More Back Story on Cliven Bundy BLM War

Rec’d via email, and facts stated have checked out elsewhere—Do not forget, earliest reports stated the BLM was going to go in a couple of years ago, but decided the conflict would be too extensive so didn’t go in. They have either decided we are now sufficiently brain dead and won’t actually do anything, or they are ready to use all that ammo the Fed’s have purchased. We will soon find out:

A Rancher TELLS ALL:

B Hunt wrote:

I live in SW Utah. I grew up on a ranch less than 100 miles from the Bundy’s ranch. My father knows Cliven Bundy. I know Cliven’s son Ryan. This is not a hoax, it is an action of force by the BLM.

The BLM was going to sell the cattle at one of the smallest cattle markets in Utah. No cattle markets in Nevada would take the cattle without a properly signed brand inspection (which the BLM cannot obtain without Cliven Bundy’s signature). The BLM paid the owner of the Utah cattle market $300,000 to do the sale (‘R’ Livestock Connection in Monroe, Utah, owned by one Scott G. Robbins, according to the Utah Business Entity Search). Utah Governor Herbert stepped in and forbid them from bringing the cattle into Utah without the legally required health and brand inspections (which again, require Bundy’s signature) and that no feral cattle are allowed to be imported at all (per Utah statute). Because Bundy claims ownership over maybe 350-500 head of branded cattle, the other 500-700 estimated head of cattle would all be considered feral. BLM officially backed off, but we suspect they are still secretly shipping them through Utah without any permission to do so, to “private” buyers in Colorado. The contract cowboys that the BLM hired to do the roundup are from Sampson Livestock in Meadow, Utah (traitors one and all).

From what I understand, Cliven Bundy owns both the Water Rights and Grazing Rights to all of the land where his cattle run. If Bundy failed to use them, the Grazing Rights would revert to the BLM and would be retired, while the Water Rights would revert to the State of Nevada, likely to be sold to the highest bidder (which would probably be a bidding war between mineral companies that are behind this action with the BLM and the City of Las Vegas which is thirsty for water and has had multiple attempts to buy water–through eminent domain from Utah farmers and ranchers–from Utah, which were all blocked by the Utah Legislature and Utah Governor Herbert). Chances are, the BLM has already filed a claim on the water rights so that they can sell to the highest bidder (instead of the state) and are trying to get the cattle off to show that Bundy cannot use the water beneficially (much like what the US Forest Service and BLM both tried to do to Wayne Hage).

Now, for Cliven Bundy, he’s not fighting this for his cattle or his own livelihood. He recognizes that he will probably die before this fight is over. He has said multiple times that he is fighting this to wake people up about the tyranny of the Federal Government and also to help wake up the western states about getting the rights to their own land back from the federal government, which has repeatedly shut down ranchers and closed off land. (MO = 1st, get all the ranchers, farmers, Native Americans, and foresters that use the land for positive, sustainable production off of the land; 2nd, grab up all the resources; 3rd, close off the lands to public access including camping, hiking, horseback riding, hunting, fishing, boating, shooting, etc; 4th, sell off the resources to the highest bidder regardless of what that will do to the land, the local environment, or the economy; 5th, collect royalties on the resources in perpetuity; 6th, reduce and eliminate all SLS and PILT payments to the states, impoverishing them beyond belief.)

Anyway, thanks for posting about this. It is important for us to be able to raise the appropriate resistance.

My Response:
Thank you for sending your valuable insight. This contained the details we were all missing.

From this we can now firmly conclude:

1. The BLM’s actions are not only flatly illegal, they are unlawful, and not only unlawful, they are so unlawful that it took bribing someone with a $300,000 payoff to get them to accept stolen cattle from a Government agency. I do not think that could be topped ANYWHERE else in the world, other than with something like a Mexican drug cartel.

So we have a clear cut case of unlawful and prosecutable actions by the BLM in this case.

