masterrig 1 #1 April 23, 2014 http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/04/22/nevada-rancher-former-indian-chief-range-war-with-blm-predates-cliven-bundy/ Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #2 April 23, 2014 My god, you're right! Why didn't I see this before? I'm allowed to skip out on rent because other people did it first.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #3 April 23, 2014 The story linked in your OP seems over-simplified, i.e., it looks like chunks of facts that should have been described in sequence are selectively missing from the narrative. Very much like when hearing only one side of an argument. But... I don't have time to research the story out. So get to work, and come back and report to us. Please be fair, balanced and unafraid. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgoose71 0 #4 April 23, 2014 So now you are saying it's OK for the white man to go onto an indian reservations and take his cattle? Doesn't this go against your liberal guilt? Or are you just for the government placing fees on whatever it wants and then taking all your shit when you don't pay?"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." Life, the Universe, and Everything Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #5 April 23, 2014 QuoteSo now you are saying If that's what he was saying, he'd have said it. Have you stopped beating your wife yet? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgoose71 0 #6 April 23, 2014 Andy9o8 Quote So now you are saying If that's what he was saying, he'd have said it. Have you stopped beating your wife yet? Ya I gave it up the same time you gave up pedophilia....Smart ass comments beget smart ass comments... My original comment was to get Quade to actually read the article. By his comment I'm not sure it happened. This time Government agents came onto a reservations to hijack the cattle from a native american. Circumstances are a little different. The BLM says it had the right to because it is the trustee for the land, but there is on going litigation about this. I know that when it comes to Native American Reservations, there are some unique rules that come into play. If you could ease up on the wise ass remarks for a while, I would actually like to hear your opinion on this..."There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." Life, the Universe, and Everything Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #7 April 23, 2014 The only thing I'm afraid of is a mad woman! In finding that story, I found that none of them told the 'rest of the story'. Just typical of the media. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #8 April 23, 2014 Here's another BLM 'land grab'... http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/04/22/Exclusive-Greg-Abbott-to-BLM-Come-and-Take-It Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #9 April 23, 2014 quadeMy god, you're right! Why didn't I see this before? I'm allowed to skip out on rent because other people did it first. You sure are selective when it comes to who is breaking the law and whether is it ok or not sheesh....."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #10 April 23, 2014 Quote Please be fair, balanced and unafraid. How do you measure that? Just curious...We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #11 April 23, 2014 Quote If you could ease up on the wise ass remarks for a while, I would actually like to hear your opinion on this... +1 Jeez, we're actually trying to bring this forum back to what it once was. People coming here to learn something? Almost frightening... We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #12 April 23, 2014 QuoteIf you could ease up on the wise ass remarks for a while, ...then all the joy would go out of life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #13 April 23, 2014 masterrigHere's another BLM 'land grab'... http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/04/22/Exclusive-Greg-Abbott-to-BLM-Come-and-Take-It Chuck That's what I figured this thread would be about. This article has a little more background: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/04/23/The-Land-Grabbing-Feds-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #14 April 23, 2014 rhaig***Here's another BLM 'land grab'... http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/04/22/Exclusive-Greg-Abbott-to-BLM-Come-and-Take-It Chuck That's what I figured this thread would be about. This article has a little more background: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/04/23/The-Land-Grabbing-Feds Thanks for posting that. It does add substance. