What's new

Anybody payin attention

I'd like to know if these same people would stand up for Treasure Hunters & Gold Miners/Dredgers/etc ?

Or if this is just a case of one sided "Cowboy" Love :unhappysmiley:


It would be alot easier to help stand up for them if they did something besides write a "strongly worded letter". We have a hard time seeing those, and it would be lucky if it made to someones desk, they probably go straight to the trash.

Sometimes it takes optics.
 
Sometimes it takes optics.

Not to mention a swift boot in the azz to make them see the light.No room in there for a boot and a head at the same time.
 
No room in there for a boot and a head at the same time.

True dat!

ROTF_LMAO_zps44758585.gif
 
I have dealt with the BLM quite a bit myself as a gold prospector and business owner in Arizona, and you speak the truth about 99.8% of those in the BLM and USFS being, "about as intelligent as a turnip." I am not saying I agree with everything the government is doing. I am saying that I personally believe this cattleman brought this grief down on himself by fighting an unlawful and unwinnable battle. I don’t believe this is a fight for his “rights” or for “state’s rights.” I think this is just another arrogant cattle rancher that thinks he is God and has the right to do whatever he wants whether the BLM likes it or not.


May I make a suggestion, "STOP THINKING OUT LOUD"

FROM ONE OF THE EDITORS OF THE ROSEBURG BEACON NEWS subscribe here: 541-672-2222 If you can handle the Truth!!
For all of those who wondered why Cliven Bundy hadn't paid his grazing fees for so long, here is a good summary of why I think he and his family are standup folks...

This is the best explanation I have read on the reason why a person would not want to enter into a contract with the BLM and thus would not pay any grazing fees to them. Offer to pay to the county but not deal with the BLM. I did not write this so if you repost or copy and paste please credit the author.

Written By Kena Lytle Gloeckner

There have been a lot of people criticizing Clive Bundy because he did not pay his grazing fees for 20 years. The public is also probably wondering why so many other cowboys are supporting Mr. Bundy even though they paid their fees and Clive did not. What you people probably do not realize is that on every rancher's grazing permit it says the following: "You are authorized to make grazing use of the lands, under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management and covered by this grazing permit, upon your acceptance of the terms and conditions of this grazing permit and payment of grazing fees when due." The "mandatory" terms and conditions go on to list the allotment, the number and kind of livestock to be grazed, when the permit begins and ends, the number of active or suspended AUMs (animal units per month), etc. The terms and conditions also list specific requirements such as where salt or mineral supplements can be located, maximum allowable use of forage levels (40% of annual growth), etc., and include a lot more stringent policies that must be adhered to. Every rancher must sign this "contract" agreeing to abide by the TERMS AND CONDITIONS before he or she can make payment.
In the early 90s, the BLM went on a frenzy and drastically cut almost every rancher's permit because of this desert tortoise issue, even though all of us ranchers knew that cow and desert tortoise had co-existed for a hundred+ years. As an example, a family friend had his permit cut by 90%. For those of you who are non ranchers, that would be equated to getting your paycheck cut 90%. In 1976 there were approximately 52 ranching permittees in this area of Nevada. Presently, there are 3. Most of these people lost their livelihoods because of the actions of the BLM. Clive Bundy was one of these people who received extremely unfair and unreasonable TERMS AND CONDITIONS. Keep in mind that Mr. Bundy was required to sign this contract before he was allowed to pay. Had Clive signed on the dotted line, he would have, in essence, signed his very livelihood away. And so Mr. Bundy took a stand, not only for himself, but for all of us. He refused to be destroyed by a tyrannical federal entity and to have his American liberties and freedoms taken away. Also keep in mind that all ranchers financially paid dearly for the forage rights those permits allow - - not rights to the land, but rights to use the forage that grows on that land. Many of these AUMS are water based, meaning that the rancher also has a vested right (state owned, not federal) to the waters that adjoin the lands and allow the livestock to drink. These water rights were also purchased at a great price.
If a rancher cannot show beneficial use of the water (he must have the appropriate number of livestock that drinks and uses that water), then he loses that water right. Usually water rights and forage rights go hand in hand. Contrary to what the BLM is telling you, they NEVER compensate a rancher for the AUMs they take away. Most times, they tell ranchers that their AUMS are "suspended," but not removed. Unfortunately, my family has thousands of "suspended" AUMs that will probably never be returned. And so, even though these ranchers throughout the course of a hundred years invested thousands(and perhaps millions) of dollars and sacrificed along the way to obtain these rights through purchase from others, at a whim the government can take everything away with the stroke of a pen. This is the very thing that Clive Bundy singlehandedly took a stand against. Thank you, Clive, from a rancher who considers you a hero.

Written By Kena Lytle Gloeckner
Loma Wharton. Co-Chair
www.liberators2004 dot org
V.A.C.A.T.E. - Valiantly Affirming Constitutional Authority Through Education
 
Thanks Jog.

The Sheriff of Nottingham(BLM) has adopted the guise of Robin Hood to affect the fleecing of those greedy, fat cat Ranchers and prospectors. They now try to use the control of your thoughts through propaganda and it looks as if they have been winning.

Most Americans have no Idea what the BLM is,or does, that is good for a start, that means less pushback because of ignorance. And then the BLM has a much larger trumpet so that when the uninformed populace hears their proclamations and nothing else it is easier to sway the uninformed. It doesn't hurt their effort when the new mantra across the land echoes a belief in a class stratification that never existed, and should never exist in this country where every man should only be constrained by his own output, and within the morality of civilization.