2. The real goal is to shut down public access to these lands. Obviously Cliven Bundy was not a jerk, and he let people go back there to explore. I myself have done a LOT of back country exploring, and noticed in the early 2000′s that they closed down all the back roads about a half mile before the destination they used to go to to discourage people from exploring the wilderness. Rather than drive the whole way, you had to get out and walk a considerable distance to scenes such as Swazy’s leap, Paul Bunyans Wood Pile, and practically anywhere else you would want to go while out 4 Wheeling. And in the desert sun, that long of a walk was usually tough to do. This resulted in these types of locations no longer being visited, which effectively equaled a shut down.

3. The motives are for profit. Rather than manage the lands responsibly, the BLM is stealing it from it’s rightful holders via corrupt actions and legal loop holes, and selling it off to corporate interests. This is cold hard proof that America is not a democracy, or more importantly a Republic, it is in fact a facist dictatorship where corruption rules and rights, freedom and honor are irrelevant.

The BLM killed hundreds of desert tortoises on purpose
They say they had to kill them because they did not have the funds to care for them. Here are two really good solutions to that “problem.” 1. Just take them out in the desert and turn them loose. -OR- 2. They could have taken the three million dollars they said the Bundy raid will cost them, CALLED OFF THE RAID, and SAVED THE TURTLES with that three million. If they had three million to destroy Bundy, they had it for the turtles as well but did not use it for that because tyranny comes first.

Steeped in arrogance and incompetence, once again a Federal agency fails to see the obvious. Or perhaps they do see it but they could care less about nature and instead operate as the enforcement arm of a band of high ranking thugs.

The truth, in the words of a Bundy
Mike Combs By SHIREE BUNDY COX:

I have had people ask me to explain my dad’s stance on this BLM fight. Here it is in as simple of terms as I can explain it. There is so much [more] to it, but here it is in a nut shell. My great grandpa bought the rights to the Bunkerville allotment back in 1887, around there. Then he sold them to my grandpa who then turned them over to my dad in 1972. These men bought and paid for their rights to the range and also built waters, fences and roads to assure the survival of their cattle, all with their own money, not with tax dollars. These rights to the land use are called preemptive rights.

Some where down the line, to keep the cows from over grazing, came the bureau of land management. They were supposed to assist the ranchers in the management of their ranges, while the ranchers paid a yearly allotment, which was to be used to pay the BLM wages and to help with repairs and improvements of the ranches. My dad did pay his grazing fees for years to the BLM, until they were no longer using his fees to help him and to improve. Instead, they began using these money’s against the ranchers. They bought all the rest of the ranchers in the area out, with their own grazing fees. When they offered to buy my dad out for a pittance, he said no thanks and then fired them because they weren’t doing their job. He quit paying the BLM but tried giving his grazing fees to the county, which they turned down. So my dad just went on running his ranch and making his own improvements with his own equipment and his own money, not taxes.

In essence, the BLM was managing my dad out of business. Well, when buying him out didn’t work, they used the endangered species card. You’ve already heard about the desert tortoise. Well that didn’t work either, so then began the threats and the court orders, which my dad has proven to be unlawful for all these years. Now they’re desperate. It’s come down to buying the brand inspector off and threatening the County Sheriff. Everything they’re doing at this point is illegal and totally against the constitution of the United States of America.

Now you may be saying,”how sad, but what does this have to do with me?” Well, I’ll tell you. They will get rid of Cliven Bundy, the last man standing on the Bunkerville allotment and then they will close all the roads so no one can ever go on it again. Next, it’s Utah’s turn. Mark my words, Utah is next.

Then there’s the issue of the cattle that are at this moment being stolen. See, even if dad hasn’t paid them, those cattle do belong to him. Regardless where they are, they are my fathers property. His herd has been part of that range for over a hundred years, long before the BLM even existed. Now the Feds think they can just come in and remove them and sell them without a legal brand inspection or without my dad’s signature on it. They think they can take them over two boarders, which is illegal, ask any trucker. Then they plan to take them to the Richfeild Auction and sell them. All with our tax money. They have paid off the contract cowboys and the auction owner, as well as the Nevada brand inspector with our tax dollars. See how slick they are?

