Originally Posted by Robbie

I listened to the man himself on the radio yesterday. And Mr. Bundy said he had 500 cattle. Not 1,000 and not "thousands"

He also said that the govt. had taken approximately 300 of his cattle as of yesterday, which left him with 200 or so cows.

I don't know where all these sites are getting info from. But I'm taking it straight from the source.

He also said that his family had used those lands for open range grazing since the 1880's. As have several other ranchers. That is the way it was done historically.

And he also pointed out that the land does NOT belong to the Federal Govt.

He also said that he has paid "grazing fees" to Clark County, NV
The land is Clark County property is what he stated on the radio and that he pays them every year.

He also pointed out the absurdity of the BLM's claim that cows are harming the tortoises!!!

Cows don't hurt turtles.
And Mr. Bundy pointed that out. His family and other ranchers have been here from the beginning of Nevada. I think that anybody with common sense would realize a cow doesn't hurt a turtle.

What's next? Is the BLM going to start hunting down every animal that lives on those lands EXCEPT the turtle...so the turtle can be "safe"???

The first thing the BLM should do is remove itself. They themselves KILLED 1,000 of these "endangered" tortoises because the population of them is out of control.

I'm reading through these posts, and the one thing I don't understand is:
How does the govt. come in on lands it does not own with all of it's resources and power...then bully a hard working ranching family: Then somehow this becomes an argument about "right wingers" and "conspiracy nuts"???

It's happening right in front of our faces.
The govt. is overreaching.
It doesn't matter if you are a "Democrat" or a "Republican" or if you own a gun or not.

This is the kind of thing that our country was founded to NOT have happen to our citizens.

And the BLM creating an imaginary "First Amendment Zone"? What the fuck is that?
And then a "No fly zone" over the property so the news helicopters couldn't film them?

What was the guy supposed to do?

I'm GLAD that some people are not going to let the govt. push them around like that.

And in my humble opinion it shows why gun ownership IS still an important thing in this country.

It's just my opinion. I've seen in the last few decades a steady erosion of freedom in this country. It's all been "baby steps" so you don't notice the little incremental moves.

But when you step back and look at it as a whole...especially since 9-11, the govt. is way out of control.

Originally Posted by dyna mo

I don't know how accurate this is

::::::::

The land has belonged to the federal government since 1848, when it was acquired under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.

From 1848 until passage of the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, the federal government allowed free grazing on federal open range. The Taylor Grazing Act provided for grazing permits within the grazing districts established under the act. The permits required the payment of grazing fees.

The Taylor Grazing Act was subsequently pre-empted by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, which continued to provide for grazing fees.

The grazing contracts have a ten-year term.

Nevada open-range law specifically recognizes federal grazing contract provisions as Nevada law.

From 1934 to 1993, the Bundy family had a grazing contract with the federal government and paid the grazing fee.

In 1993, Clive Bundy refused to sign a new grazing agreement with the BLM because the new agreement limited the number of cattle on the allotment (due to the presence of an endangered species of tortoise) and increased the grazing fee.

Originally Posted by Robbie

As I understood what Bundy said:
It is NOT federal land. It belongs to the state of Nevada and Clark County in particular. Or to "the people" as it should.

It IS a "federally protected" land. Meaning that they can say the tortoise is being "hurt" by the cows.

I have no way other than what I can find online of knowing if that is accurate or not.

I have heard a number that says the Federal Govt. owns 28% of all land in the U.S. (which is kinda fucked up if you ask me).

Originally Posted by Robbie

As I understood what Bundy said:
It is NOT federal land. It belongs to the state of Nevada and Clark County in particular. Or to "the people" as it should.

It IS a "federally protected" land. Meaning that they can say the tortoise is being "hurt" by the cows.

I have no way other than what I can find online of knowing if that is accurate or not.

I have heard a number that says the Federal Govt. owns 28% of all land in the U.S. (which is kinda fucked up if you ask me).

Originally Posted by trevesty

Sweet, but knowing that you'd consider a conspiracy site worthy of mentioning says a lot. Police state usa? come on.. at least some of the other ones TRY to hide their paranoid dip shit bias. Anyways, only Fox News and offgridsurvival.com mention that quote that I see in the top 10. So.. a company that lies consistently and this has been documented, and then another conspiracy site. Awesome.

http://lasvegassun.com/news/2014/apr...ully-not-hero/
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2014...dy-blm-battle/

Again, came down to a far-right traditionalist dork wanting to have his cake and eat it, too, but got his feelings all hurt when the government decided to stop baking the cake entirely. Pretty typical.