When I was young, before ranchers had all manners of vandalism and lawlessness thrust across their property and holdings, and even before the BLM themselves knew the entirety of what their charter would become, gates were unlocked. If you go through one you latch it behind you, you respect the land and you cause no deleterious effects. Honest Americans were free to come and go. through the "managed" lands.

I believe that was the idea behind the BLM. Manage lands that looked to have limited potential, manage them for the state that they resided in, not for the Federal Gov. Looking back across time it looks like it was a planned confiscation from the start, no one I knew suspected it would Ever happen.


I have worked cattle all over the BLM, I have explored and been a rock hound across those lands too. It is shameful what is happening, and the BLM is an entity whose time should be waning, as a usurper of property rights in America!
 
Last edited:
Also.


CLIVEN BUNDY AGREES
PUBLIC LAND IS NOT FEDERAL LAND.
LAND TRANSFER IS NEITHER THE ISSUE NOR THE SOLUTION.

http://www.glennbeck.com/2014/04/14/nevada-rancher-i-did-not-graze-my-cattle-on-united-states-property/

"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 people, and 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.

"Essentially, Bundy is saying this conflict isn’t inherently about grazing fees or water rights, but that he ultimately does not recognize the lands to be federal and the United States government or the BLM do not have jurisdiction on the land."

I agree with Bundy, with one important distinction.

AN IMPORTANT POINT OF CLARIFICATION


THE PEOPLE ARE THE STATE

According to Black's Law Dictionary 5th Edition (found on page 1262), the definition of State is "A people permanently occupying a fixed territory bound together by common-law habits and custom into one body politic exercising, through the medium of an organization government, independent sovereignty and control over all persons and things within its boundaries..." In other words, the People are the State.


STATE LANDS BELONG TO THE PEOPLE

The expression "State land" is correct, but only when properly understood to mean the People's land. Americans have been greatly deceived and are utterly confused because they don't understand the meanings and legal distinctions between words. "State" and "State government" are not synonymous. They are two very different things. Supreme Court decisions confirm this fact. And it is a very important distinction, because one implication as that state lands do not belong not to the state's government. They are an asset, a treasure if you will, that belongs to the People, either individually as private property, or collectively as public land.


THE "GOVERNMENT" OF A STATE IS NOT THE "STATE"

What, then, is government? Government representatives are agents of the People, receiving their authority from the People, and accepting the duty to exercise this authority on behalf of the People to support and enforce the national and state constitutions.

Therein lies the problem.

Currently, many if not most state and local representatives are in breach of their fiduciary duty to the People by taking money from the federal government. In so doing, they create a massive conflict of interest, effectively becoming agents of the federal government, more concerned about the money than the People's rights. I know this first hand. Many, if not most, county representatives, for example, are more concerned about what the local federal agent has to say than what the People say, for fear of pissing off the federal government and losing the money. That's why we are losing our rights and lands; how Common Core education is creeping in; and how Agenda 21 gets traction.

In so doing, our representatives become co-conspirators in the unconstitutional expansion of federal authority; breach their fiduciary duty to the People and to their constitutions; and act under color of law; all of which have legal remedies, not just political ones.

As bad as those implications are, one only understands the full impact by understanding the fraud behind our current "monetary system". "Money" "given" to a state by the federal government is borrowed from the privately owned federal reserve system These debts are never repaid. They become perpetual debts, growing with interest. Like a snowball rolling down hill, they just continue growing until they consume all of our personal and national wealth and property, and the People are enslaved, forever laboring to pay off debts that cannot be repaid. Thus, the states' acceptance of federal "money" just deepens and accelerates our slavery. There is a reason why "bond" is the root word for "bondage".

It's about time the People wake up, and act accordingly.


WE EITHER RESTORE LOCAL GOVERNMENT, OR SUFFER GLOBAL GOVERNANCE.


KIrk MacKenzie
www.DefendRuralAmerica.com
 
We all know that Harry Reid is corrupt ...

sent from a potato...
 
That right there is exactly what is destroying our country, having to feel we have to have *sides*
Hate me for saying it, that's fine, but nothing will get better with everybody so divided.

Mike
Not going to happen Mike. Too much bad blood with some people determined to force change on those who respect the old ways and the rest determined to keep things the same at all cost. I agree that it's destroying our country though. Our founding fathers are rolling over in their graves.. I was simply asking Terry to clarify what his position is on this issue. He changes his mind from day to day...
 
Last edited:
That right there is exactly what is destroying our country, having to feel we have to have *sides*
Hate me for saying it, that's fine, but nothing will get better with everybody so divided.

Mike

United we stand divided we fall...however that's the plan.

sent from a potato...
 
appears to be Getting political IMO
 
appears to be Getting political IMO

It's important this thread doesn't get closed. This is an important issue that should be seen from all parties as a wrongdoing...

sent from a potato...
 
If it's political it will get moved to the new politics forum under Charter Members forum. Admin will start moving threads he considers political...







American by birth, Patriot by choice.

I would rather die standing on my two feet defending our Constitution than live a lifetime on my knees......
 
...And this definitely qualifies, BUT OP is not a charter member, so I'm trying to figure out what to do about that. No fun to have your thread moved to a place where you can't get to it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom