So nothing about this? Feds engage in cattle rustling, assault, in Nevada

http://21stcenturywire.com/2014/04/...ers-reports-of-killing-cattle-in-bunkerville/

Video at the link. I'm sure gul, et al. will insist that I staged this somehow to justify my distaste for Federal overreach.

Interesting.......could explain reports of cattle mutilations with the lights in the sky, no footprints left, etc.
Imagine our gub'mint having secret programs!

Interesting that an article with today's date, mentions events having happened "this afternoon at 2PM PST," when current time is 4AM PDT. I'm not familiar with the "protest camp," can you give us more details to help us judge your rage?

Certainly.

http://kutv.com/news/top-stories/st...nchers-protest-federal-government-10501.shtml

http://www.carsonnow.org/story/04/0...eating-atmosphere-intimidation-cattle-roundup

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=29387272&nid=1070&s_cid=rec1

I hope this information serves to alleviate your terror.

A noteworthy omission from Castle's excerpt:

So what we have here is a man actively stealing from the rest of us, and Castle supports the effort. That isn't just anti-government, that's anti-people. Why does Castle hate American citizens?

How is he stealing from anyone?

He hasn't paid rent in 20 years. About time the land lord evict him. That's $300,000 stolen from you, me, and every other tax payer. By supporting his theft, you laugh in the face of ranchers like @evenflow, who graze on private land. Why do you hate Flow and @Aenea?

He's not the one who stole it.

Hint: He's not showing up at your place with weapons of war.

Its very common for ranchers to lease BLM grazing land. But it's not free, you have to pay your lease fees.

So let's give it to the Indians. You are going with the wrong anti-government angle on this one, because your position advocates robbing from Peter to favor Paul. No matter how you cut it, Clive Bundy does not now and never did own that land.

When did the Bureau of Land Management purchase it from the Bundy family? They've been making use of it since before the BLM even existed. Seems like the Feds are the ones who stole it first.

If you are too stupid to read and understand the article you linked, you are too stupid.

BLM is the fed program currently in charge of that land, which has been owned (though managed by other agencies) by the fed gov ever since it was stolen from the Mexicans.

The Bundy family has never owned it, despite the current patriarch's refusal to pay rent.

Clearly, the Feds never owned it. If it's "public land", then the American people own it. That includes Bundy and whoever else wants to use it. Who else wants to use it, other than the Feds?

When does he pay you the rent he owes? Also, I hear that Flow has a fallow field. Can I move to Oklahoma and farm it, as nobody is currently using it?

Also, can't leave this claim just sitting there. Clearly, the Feds have a stronger claim to this land than many other examples of Federal property. It was seized in a Constitutionally legal war, the seizure was recognized by the prior owner (see Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo), and the Feds even paid the previous owner.

So you go ahead making silly claims, but the effort isn't required, you've already provided enough demonstrations of your limited intellect this week.

He doesn't owe any.

Does Flow own it? If it's private property -- as opposed to public property -- you'll need Flow's consent.

Not with their money -- with the American peoples' money. So the American people own it, which they acknowledge by calling it public property. That means it's for the use of the American people. The BLM doesn't take its direction from the people, therefore the BLM has no claim to legitimate direction of the property's use.

So you claim. So you continue to fall short of supporting. Oh, you can yell, "Stupid-head! Stupid-head!" until you pass out -- and I heartily encourage you to do exactly that. But that'll get you nothing and a cheese sandwich, if you make the cheese sandwich yourself.

This would probably be the way to resolve such problems. What you really need to do is introduce a democracy, so that publicly owned property can be used at the discretion of the people. If only the ruling dynasty would allow for free elections! A parliament, once established, might even be able to come up with a constitution.

Okay, Castle, once again the delusional illogical argument that the people own nothing. You are a fucking fool. Whether you call it government or the public, it is owned by you and me, as I've stated in multiple posts. If you wish to allow free grazing on the blade of grass you own, go for it. The rest of us are owed grazing fees. He didn't pay, so we, the landlord, through our agent (the BLM), are evicting the thief, and confiscating his herd as compensation for the theft. Your argument fails on every level.

/thread

That's exactly the opposite of the argument I've been making. The people own that land; the government does not.

We aren't the U.S. government. We're supposed to be, but we're not. If you think that any government is "the people", I challenge you to tell any Holocaust survivor that he or she was the NSDAP government, or that the NSDAP government worked for the six million plus innocent people it murdered. Of course, all the "good Germans" who saw nothing, said nothing, and did nothing -- I'm sure they'd find that argument of yours very comforting.

Did you send them? Know anyone who called them up and asked them to go out there who isn't a government employee? You do not.

The government /= the people.

Has anyone actually bothered to read the articles detailing the history of this dispute?

The question is rhetorical of course - this is Wordforge where people only tune in for the slap - fight drama.

However, let's clear a few things up.

First, poor Mr. Bundy has been engaged in a 20-year long dick waving contest with the Feds, and right now he's finally finding out who's dick is bigger. So, in that sense, I have no sympathy. The Feds could have come in and lowered the boom 10 years ago, but they didnt, instead battling it out in court, winning several Federal suits. Let me repeat that, poor Bundy has lost in the courts every single time. Who knows how many compromises the Feds have offered to settle this thing this stubborn coot has rejected over the years?

So, the preceeding would make you think I'm on the side of the Feds, right?

***** edit - well, I don't know what happened, half my post was chopped off and has disappeared when I pressed submit.
Wrong.

Here's why - the bedwetting liberal eco-terrorist agenda. See, this whole thing began because filthy hippy desert-huggers who have no respect for the livestock

This board is fucked up.

Two problems with your analysis Flashlight:

1. I did read it, which should be obvious from the posts I made pointing out similar things about Bundy's lack of a legal claim.
2. You are a dumbass to not care about protecting property rights if the stimulating rationale happens to offend your sensibilities.

First, as you yourself pointed out, the Feds stole it from Mexico in the first place, then used the people's money to bribe Mexico into not trying to take it back. So the Feds stole it, then the people paid for it. The Feds have no property rights to that land.

^All of which could be solved if someone could produce a deed to the land...

How do you know this? Multiple courts have ruled on title, there is at least some sort of valid paper trail.

There's no such thing as "public" property. It's either state, federal, county etc. for folks to use (within limits) and for certain purposes you have to pay. For example I hunt "public" land which means I have to share it with everyone the federal government deems has the right to share it. Thus I must follow the rules - I can't just do as I want despite paying taxes and paying my annual fee to hunt there.

Exactly. That's why gul's earlier tirade about how it belongs to us, how "we are the government" is utter nonsense. The Feds used the people's money to pay for it, and have since basically stolen it from the people.