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 380 #15 April 23, 2014 masterrigHere's another BLM 'land grab'... http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/04/22/Exclusive-Greg-Abbott-to-BLM-Come-and-Take-It ChuckThe article presents only one side of the issue (the Texas Attorney General), but even so this one looks like nothing but trouble. From a second Briebart article, it seems (as far as I can understand it, without any explicit explanation of the BLM position), that the BLM is using uncertainty about the exact placement of the Texas/Oklahoma border (which the two states dispute), meandering of the Red River creating and consuming land, and legalistic arguments about whether or not Texas had authority to deed land that was covered in the Louisiana Purchase, as a basis for contemplating taking control of 90,000 acres. I think it would be a huge mistake for the BLM to attempt to use technicalities to seize land that has been deeded for 200 years. Despite the amount of smoke and noise generated by anti-federal-government hotheads over the Bundy issue, I believe most Americans see him as land-grabbing tax avoiding nutjob. If the BLM moves to take over private land, where people have deeds and actual long history with the land, I doubt there will be any sympathy at all for their position, only anger that could result in the political destruction of the BLM. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #16 April 23, 2014 Quote ...then all the joy would go out of life. ROFLMAO!!! We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #17 April 23, 2014 GeorgiaDon***Here's another BLM 'land grab'... http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/04/22/Exclusive-Greg-Abbott-to-BLM-Come-and-Take-It ChuckThe article presents only one side of the issue (the Texas Attorney General), but even so this one looks like nothing but trouble. From a second Briebart article, it seems (as far as I can understand it, without any explicit explanation of the BLM position), that the BLM is using uncertainty about the exact placement of the Texas/Oklahoma border (which the two states dispute), meandering of the Red River creating and consuming land, and legalistic arguments about whether or not Texas had authority to deed land that was covered in the Louisiana Purchase, as a basis for contemplating taking control of 90,000 acres. I think it would be a huge mistake for the BLM to attempt to use technicalities to seize land that has been deeded for 200 years. Despite the amount of smoke and noise generated by anti-federal-government hotheads over the Bundy issue, I believe most Americans see him as land-grabbing tax avoiding nutjob. If the BLM moves to take over private land, where people have deeds and actual long history with the land, I doubt there will be any sympathy at all for their position, only anger that could result in the political destruction of the BLM. Don Damn good post! I really believe the BLM does step over the bounds of their Agency. I feel too, their bottom line is power and greed with an undercurrent of gain and that gain being more than land. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #18 April 23, 2014 Quote I think it would be a huge mistake for the BLM to attempt to use technicalities... +1, and not only the BLM, it's this entire administration (...e.g., EPA). Quote I believe most Americans see him as land-grabbing tax avoiding nutjob Uhm, you have a point without a doubt, but there is definitely something more going on here... Quote ...only anger that could result in the political destruction ... It's reaching a point where people are asking what recourse is available. And, apparently, there isn't much.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #19 April 23, 2014 masterrig******Here's another BLM 'land grab'... http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/04/22/Exclusive-Greg-Abbott-to-BLM-Come-and-Take-It ChuckThe article presents only one side of the issue (the Texas Attorney General), but even so this one looks like nothing but trouble. From a second Briebart article, it seems (as far as I can understand it, without any explicit explanation of the BLM position), that the BLM is using uncertainty about the exact placement of the Texas/Oklahoma border (which the two states dispute), meandering of the Red River creating and consuming land, and legalistic arguments about whether or not Texas had authority to deed land that was covered in the Louisiana Purchase, as a basis for contemplating taking control of 90,000 acres. I think it would be a huge mistake for the BLM to attempt to use technicalities to seize land that has been deeded for 200 years. Despite the amount of smoke and noise generated by anti-federal-government hotheads over the Bundy issue, I believe most Americans see him as land-grabbing tax avoiding nutjob. If the BLM moves to take over private land, where people have deeds and actual long history with the land, I doubt there will be any sympathy at all for their position, only anger that could result in the political destruction of the BLM. Don Damn good post! I really believe the BLM does step over the bounds of their Agency. I feel too, their bottom line is power and greed with an undercurrent of gain and that gain being more than land. Chuck I saw a news story on it the other day and they're basically saying that when the river erodes the bank, that the border moves, but when the bank of the river moves north through other mechanisms (river course change, water level drop, they listed a couple of others, but I don't recall) that the border doesn't move south.