The Green Scam of “Endangered Species”

[wolfbait]

BUNDY-TIMES STING: WORSE THAN I THOUGHT

http://www.wnd.com/2014/04/bundy-times-sting-worse-than-i-thought/


Judge Jeanine Pirro Opening Statement - Dirty Harry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trjJg_Up8xM

[AspenBud]

Yeah...

"Bundy was plainly a nutcase, and the right-wing pundits and politicians should have seen that. He should never have been portrayed as a hero or a victim or anything other than a lawbreaker, a freeloader, a moocher. A taker.

For two decades, he grazed his cattle on land that did not belong to him and refused to pay the landowner. Right-wingers, one would think, would hate that. He refused to respect law enforcement, in fact threatened to take up arms against the peace officers whom Republicans usually trip over themselves to honor. I thought conservatives believed in law and order.

What if, instead of being a right-wing rancher who flouted the law, Bundy was the leader of a left-wing group of college radicals who occupied a government building? Ronald Reagan notoriously said of Berkeley protestors, "If there is to be a bloodbath, let's get it over with. No more appeasement!"

Or what if Bundy had been the leader of the New Black Panther Party? What if he and his followers had, for 20 years, brazenly stolen from the federal government, refused to obey court orders and threatened police with guns? Would Hannity have been duped into defending him? Fat chance.

Or, umm, what if Bundy had been a Muslim, declaring a tiny caliphate on that dusty piece of Nevada? Does anyone really think Fox News would have made a hero of him then? "


http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/25/opinion/begala-racist-rancher-conservatives/index.html?sr=sharebar_facebook

[timberfaller]

Paul Begala

CNN  Clinton Network News

enough said!!

[AspenBud]

Paul Begala

CNN  Clinton Network News

enough said!!

How about Glenn Beck and Tucker Carlson then?   

http://theweek.com/article/index/259997/speedreads-glenn-beck-and-tucker-carlson-warn-conservatives-about-bundy-ranch-dispute

[Elkaholic daWg]

From Backcountry Rebels....

Originally Posted by Grizzz View Post
Here in the neo-liberal West coast of Canada we have a eerily similar story playing out in the courts right now. The land in question had a usage ongoing for 20 yrs. before the land commission even existed. The old fella who was shut down by 29 govt. agents with various jurisdictions felt his rights under the constitution were breached. 3 yrs. later and 20 odd court visits and the judge scolded and rebuked the land commission so much they had to ask for a break to discuss how large a financial settlement was to be offered the old feller. Mind you our news media here is so liberal and tree hugger they have completely ignored this whole story. The provincial govt. is currently redrawing the whole ALC (Agricultural Land Commission) due to this court case. Not like any of our news guys (copy & paste, latte sucking, plagiarists) have even bothered to investigate. We used to envy the US constitution and the protection the rights of individual citizens were afforded under it. Now it seems we have gotten ours into exactly such a configuration while yours is being assailed at every turn by both the elected politicos and the judiciary. Good luck, you'll need it.

I hear ya. Down here we hear liberals only argument, "He broke the law!" And it seems to me they argue that we are a democracy and a nation of laws and the majority passed that law. What they fail to realize is that we are not a democracy, we are a republic with a democratic election process. We are not subject to a rule by the mob and are protected by the the Bill of Rights which protect the individual from the mob. Just because our society deems a law necessary does not mean it is ethical or right. Justice is what society deems is appropriate to what society allows as debated in Plato's Republic. Our forefathers were smart enough to see to the protection of all of us as individuals. But you watch, there are already liberals down here openly stating how the Bill of Rights is a dated document and irrelevant in today's era. They have never been so wrong.

[timberfaller]

"How about Glenn Beck and Tucker Carlson then?   "

I find the whole "racist" debate a joke now days.    Had Bundy used just a few different words nothing would have come from his comments.   He should have  used African Americans instead of Negro, the PC police would have left him alone.

Because of the reprisals of the leftist liberals ALL broadcasters HAD to come out against Bundy, even when it was found out his speech had been "edited" by the liberals as USUAL!! 

NOW we have the Clippers owner getting the same treatment!!

But then this thread is about the ESA and its use by a Over reaching government agency and Bundy is a good scapegoat! for distraction purposes!

[WAcoyotehunter]

who brought up Bundy on this thread?? 

The guy is a bottom dweller and his comments were more inflammatory than just saying "Negro".  The whole message was ridiculous.

The tea partiers made a mistake championing him.  If they want to discuss the issue, go for it.  If they need a champion or hero, they should keep looking.

[AspenBud]

"How about Glenn Beck and Tucker Carlson then?   "

I find the whole "racist" debate a joke now days.    Had Bundy used just a few different words nothing would have come from his comments.   He should have  used African Americans instead of Negro, the PC police would have left him alone.

Because of the reprisals of the leftist liberals ALL broadcasters HAD to come out against Bundy, even when it was found out his speech had been "edited" by the liberals as USUAL!! 

