New and Used Car Talk Reviews Hot Cars Comparison Automotive Community

The Largest Car Forum in the Philippines



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13
  1. Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,994
    #1
    Meanwhile, somewhere in Nevada...

    BUNKERVILLE — More than 100 head of Cliven Bundy’s confiscated cattle were released from a corral outside of Mesquite after a 20-minute standoff between angry and armed ranchers and law enforcement officers Saturday.

    With rifles pointing toward each side and tensions reaching a critical level, federal land officials backed off and agreed to give up the cattle to Bundy’s family and supporters.

    The mid-afternoon release by the Bureau of Land Management was hailed as a victory among supporters who had forced the closure of Interstate 15 after marching to the holding pen on the sides of the highway, although environmentalists condemned the agency’s decision.

    The BLM, upset that Bundy has refused to pay about $1 million in grazing fees to the federal government for two decades, had seized at least one-third of his cattle earlier this week in a raging debate that captured national attention and whose purpose was also to protect a critical habitat of the threatened desert tortoise.

    But on Saturday the BLM decided to halt the roundup, fearing for the safety of its agents and the public.

    Bundy was overcome with joy when told of the pullout earlier Saturday, and his enthusiasm was catching. A crowd just outside his ranch cheered as he shouted, “Good morning America! Good morning world! Isn’t it a beautiful day in Bunkerville?”

    Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie served as a negotiator between Bundy and the BLM late Friday night, but neither side said they anticipated protesters to march toward the corral.

    Gillespie just moments earlier had told Bundy supporters to remain peaceful. It’s something he’d been saying all week as the Gold Butte clash heated up. The feud was held up as just another example of how the federal government takes its actions to an extreme, infringing on landowner rights.

    But in Gillespie’s short speech to the crowd on the banks of the Virgin River, where Bundy’s cattle once grazed, he failed to elaborate on what federal agents planned to do with the 170 penned-up cattle.

    So after reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, singing the National Anthem and saying a few prayers, protesters took matters into their own hands and mobilized in an attempt to free them. They were kept at bay by sheriff deputies and an array of federal agents in what turned into a tense standoff. One person said officers used bullhorns to tell marchers to keep away or they’d be shot.

    “There have been no shots and nobody has been injured and my men are working real hard to keep the calm,” Gillespie said by telephone from the scene. “But emotions are high, and we’re going to make sure that it ends peacefully.”

    Las Vegas police issued a statement saying business owners in Mesquite had received threats because of the conflict. Extra officers will remain in the area throughout the weekend.

    And the Metropolitan Police Department said more officers will remain in the area over the weekend and more officers have been assigned to the Clark County Fair “to ensure everyone’s safety.”

    Protesters’ actions cap a weeklong fight that has pitted armed federal agents against Bundy, a 67-year-old rancher who claims the land is either his for his cattle to graze on or it belongs to the state of Nevada, but it certainly doesn’t belong to the federal government.

    Theresa Casella, who came to Nevada from Phoenix to protest, said she couldn’t believe that the Bureau of Land Management and the National Park Service were pouring millions of dollars into impounding Bundy’s cattle, which is his livelihood.

    “Wasn’t that a hangable offense back in the day?” she said, half jokingly from the passenger seat of her pickup. “And now we have the federal government doing it? Back in the day, that was called rustling, I think.”

    The roundup of what government called “trespass cattle” occurred in an area that spans 1,200 square miles in Clark County.

    “We the people in this area have nothing to fear,” said Bundy, wearing a cowboy hat and a T-shirt bearing his family name. “We can carry our weapons if we like because we have Second Amendment rights, and those are God-given rights. Those Second Amendment rights are our rights. But, and I say ‘but,’ because we don’t have to carry them right now because we’re afraid. I’m telling you that right now. Because there’s been a lot of people who’ve been afraid, and I know that feeling. Just yesterday evening I was really afraid. … Today, we have been confirmed by our creator that we do not have to be afraid.

    “This is his battle. This is his battle.”

    For its part, the BLM released little information once the roundup got underway a week ago, often canceling press conferences at the last minute. Mostly the message was the same: it was seizing Bundy’s cattle because it has repeatedly to get Bundy to pony up his debt or suffer the consequences.

    The Bundy ranch itself, whose cattle operations have existed since the late 1800s, became a fortified compound overnight, courtesy of militias who came from throughout the West to protect Bundy from what they perceived as “government tyranny.”
    BLM releases Bundy cattle after protesters block southbound I-15 | Las Vegas Review-Journal



    Recap:

    -Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is seizing the land of of Bundy, which is unconstitutional under the 10th amendment. Link

    -BLM's excuse is to save a tortoise that was said to be "endangered" but then the authorities euthanized half of its population anyway. Link Link 2

    -Then, BLM changed their excuse claiming Bundy owes $1 million

    -While the authorities have agreed to release the confiscated cattle, the area is still considered a no fly zone.