Well, this is it in a nut shell. Thanks

Not Just Cliven Bundy has BLM Troubles

Coming soon, to land near you. The Federal agencies are on power trips and have all this equipment they think they’re ready to use…(info rec’d from an email and search yielded the following from a freerepublic post)

Oklahoma-Texas border dispute has ranchers worried (BLM also pushing Texas Red River Range War)
Red TV ^ | Apr 10, 2014 | RFD-TV News Staff 

Posted on April 11, 2014 8:43:06 AM CDT by xzins

BYERS, Texas (RFD-TV) Most people think the border between Texas and Oklahoma is the Red River. Unfortunately, it’s a little more complicated than that, especially along the part of the river where Tommy Henderson and his family ranch. Henderson lost a lawsuit 30 years ago that moved part of the northern Texas border over a mile to the south.

The Bureau of Land Management [BLM] took 140 acres of his property and didn’t pay him one cent.

Now, they want to use his case as precedent to seize land along a 116-mile stretch of the river.

“They’re wanting to take the boundaries that the courts placed here and extend those east and west to the forks of the river north of Vernon and east to the 98th Meridian which is about 20 miles east of us,” Henderson explained.

BLM, which oversees public land in the United States, claims this land never belonged to Texas.

The Texas landowners who have lived and cared for that land for hundreds of years beg to differ.

BLM plans on taking the land anyway. Property owners will be forced to spend money on lawsuits to keep what is theirs.

For many, that property has been in their family for generations.

“How can BLM come in and say, “Hey, this isn’t yours.” Even though it’s patented from the state, you’ve always paid taxes on it. Our family has paid taxes for over 100 years on this place. We’ve got a deed to it. But yet they walked in and said it wasn’t ours,” said Henderson.

Ever since the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, there has been controversy over where Oklahoma ends and Texas begins.

In layman’s terms the boundary is the vegetation line on the south side of the Red River.

Over time the river moves. This movement north toward Oklahoma is the sticking point.

The sandy soils erode in a process called accretion, which wipes out the bank. So the property line follows the river.

BLM claims that the river moved by another process called avulsion. With avulsion, the land may be changed by flood or currents, but the property line isn’t. So BLM claims that when the river moved back north the property line stayed put.

It doesn’t help that Oklahoma defines avulsion differently than Texas and the U.S.

“Originally, here the river was out there where it is now and it eroded and accreted up to here, and then it eroded and accreted back. Well, their interpretation is that it eroded up to here but avulsed back. So when you listen to them it is always erosion to the south because the property line follows it then, but it’s always avulsion when it goes north. So the boundary can move south but it can never move back north,” said Henderson.

About 90,000 acres could be seized by BLM, disappearing across a new state line. If they are allowed to take the land, it could also affect farmers and ranchers down river like Scott Carpenter, who ranches north of Nocona.

BLM couldn’t take his land, but there would be nothing to stop his neighbor across the river from claiming some of Scott’s property belongs to him. That is just one of the reasons Carpenter wants to help.

“We have numerous places that have been in our family for over a hundred of years, and you hate to see land that people’s worked hard for would lose,” said Carpenter. “As producers we are always on a defense. We have to make decisions to try to help ourselves to help one another.”

Both ranchers have been in contact with U.S. Congressman Mac Thornberry, who is working to help stop the land grab. Henderson’s land probably won’t be affected this time, but he’s hoping what happened to him won’t happen to his fellow landowners.

This report is from our partners at the Texas Farm Bureau.

Supporters of Bundy “Better have funeral plans”

County Commissioner Says Bundy Supporters “Better Have Funeral Plans”

  • The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Infowars.com Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store

 

War of words over standoff with feds intensifies

UPDATE: Breaking: Sen. Harry Reid Behind BLM Land Grab of Bundy Ranch
The BLM shows criminal intent by attempting to hide documents exposing Sen. Reid’s involvement with this land grab.

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
April 11, 2014

Clark County Commissioner Tom Collins has caused outrage by remarking that Utahns planning to travel to Nevada to support Cliven Bundy in his standoff against the feds “better have funeral plans”.

Image: Tom Collins (YouTube).

The comments were revealed by Darin Bushman, a Piute County, Utah, commissioner after he spoke with Collins about Utah ranchers and his colleagues on the County Commission complaining about tactics used by Bureau of Land Management agents during their seizure of Bundy’s cattle in southern Nevada.