Originally Posted by crockett

There isn't anything fucked up with the Federal govt owning land. That means that we usually have access to that land.

The national forest, beaches and even BLM land is something to be thankful over, not complain about..

Originally Posted by trevesty

I know you live in Vegas, but not sure if you've ever driven through Utah / Montana, etc. There is a TON of wide open space - beautiful drive, though.

Originally Posted by Robbie

I haven't done that yet. But I've been wanting to. Maybe this will be the summer I'll do that. I get so caught up in work that I haven't took a proper NON-working vacation in 4 years.

Originally Posted by AaronM

Let me tell you how I came to post that link....

I recalled the facts from a facebook post and discussions I've had with people at the site in question. I then searched Google and posted the first link. That's how much "consideration" I put into the conspiracy thing.

The bottom line here is that you think that because something is posted to a "conspiracy" site that by default, it as no factual basis.

Like I said in my initial post here: "This thread is overflowing with misinformation and ignorant opinions."

Originally Posted by trevesty

If a place consistently cries "wolf" about every single thing the government does and puts a far-right, cry baby spin on it, I won't trust it ever. The same as I won't trust a person who constantly cries wolf. It's called being rational.

Originally Posted by Robbie

What I don't get is...where the hell are all the LIBERAL websites calling out the govt?

It's like liberals just "sold out" and surrendered.

In the 1960's the young people rose up and protested AGAINST the govt.
They didn't believe in what we were doing in Vietnam and didn't trust the govt. for shit.

Where are the Abbie Hoffman's of today?

These days it seems that the "progressive" movement is just rubber stamping with approval any and everything the govt. does.

And anybody that stands up to the govt. is "right wing" and a "gun nut" (not that a lot of them aren't...but I"m just saying why aren't the liberals in there standing up against the govt. as well?)

We need some REAL progressives and liberals to stand up like the liberal youth movement of the 1960's did.
They would be ashamed of this new breed of elitist, govt. loving liberal.

At least that's my opinion.

Even though I was born too late to be a "hippy"...I am 100% in tune with a lot of what they believed in as far as wanting to be free and not trusting the govt like some kind of sheep.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I, therefore, intend to oppose the effort to increase America's debt.
Barack Obama

Originally Posted by Robbie

Typical politician. Thing is, I believed Obama when he said that.
I believed it because he was right!

And then he took office and threw out all that and went right to work acting like a typical career politician.

In my opinion he is Bush "on steroids" as far as cronyism and pushing for bigger more oppressive govt.

Originally Posted by AaronM

?Years ago, I used to have 52 neighboring ranchers,? he said. ?I?m the last man standing. How come? Because BLM regulated these people off the land and out of business.?

http://www.policestateusa.com/2014/cliven-bundy-part-1/

Originally Posted by Robbie

What I don't get is...where the hell are all the LIBERAL websites calling out the govt?

It's like liberals just "sold out" and surrendered.

In the 1960's the young people rose up and protested AGAINST the govt.
They didn't believe in what we were doing in Vietnam and didn't trust the govt. for shit.

Where are the Abbie Hoffman's of today?

These days it seems that the "progressive" movement is just rubber stamping with approval any and everything the govt. does.

And anybody that stands up to the govt. is "right wing" and a "gun nut" (not that a lot of them aren't...but I"m just saying why aren't the liberals in there standing up against the govt. as well?)

We need some REAL progressives and liberals to stand up like the liberal youth movement of the 1960's did.
They would be ashamed of this new breed of elitist, govt. loving liberal.

At least that's my opinion.

Even though I was born too late to be a "hippy"...I am 100% in tune with a lot of what they believed in as far as wanting to be free and not trusting the govt like some kind of sheep.

Originally Posted by sperbonzo

This federal land-grabbing is happening all over the US.

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/04/1291...tire-property/


"Now that the federal government has decided to retreat from the heated battle over Cliven Bundy?s cattle, we can all breathe a sigh of relief, right? Maybe not.

A Colorado couple, Andy and Ceil Barrie, are battling Summit County commissioners who decided to seize their mountainside property via eminent domain. Why? To preserve the acreage and protect the wildlife.

[The] battle is a unique test of private property rights. Unlike in countless other cases, where local governments have used those powers to seize land to make way for a road or some economic development project, Colorado?s Summit County is using eminent domain to go after the Barries? land simply because officials want the open space.

Two years ago, Andy and Ceil Barrie bought two pieces of land: a house in an established subdivision, and another piece of property at a higher elevation, accessible by an old mining road.

The Barrie?s property is surrounded by 2.2 million acres of White River National Forest. It includes an old mining cabin, an outhouse and a shuttered gold mine.