NOW we have the Clippers owner getting the same treatment!!

But then this thread is about the ESA and its use by a Over reaching government agency and Bundy is a good scapegoat! for distraction purposes!

Now now, Beck and Carlson weren't talking about race. In fact I believe their comments were made before Bundy opened his freeloading mouth.   

I wonder how many of those "patriots" down there who have lost their jobs, or didn't have one to start with, are now drawing unemployment...     

[WAcoyotehunter]

I wonder how many of those "patriots" down there who have lost their jobs, or didn't have one to start with, are now drawing unemployment...     

yep...  The guy is a classic moron.  He bit the hand that fed him and I am anxious to see him change his ranch operations to fit the 160 acres that he actually owns. 

[wolfbait]

I wonder how many of those "patriots" down there who have lost their jobs, or didn't have one to start with, are now drawing unemployment...     

yep...  The guy is a classic moron.  He bit the hand that fed him and I am anxious to see him change his ranch operations to fit the 160 acres that he actually owns.

Actually Bundy refuse to sell his grazing, water, and surface rights to "Dirty Harry" and crew, next came the fake endangered turtle, and then the Shock and Aw followed when all else failed. I think what bothers you two so much is the real truth in stead of what dirty harry want everyone to believe came out. Just like the real wolf, not the fake wolf that the USFWS and WDFW promote.

[WAcoyotehunter]

I wonder how many of those "patriots" down there who have lost their jobs, or didn't have one to start with, are now drawing unemployment...     

 I think what bothers you two so much is the real truth in stead of what dirty harry want everyone to believe came out. Just like the real wolf, not the fake wolf that the USFWS and WDFW promote.

What the He(( are you talking about?

[wolfbait]

BLM Whistleblower: Reid Bunkerville and the Military Industrial Complex at Bundy Ranch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNGJXDuLkdI

[WAcoyotehunter]

Wow.... groundbreaking.  A BLM VOLUNTEER blowing a whistle about research he did on the county's public database. 

 

[Elkaholic daWg]

THE LONG HISTORY OF BLM'S AGGRESSIVE CATTLE SEIZURES

http://www.google.com/gwt/x?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.breitbart.com%2FBig-Government%2F2014%2F04%2F29%2FThe-Long-History-Of-BLM-s-Aggressive-Cattle-Seizures&ei=AGRhU5yQCeHfsgfZh4HoCw&wsc=yh#.U2FkZesalXE.facebook


The 1994 “Rangeland Reform” regulations included doubling the current fees charged to ranchers for public forage and further environmental rules to prevent “overgrazing.” Opponents noted that in the runup to the new regulations, the National Academy of Scientists – a preeminent scientific authority on which federal agencies rely for expert analysis – had issued a report concluding so little was known about the condition of U.S. range lands that the new standards were essentially a shot in the dark. But Babbit forged ahead anyway.

At the time, former-Sen. Pete Domenici ripped the plan, a version of which he had defeated in Congress when it was a legislative proposal the year before. "The last thing we should do is hurry decisions that have far-reaching effects on western states," he said.

Underlying the move to raise fees was BLM's view that the fees on public lands were too low – much lower than fees to graze on private land, for example.

But as Heather Smith Thomas, an Idaho rancher, noted in a 1994 article in Rangelands, a peer-reviewed academic journal, the private grazing fees were artificially high because the government owns so much land in the West.

“What many people do not understand is that the ‘low’ fee is just one small portion of the rancher's many costs in using public land. The total costs amount to much more than renting private pasture, yet the rancher is locked into this situation, totally dependent on the public range. He can't just walk away if the fee gets too high, and rent pasture elsewhere; there is not sufficient private pasture available,” Thomas wrote.

The new fees imposed upon ranchers in the 90’s were skewed, according to Thomas, because the fee was based on private land lease rates, but private lease rates were high due to the scarce availability of private land and the lack of regulations on private land compared to federally owned land.

Thomas noted the“BLM states that "land treatment solely oriented toward meeting livestock forage requirements will be discontinued". Additionally the reforms have less emphasis on grazing, “yet the BLM wants to charge the rancher more for something that is being made much more difficult to use.”

Before the Babbit rule, fees were based on a formula that reflected annual changes in the costs of production.

“All the legislative history involving FS and BLM fees show that grazing fees were intended to be based on the rancher's ability to pay, not on some arbitrary value of forage or budget needs of the administrative bureau,” Thomas said of the 1978 legislation.

[wolfbait]

Wow.... groundbreaking.  A BLM VOLUNTEER blowing a whistle about research he did on the county's public database. 

I'm not surprised at what "the wind" took out of this video. What it failed to mention was the outlandish prices the BLM paid for some properties, which WDFW have been known to do, and the warning for people to get involved, dig in and find out the reason behind these land buys. It sure as hell isn't about habitat.