago said:
Yes, I'm reminded of the case of DONALD SCOTT
Click to expand...

They don't appear to be the same. In the Scott case they appear to have sought possession of Scott's property; in this case all they seem to want is for him to remove his cattle from federal land which he obviously does not own and for him to pay the back rents that he owes for the use of that land for grazing his cattle to the federal government, that is, you and me, and everyone else here.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
maybe you should find out WHY those fees and fines were implemented. follow the money, aka harry reid and his contributors
Click to expand...


Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Yeah, that inept Harry Reid who can't get a federal judge approved by the Senate runs every other department of the federal government.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
since you're a statist, it wouldn't matter to you if there were evidence that Reid set this in motion to give the land to his contributors, since all the fines were applied fairly. perfectly legal land grab as far as you're concerned, right??
Click to expand...

All they are doing is telling him to remove his cattle and pay his rent! Bundy by paying rent to the state has already admitted that the land isn't his, it's rental property. The federal government can take the land from the state if the state officials, and Bundy isn't one of those, decide to let the federal government have primary jurisdiction over the land. If Bundy was/is paying rent prior to this then ipso facto he was admitting that the land belonged to someone else and was/is not his. So there is no claim about prior family ownership, he already gave that up when he started paying rent to the state. It seems to me all he is really arguing about is who he thinks he owes rent to.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
Your questions are irrelevant and do not begin to cover the scope and complexity of this case which has been going on for 20+ years. Again, trying to reduce it to a few basic questions shows that you have almost no understanding about whats happening in Nevada. Where's your question about Harry Reid? Where's your question about the desert tortoise? Where's your question about Harvey Whittemore? Where's your question about the 52 other ranchers that the government ran off the land and put out of business? Where's your question about the fees that Bundy HAS paid to Clark County? Where's your question about why the Feds would need to send 200 BLM and FBI agents with automatic weapons, sniper rifles, surveillance equipment etc, etc....
Click to expand...

"Where's your question about the fees that Bundy HAS paid to Clark County?" admitting through such payments that he doesn't own the land.
 
Dantès said:
All they are doing is telling him to remove his cattle and pay his rent! Bundy by paying rent to the state has already admitted that the land isn't his, it's rental property. The federal government can take the land from the state if the state officials, and Bundy isn't one of those, decide to let the federal government have primary jurisdiction over the land. If Bundy was/is paying rent prior to this then ipso facto he was admitting that the land belonged to someone else and was/is not his. So there is no claim about prior family ownership, he already gave that up when he started paying rent to the state. It seems to me all he is really arguing about is who he thinks he owes rent to.
Click to expand...

The land he is allowing his cattle to graze on for free was federal land before Nevada even became a state, people jumped on this before they had the facts, or they just wanted a reason to point guns at federal agents!
 
Sardonic said:
The land he is allowing his cattle to graze on for free was federal land before Nevada even became a state, people jumped on this before they had the facts, or they just wanted a reason to point guns at federal agents!
Click to expand...

yet i've noticed that not a single one of you so called 'free speech' warriors have said a damned thing about the 'free speech' zones. just like I stated in MY OP, you'd agree with them wholeheartedly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top