The trouble began when the U.S. Forest Service got after the couple for using a utility vehicle to drive from their home to the cabin. All on their own private property, mind you.

Summit County then tried to buy the property ? but the Barries didn?t want to sell. That?s when the county played its trump card:

Unbeknownst to the Barries, the previous owner had remodeled the cabin without permits. So county commissioners voted to condemn the property for wiring and plumbing ? even though the cabin has none ? and filed for eminent domain.

As for the eventual outcome, the Barries aren?t optimistic:

?I understand that we are all trying to save these beautiful mountains and make them accessible to everyone, but you know that property has been sitting there since President Garfield signed our land patent, and we?re not doing anything bad there,? Ceil Barrie said.

Asked if recent mediation pointed to a way for the coupleto keep the land in the family name and avoid eminent domain, Andy Barrie responded flatly, ?No, they?re taking it.?

The Barries say they have no plans to develop their property or sell it.

So, should the government be able to confiscate private property because of what might happen ? vs. what is happening? You make the call."




Meanwhile the feds are set to take over another 5.2 MILLION acres this year alone.

Why? And where the hell did they come up with the power to do that?



.


.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

Idiots on here think I'm a republican time and time again, I'm not, I just don't like our president because of things like this.

Originally Posted by crockett

Did you miss the whole Occupy movement. It wasn't perfect by far and much of the stuff they protested about was fairly ridiculous, however you can not deny that it wasn't largely a liberal movement and they were very much against what the govt was doing and the govt beat the shit out of them. All you rightward thinking types couldn't get over yourselves laughing and calling them names even supporting the cops whom beat them up.

Originally Posted by Robbie

I never thought they were protesting the govt. at all.

They were protesting Wall Street and "income inequality".

I'm talking about citizens standing up against the federal govt.
I did think the Occupy movement was interesting...at first. And then they started turning it into a circus. (I guess that probably happens no matter what).

Do I think that "Occupy" was on the same level as the college students at Kent State back in 1970? Hell no.

The federal govt. has become the biggest thing in the world. It's bigger than Wall Street. It's bigger than all the big corporations put together.

And as we learn something new seemingly every week (now the NSA and the "heartbleed" virus)...it's pretty apparent that the feds are pulling shady shit constantly.

Think about it a second...our federal govt. is spying on us, torturing people around the world, holding people prisoner with no trial for YEARS, killing people in other sovereign nations with drones...and that's just the stuff we know about!

If you changed "USA" to "Soviet Union during the 1970's" it would read the exact same way.

Originally Posted by _Richard_

isn't a protest against wall street a protest against the federal government?

Originally Posted by sperbonzo

This federal land-grabbing is happening all over the US.

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/04/1291...tire-property/


"Now that the federal government has decided to retreat from the heated battle over Cliven Bundy?s cattle, we can all breathe a sigh of relief, right? Maybe not.

A Colorado couple, Andy and Ceil Barrie, are battling Summit County commissioners who decided to seize their mountainside property via eminent domain. Why? To preserve the acreage and protect the wildlife.

[The] battle is a unique test of private property rights. Unlike in countless other cases, where local governments have used those powers to seize land to make way for a road or some economic development project, Colorado?s Summit County is using eminent domain to go after the Barries? land simply because officials want the open space.

Two years ago, Andy and Ceil Barrie bought two pieces of land: a house in an established subdivision, and another piece of property at a higher elevation, accessible by an old mining road.

The Barrie?s property is surrounded by 2.2 million acres of White River National Forest. It includes an old mining cabin, an outhouse and a shuttered gold mine.

The trouble began when the U.S. Forest Service got after the couple for using a utility vehicle to drive from their home to the cabin. All on their own private property, mind you.

Summit County then tried to buy the property ? but the Barries didn?t want to sell. That?s when the county played its trump card:

Unbeknownst to the Barries, the previous owner had remodeled the cabin without permits. So county commissioners voted to condemn the property for wiring and plumbing ? even though the cabin has none ? and filed for eminent domain.

As for the eventual outcome, the Barries aren?t optimistic:

?I understand that we are all trying to save these beautiful mountains and make them accessible to everyone, but you know that property has been sitting there since President Garfield signed our land patent, and we?re not doing anything bad there,? Ceil Barrie said.

Asked if recent mediation pointed to a way for the coupleto keep the land in the family name and avoid eminent domain, Andy Barrie responded flatly, ?No, they?re taking it.?

The Barries say they have no plans to develop their property or sell it.

So, should the government be able to confiscate private property because of what might happen ? vs. what is happening? You make the call."