    -So why the heck would the US govt be interested on a 600,000 acre land just for a freakin' tortoise? Answer
    Last edited by safeorigin; April 13th, 2014 at 11:56 PM.
    Damn, son! Where'd you find this?

  2. Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,279
    #2
    Total BS. That's an open area where people bring their desert karts to play. If it is a tortoise reservation, those kinds must be clad in indestructible armor

  3. Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,994
    #3
    actually, the nevada desert used to be a nuke testing ground...

    what's amusing and sad is the "1st amendment area" the authorities set up and people were rounded up like cattle.

    Eventually, more people came with their guns.

    Heh, and the liberals say the 2nd amendment is just for hunting and sporting purpose.
    Damn, son! Where'd you find this?

  4. Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,720
    #4
    eto pala yung nabasa ko sa cnn. i thought it was another WACO

    Weird, if the grazing area is indeed home to endangered wildlife, why allow anyone to graze there in the first place? All boils down to grazing fees = money.

    Ano kaya reason why the ranch refused to pay the bill? It seems unfair for cattle raisers to have their herd graze in the area, and not contribute anything to its sustainability. imho it has to go beyond randomly spreading cow poop in the area.

  5. Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,994
    #5
    Actually, the grazing area belonged to the Bundys since 1800's. During the 90's the liberals decided that it should be made into "public" land and they are now charging fees for it.

    Last edited by safeorigin; April 15th, 2014 at 01:39 PM.
    Damn, son! Where'd you find this?

  6. Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,720
    #6
    Hay. sabi na nga ba galing sa Fox News. They're the only news channel that tends to see things as "liberal" and "republican".

    Sorry, can't view the clip from here; weren't the Bundys compensated for it?

  7. Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,994
    #7
    Well, CNN is pro-Washington, MSNBC and most are pro-"Democrat". Fox is pretty much "neo-con".

    So, I don't see any mainstream news network showing Bundy's side of the argument. But hey, I did link fox's not because they have credibility(or the lack of it) but because of Judge Napolitano.
    Last edited by safeorigin; April 15th, 2014 at 05:10 PM.
    Damn, son! Where'd you find this?

  8. Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,994
    #8
    So, the tortoises actually benefit from cattle since the tortoises eat cattle dung. Oh boy...

    related studies:

    https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/in...le/10776/10049

    http://www.gardnerfiles.com/Desert%20Tortoise.pdf

    'The more cows, the more tortoises' | Las Vegas Review-Journal
    Damn, son! Where'd you find this?

  9. Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,994
    #9
    Of course... domestic terrorism.

    U.S. Sen. Harry Reid on Thursday called supporters of Bunkerville rancher Cliven Bundy “domestic terrorists” because they defended him against a Bureau of Land Management cattle roundup with guns and put their children in harm’s way.

    “Those people who hold themselves out to be patriots are not. They’re nothing more than domestic terrorists,” Reid said during an appearance at a Las Vegas Review-Journal “Hashtags & Headlines” event at the Paris. “… I repeat: what went on up there was domestic terrorism.”

    The BLM shut down its weeklong roundup of Bundy’s cattle Saturday after an armed confrontation with dozens of militia members who had traveled to Southern Nevada from across the country and from neighboring states.

    Bundy has not paid federal grazing fees for 20 years and owes about $1 million to the government.

    Reid, the Senate majority leader who is in Las Vegas during Congress’ Easter recess, is known for not pulling punches. The senator said he talked last week with federal, state and local officials about Bundy as well as the Nevada Cattlemen’s Association, which has not backed Bundy’s personal battle but has expressed concerns about access to public land.

    The senator said he spoke with Attorney General Eric Holder, FBI leaders and Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie. Reid said he understands there’s a task force being set up to deal with Bundy, and Gillespie is involved as well.

    “It is an issue that we cannot let go, just walk away from,” Reid said.

    Reid accused Bundy backers of bringing their children to protest the BLM so that federal authorities might harm them, which would prompt negative headlines around the world and hurt the government’s case against the rancher.

    “There were hundreds — hundreds of people from around the country — that came there,” Reid said. “They had sniper rifles on the freeway. They had assault weapons. They had automatic weapons.”

    According to Reid, some protesters said they had “children and women lined up because if anyone got hurt we wanted to make sure they got hurt first, because we want the federal government hurting women and children. … What if others tried the same thing?”

    No shots were fired during the confrontation.

    Reid didn’t have kind words for Bundy either, calling him a lawbreaker.

    “Clive Bundy does not recognize the United States,” Reid said. “He says that the United States is a foreign government. He doesn’t pay his taxes. He doesn’t pay his fees. And he doesn’t follow the law. He continues to thumb his nose at authority.”

    Bundy and his family did not respond to requests for comment on Reid’s remarks.

    Reid noted there are two court orders allowing the BLM to conduct the roundup of Bundy’s 500 to 900 “trespass cattle,” which have long roamed on federal public land that the Bundy family homesteaded in the 1870s. Some of the land includes habitat for the threatened desert tortoise, which the federal government is trying to protect by limiting grazing.

    During the question-and-answer forum, Reid was asked by R-J columnist Steve Sebelius, the moderator, what might happen in the Bundy case and and what should be done about supporters “who are willing to shed blood for the cause.”

    “I hope that’s not the case,” Reid said, turning somber. “I repeat, we are a country of laws. … We can’t let this happen.”

    If Bundy wins his battle with the BLM, it could set a precedent where protesters and militias might come to the aid of other farmers and ranchers who have land disputes with the federal government, much like the Sagebrush Rebellion in the 1970s and 1980s. The federal government owns about 85 percent of Nevada land and politicians, particularly states’ rights conservatives, have long argued the state should try to take back or buy back the property.

    Nevada’s 1864 Constitution, however, cedes rights to the vast stretches of public land to the federal government.

    “The people inhabiting said territory do agree and declare, that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within said territory, and that the same shall be and remain at the sole and entire disposition of the United States,” the state Constitution says in the ordinance section.

    Reid noted many of the protesters care deeply about the Constitution, both state and federal.

    “Nevada’s Constitution sets out very clearly the situation,” Reid said.
    Reid calls Bundy supporters ?domestic terrorists? | Las Vegas Review-Journal

    Just so everyone remembers, one of the reasons the Americans revolted against the British was because of taxation without representation.
    Damn, son! Where'd you find this?

  10. Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    22,710
    #10
    -Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is seizing the land of of Bundy, which is unconstitutional under the 10th amendment. Link

    -->Bundy has no title to the land, no claim except a homestead claim via common law property. But the statutes for common law property were only intended as a stopgap measure on the understanding (and this is in the law from way back then) that the settler would eventually fix the paperwork and claim their title. Bundy's family never did.

    -BLM's excuse is to save a tortoise that was said to be "endangered" but then the authorities euthanized half of its population anyway. Link Link 2

    -->True enough. Plus as you've said in a later post, the ranching might be helping, since Bundy has made a lot of improvements to the area, including building a water supply system.

    -Then, BLM changed their excuse claiming Bundy owes $1 million

    -->Didn't change it. As per the court order of 1993, Bundy has to pay $200 per head of cattle grazing on the lands after he was ordered to cease and desist. That means he owes anywhere from $300k to $1m, depending on whose census you believe.

    -While the authorities have agreed to release the confiscated cattle, the area is still considered a no fly zone.

    -->Of course, they don't want the media there.

    -So why the heck would the US govt be interested on a 600,000 acre land just for a freakin' tortoise? Answer

    -->It's an interesting rumor, but remember, BLM has been fighting with Bundy since the 90's. Retired BLM heads have stated that they've called off plans to confiscate the trespassing cows numerous times because Bundy threatened violence.

    -

    Two sides.

    The most Bundy can claim is that it's illegal for the Federal Government to claim the land, since Nevada has achieved statehood and should have control over its own public lands (and the Nevada legislature has written a complaint as such), but in the end, he's got his cattle grazing on land he doesn't own, and which neither he nor his ancestors bothered to get titled... which the Federal government owns by virtue of transfer from the government of New Mexico, and which the Nevada State Government might have rights to... might... depending on how you interpret the Constitution.

    And Bundy has publicly called for a "range war", stating that he's standing up for freedom, blah blah... bull. He's standing up for the continuation of his use of public lands to further his own business. That's all.

    The BLM, on the other hand, is using heavy-handed tactics and intimidation to edge protesters away, and isn't being as transparent as it should be about things. They do have the legal right (after several court cases and petitions) to remove the cattle from the land under their management, but they don't clearly have the right to confiscate the cattle, and they're not handling the confrontation properly. The BLM people should focus on removing the cattle. If they have problems with protesters, they should allow the Nevada State Police to take care of it.

    The solar plant deal is pretty suspicious, and then there are the fracking rights the BLM is handing out in other parts of Nevada (which, really, should be managed by the State!) but if there wasn't a pre-existing case against Bundy, the BLM would have no leverage to make him leave.

    -

    Of course, the third side to the story is: It's all Indian land, anyway, and they're all tresspassers. All of them.

    Ang pagbalik ng comeback...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Clive Bundy Ranch Standoff