“I was just told by commissioner Collins of Clark County NV that all of us folks from Utah are a bunch of “inbred bastards” and if we are coming to Clark Cointy NV to support Cliven Bundy we all “better have funeral plans”. We should “turn our asses around on mind our own f-ing business”. Now there’s some classy leadership for you,” wrote Bushman on his official Facebook page.

After the story was picked up by the Las Vegas Review Journal, Bushman responded to the controversy by posting on Facebook, “I guess I’ve made an enemy in Las Vegas.” The commissioner also lambasted Clark County Sheriff Douglas Gillespie as being, “too spineless to exercise his Jurisdiction”. Earlier this week, Cliven Bundy called on Sheriff Gillespie to start arresting BLM feds on charges of trespassing and theft.

Collins’ remarks were made in the context of him fearing that protests against the BLM could turn violent, which is ironic given that the only person invoking direct violence is Collins himself.

“I’m trying to do everything I can to discourage anybody who tells me they’re coming here with loaded guns,” Collins said. “I’m going to tell them not to come,” adding, “The Bundys want peace, they don’t want any violence going on so all these gun-packing folks just need to go home.”

Clark County commissioners will hold a meeting next week to discuss issues of decorum in response to Collins’ comments. It is unclear whether or not any action will be taken against him.

Bushman questioned Collins’ sanity in light of his offensive comments.

“This guy was just off-the-hook weird,” he said. “I’ve never ran into a fellow commissioner who treated me like that.”

 

Announcement from Oathkeepers on Bundy Situation

This is lengthy, but very worthwhile. This is today’s Lexington Concord. I hope for a peaceful and righteous resolution. Glad Oathkeepers and Mack are going. I was disappointed checking their sites and seeing nothing on this earlier in the week.

 

Here’s the re-post from the Oathkeeper’s site:

 

April 10th, 2014

Coalition of Western State Legislators, Sheriffs, and Veterans Stand Vigil in Support of Embattled Nevada Rancher, Cliven Bundy ‘To Prevent Another Ruby Ridge or Waco”

 

Press release:

Coalition of Western State Legislators, Sheriffs, and Veterans Stand Vigil in Support of Embattled Nevada Rancher, Cliven Bundy ‘To Prevent Another Ruby Ridge or Waco”

A Delegation of state legislators, lead by Washington State Representative Matt Shea, along with a  delegation of current serving Sheriffs, lead by Sheriff Richard Mack of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, and military and police members of Oath Keepers, are converging on the site of a stand-off between federal law enforcement and Nevada Rancher Cliven Bundy, to prevent bloodshed and to stand in defense of hardworking rural Americans who are under assault by a runaway federal government.

LAS VEGAS, NV, April 10, 2014

The Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA.org), led by retired Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack, and the Oath Keepers organization (oathkeepers.org) are assisting Washington State Representative Matt Shea in organizing a delegation of current serving Western state legislators and Sheriffs to travel to the site of a tense stand-off between Bunkerville, Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).  The delegation is traveling to Nevada to support a coalition of current serving Nevada legislators being organized by Nevada State Assemblywoman Michele Fiore, of Las Vegas, to stand vigil at the Bundy ranch to prevent Federal Government provocation of violence resulting in another Ruby Ridge or Waco type incident.  They also hope that their example of oath-sworn public servants defending the rights of the people will prompt Clark County, Nevada Sheriff Douglas Gillespie and Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval to honor their oaths of office by taking real action to defend the rights of the Bundy family, the rights of all Nevadans, and the sovereignty of the State of Nevada.

Yesterday, April 9, 2014, Nevada State Assemblywoman Michele Fiore served the first watch in this vigil shortly after Cliven Bundy’s son, Ammon Bundy, was tazered by BLM “Rangers” during a heated confrontation.  The video of that confrontation can be seen here:

The courage and resolve displayed by Ammon Bundy and his relatives is inspiring, and may well go down in history as a watershed moment – a turning of the tide.  But the above video also amply demonstrates the heavy-handed behavior of the BLM that risks escalating an already volatile situation into open bloodshed, that, once begun, may spiral out of anyone’s control.