Meanwhile the feds are set to take over another 5.2 MILLION acres this year alone.

Why? And where the hell did they come up with the power to do that?



.


.

Originally Posted by Robbie

What I don't get is...where the hell are all the LIBERAL websites calling out the govt?

It's like liberals just "sold out" and surrendered.

In the 1960's the young people rose up and protested AGAINST the govt.
They didn't believe in what we were doing in Vietnam and didn't trust the govt. for shit.

Where are the Abbie Hoffman's of today?

These days it seems that the "progressive" movement is just rubber stamping with approval any and everything the govt. does.

And anybody that stands up to the govt. is "right wing" and a "gun nut" (not that a lot of them aren't...but I"m just saying why aren't the liberals in there standing up against the govt. as well?)

We need some REAL progressives and liberals to stand up like the liberal youth movement of the 1960's did.
They would be ashamed of this new breed of elitist, govt. loving liberal.

At least that's my opinion.

Even though I was born too late to be a "hippy"...I am 100% in tune with a lot of what they believed in as far as wanting to be free and not trusting the govt like some kind of sheep.

Originally Posted by Robbie

Not even close.

Name me one company that has the money and power and has ABUSED that power the way our Federal govt. has.

There are none. The latest NSA bullshit with this "Heartbleed" virus should open some people's eyes (as if everything else hasn't already).

Our govt. KILLS people. Our govt. SPIES on people. Our govt. has even conducted secret medical experiments on it's own citizens. It's disgusting.

Originally Posted by dyna mo

The Taylor Grazing Act was subsequently pre-empted by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, which continued to provide for grazing fees.

The grazing contracts have a ten-year term.

Nevada open-range law specifically recognizes federal grazing contract provisions as Nevada law.

From 1934 to 1993, the Bundy family had a grazing contract with the federal government and paid the grazing fee.

In 1993, Clive Bundy refused to sign a new grazing agreement with the BLM because the new agreement limited the number of cattle on the allotment (due to the presence of an endangered species of tortoise) and increased the grazing fee.

Originally Posted by potter

The man is a criminal plain and simple and I'm amazed at how far fetched and off the wall some of the replies in this thread are. The man was allowed to let his cattle graze on the land if he paid the fees, he hasn't paid the fees since 1993 yet continued to allow his cattle to graze. This isn't some crazy wild issue here, he's a pure and simple freeloader trying to get a free ride from the public because he doesn't want to pay the associated fees.

Seriously, this isn't rocket science. Man owns land next to .gov managed land, man owns cattle, man lets cattle graze on land, .gov allows this with payment of associated fee, man decides not to pay fees for 20 years, .gov steps in because he owes so much money.

Get a clue people.

Originally Posted by potter

The man is a criminal plain and simple and I'm amazed at how far fetched and off the wall some of the replies in this thread are. The man was allowed to let his cattle graze on the land if he paid the fees, he hasn't paid the fees since 1993 yet continued to allow his cattle to graze. This isn't some crazy wild issue here, he's a pure and simple freeloader trying to get a free ride from the public because he doesn't want to pay the associated fees.

Seriously, this isn't rocket science. Man owns land next to .gov managed land, man owns cattle, man lets cattle graze on land, .gov allows this with payment of associated fee, man decides not to pay fees for 20 years, .gov steps in because he owes so much money.

Get a clue people.

Originally Posted by Robbie

crockett, calm down. You're starting to do that "liberal" thing again. Which is hateful and vitriolic posts against other people here that don't think the same way you do.

You're attack on Vendzilla was uncalled for.

Why not just discuss what's going on instead of being so damn hate filled about everything?

That's the damndest irony.

The Democrat Party talking point is that Republicans are full of "hate". But every post by every liberal Democrat always includes the most hateful speech of all times.
The irony is inescapable.

Stay in the arena of ideas.

If you think that a rancher standing up to the federal govt. sending in what was basically an army is "bad". Then just say so.

If you think the federal govt. is justified in spying on you and that Pres. Obama is either totally ignorant of everything around him...or in CHARGE of things and you're cool with it, then just say so.

No need to go off and try to troll Vendzilla.

I'm more interested in what you think and have to say about what's going on.
I could give two shits about whether Vendzilla was a Republican and switched to Libertarian.

He has no power over anything.

The govt. does.

Originally Posted by trevesty

I know you live in Vegas, but not sure if you've ever driven through Utah / Montana, etc. There is a TON of wide open space - beautiful drive, though.

Originally Posted by dyna mo

For me there are many things going on here and I look at them separately.