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #20 April 24, 2014 rhaig*********Here's another BLM 'land grab'... http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/04/22/Exclusive-Greg-Abbott-to-BLM-Come-and-Take-It ChuckThe article presents only one side of the issue (the Texas Attorney General), but even so this one looks like nothing but trouble. From a second Briebart article, it seems (as far as I can understand it, without any explicit explanation of the BLM position), that the BLM is using uncertainty about the exact placement of the Texas/Oklahoma border (which the two states dispute), meandering of the Red River creating and consuming land, and legalistic arguments about whether or not Texas had authority to deed land that was covered in the Louisiana Purchase, as a basis for contemplating taking control of 90,000 acres. I think it would be a huge mistake for the BLM to attempt to use technicalities to seize land that has been deeded for 200 years. Despite the amount of smoke and noise generated by anti-federal-government hotheads over the Bundy issue, I believe most Americans see him as land-grabbing tax avoiding nutjob. If the BLM moves to take over private land, where people have deeds and actual long history with the land, I doubt there will be any sympathy at all for their position, only anger that could result in the political destruction of the BLM. Don Damn good post! I really believe the BLM does step over the bounds of their Agency. I feel too, their bottom line is power and greed with an undercurrent of gain and that gain being more than land. Chuck I saw a news story on it the other day and they're basically saying that when the river erodes the bank, that the border moves, but when the bank of the river moves north through other mechanisms (river course change, water level drop, they listed a couple of others, but I don't recall) that the border doesn't move south. I believe, I saw the same story and as I understand it, the BLM is trying to take that 'questionable' area. 90,000 acres is a good size piece of land. What I've read about it also is, the farmers and ranchers 'know' who's land is who's and as we know, some of that land has been worked since before Texas was a State. I really feel, the BLM has more up their sleeve than 'preserving land'. This case just may bring that to light. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 380 #21 April 24, 2014 QuoteI saw a news story on it the other day and they're basically saying that when the river erodes the bank, that the border moves, but when the bank of the river moves north through other mechanisms (river course change, water level drop, they listed a couple of others, but I don't recall) that the border doesn't move south. Rivers meander. Whether the boundary is the high water line, or the normal water level, or the middle of the river (the rules vary from state to state) it's to be expected that property lines will shift around over time. Surely there are laws that cover ownership of the "new" land that is deposited, just as laws apply to loss of land due to erosion. Does anybody know what the law is in Texas, or in any other state? I'm pretty sure no state would say the "new" land is federal by default. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #22 April 24, 2014 GeorgiaDonQuoteI saw a news story on it the other day and they're basically saying that when the river erodes the bank, that the border moves, but when the bank of the river moves north through other mechanisms (river course change, water level drop, they listed a couple of others, but I don't recall) that the border doesn't move south. Rivers meander. Whether the boundary is the high water line, or the normal water level, or the middle of the river (the rules vary from state to state) it's to be expected that property lines will shift around over time. Surely there are laws that cover ownership of the "new" land that is deposited, just as laws apply to loss of land due to erosion. Does anybody know what the law is in Texas, or in any other state? I'm pretty sure no state would say the "new" land is federal by default. Don Maybe, this will help, Don... http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/NR/htm/NR.12.htm Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgoose71 0 #23 April 24, 2014 Andy9o8QuoteIf you could ease up on the wise ass remarks for a while, ...then all the joy would go out of life. Well, we can't have that. Go ahead and wise ass away.... My ass is so wise I can sit on a bowl of ice cream and tell you what flavor it is..."There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." Life, the Universe, and Everything Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #24 April 24, 2014 Quote http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/NR/htm/NR.12.htm That's pretty good stuff...We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #25 April 24, 2014 StreetScoobyQuote http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/NR/htm/NR.12.htm That's pretty good stuff... I found it quite informative. Plain and simple. Yet, the BLM sees it different. They're going to do whatever they want in spite of the compact. This will be real interesting to follow. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