- the guy is a freeloader. He hasn't paid his bill in 20 years, I get that, but if he never signed the contract back in 1993 then he hasn't been getting a bill

Originally Posted by Robbie

Not even close.

Name me one company that has the money and power and has ABUSED that power the way our Federal govt. has.

There are none. The latest NSA bullshit with this "Heartbleed" virus should open some people's eyes (as if everything else hasn't already).

Our govt. KILLS people. Our govt. SPIES on people. Our govt. has even conducted secret medical experiments on it's own citizens. It's disgusting.

Originally Posted by _Richard_

i guess we just need to get rid of governments, and put all the power into corporations.



that will solve the power problem!

Originally Posted by Robbie

Now you're just being foolish. Nobody wants to get "rid of govt.'s"

But in our country there are checks and balances. The separate branches of govt., the power of state govt., and MOST importantly the Free Press and the people themselves (which is what FINALLY prevailed in this situation).

Are you saying that you don't think the govt. is TOO big. And that is "cool" for them to do all these shady and secretive things around the world to people?

I can't understand that line of thinking.

How about some common sense:
Get the federal govt. back under control and SERVING the people instead of RULING the people.
And keep corporations in check so that they are able to make profit, hire people, and make the world go around WITHOUT getting too big and powerful either.

Like most things there is a "sweet spot". The Federal govt. hit that spot about 50 years ago and then kept on growing.
At least the corporations get knocked down when they get too far out of control.

But the Federal Govt.? They make the LAW. And they've actually made laws that damn near make it impossible for citizens to reign them in.

Just think about it for a second without making any "witty" quips or exaggerating points.

The govt. is supposed to SERVE us. Not own us and run every aspect of our lives from cradle to grave.

Originally Posted by halfpint

So Bundy and the people won ?

Originally Posted by Robbie

Hearing him on the radio here...he said he had paid his fees to the county the entire time for use of that land.

I have no "proof" of that. But that is what he said.

And I certainly wouldn't call anyone who works hard to make a living a "freeloader". His family have had their cattle grazing that land long before the U.S. govt. was involved.

Matter of fact, ALL cattle use to free-range graze. That's the way the cattle business worked historically.
It was only until the invention of barbed wire that cattle were ever fenced in.

Every cowboy movie you ever saw where they were doing a "round up" of cows was because they grazed on the open range.

To me...a "freeloader" is a lazy piece of shit who doesn't have a job and lives entirely off of the govt. from their housing to their food stamps.
Not a rancher who puts in more hours a day working hard than 99% of the people.

Originally Posted by _Richard_

the 'too big to fail' companies.. right?

Originally Posted by dyna mo

The term "Freeloader" in everyday speech refers to a "mooch" or a schnorrer. The technical term for such a person is a free rider.

A free rider, in economics, refers to someone who benefits from resources, goods, or services without paying for the cost of the benefit.


I read the transcript of a radio interview of him, in this interview he said he was WILLING to pay those fees to Clark County but not to the BLM.

Originally Posted by _Richard_

'Reid tells News4's Samantha Boatman his take on the so-called cattle battle in southern Las Vegas. "Well, it's not over. We can't have an American people that violate the law and then just walk away from it. So it's not over," Reid said. '

Originally Posted by dyna mo

robbie, you minced the word, not me. And you did so instead of acknowledging the point of my post, which wasn't his being a freeloader, in fact, I stated it didn't matter if he was a free loader or not, what mattered was the BLM.


And spare me the fatherly talk.

Originally Posted by dyna mo

For me there are many things going on here and I look at them separately.

- the guy is a freeloader. He hasn't paid his bill in 20 years, I get that, but if he never signed the contract back in 1993 then he hasn't been getting a bill

- BLM capriciously applying regulations

- BLM being overly agressive and overstepping their boundaries and common sense in handling this situation.

I'm glad BLM walked away from the continued escalation here and also that Bundy met with the sheriff and agreed to some terms. the big concern here for me was the overly aggressive pursuit by BLM on this, regardless of the guy being a freeloader.

Originally Posted by Robbie

Yep, they did win.

The govt. came in here and started a problem (like they always do in these kinds of situations) where there was none.

They just picked the wrong state to try it in. The original ranchers in Nevada aren't like some of the folks out East who just roll over when they are told to.

The govt. picked the wrong state, and the wrong group of people to try and bully around.

I think that this example (just like the uprising in Egypt, Libya, and Syria) disproves some people who say that citizens just can't stand up to the big bad govt.

To borrow something from Pres. Obama: "YES WE CAN!"

Originally Posted by Robbie

trying to apply negative connotations to something that feeds our country (cattle ranchers).