It is necessary that current serving public servants step in-between the protesters and the BLM, to protect the rights of the people and to prevent violence against them by the militarized federal law enforcement that are massing near the ranch to continue the forced confiscation (theft) of  Bundy’s cattle, while they also restrict all access to huge tracts of public land, and attempt to restrict the free speech of protesters with their absurd “First Amendment Area” (which the protesters are ignoring, to their honor).

The Oath Keepers organization, comprised of 40,000 current serving and former military, police, and first responders, is also calling on its members and all other patriotic Americans to join the vigil at the Bundy ranch under the leadership of the current serving legislators and sheriffs.  The goal is to have at least one current serving state legislator and at least one sheriff on the ground at all times until this is over.  And they will be backed by a large number of military and police veterans, as well as dedicated patriotic Americans from all walks of life, to interpose and defend the rights of the protesters and to keep an eye on the actions of the BLM and any other federal law enforcement present, to prevent a recurrence of the horrid abuses seen at Ruby Ridge and Waco, and to hopefully pressure the Clark County Sheriff and the Nevada Governor to step up and do their constitutional duty.

Regardless, please tell everyone you know to be praying for a peaceful resolution to this situation and for the safety of the brave patriots headed there and on the ground there right now.

As Assemblywoman Fiore said yesterday during the launch of her vigil, “we are here because the Governor is not.” And she will remain there until Governor Sandoval steps up to do his job, by defending the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Nevada, as he swore to do when he took office.  And Assemblywoman Fiore will not stand alone.  Other brave public servants will honor their oaths by standing with her, and there are thousands of Americans now on their way to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with them.    Governor Sandoval did at least, finally, state the following:

“Most disturbing to me is the BLM’s establishment of a ‘First Amendment Area’ that tramples upon Nevadans’ fundamental rights under the U.S. Constitution. To that end, I have advised the BLM that such conduct is offensive to me and countless others and that the ‘First Amendment Area’ should be dismantled immediately. No cow justifies the atmosphere of intimidation which currently exists nor the limitation of constitutional rights that are sacred to all Nevadans. The BLM needs to reconsider its approach to this matter and act accordingly.”

But the Governor needs to take the next step and go there in person, as is his duty, and order the Nevada Highway Patrol to actively interpose and stand between the people and an out of control BLM, to make sure the BLM actually reconsiders its approach to this matter and acts accordingly.  And he needs to speak out directly on the issue of federal subversion of what were supposed to be state lands, and the intentional destruction of rural America.  Silence in the face of tyranny implies consent.   Governor Sandoval needs to be sure he is not silent.

This is not about cattle.  This is about power, and the trampling of rights.  It’s about a systemic power grab and abuse of power by the federal government as it runs roughshod over the rights of honest, hard-working rural Americans and over the rights of all the Western states.  This is not an isolated incident.  It is but the latest in a long train of abuses aimed at subjecting rural Americans to absolute despotism while destroying the property rights, economy, and independence of the rural West, in particular, and eventually wiping out all of rural America.  This is an attack on all of the West, which is why patriotic legislators and lawmen from all over the West are answering the call to defend it.

And it is not just ranching that is under attack.  It is also mining, farming, logging, fishing, oil and gas, and any other industry that uses natural resources or the land.   This is a full spectrum, frontal assault on the rural West.   Ultimately, it is about bankrupting and impoverishing independent rural Americans to bring on a planned depopulation of the West.

This is truly a range war, and it is being waged by all three branches of the federal government, including complicit federal judges who “make it legal” through their willful rulings that strip away any meaningful redress or shelter for ranchers and farmers who have worked the land for generations only to now be told that they can no longer do so because of one endangered species or another.  Entire regions of the West are being shut down and impoverished using this tactic.

In this case, the Bundy family has run cattle on that same range since 1877 and they used to have fifty-two neighboring ranchers who did the same.  Now, using the Desert Tortoise as the weapon of choice, the federal government has run all the other ranchers in Clark County, Nevada out of business, and Cliven Bundy truly is the last man standing.   And it is also about all Nevadans being “prohibited” from using their own “Public Land” and the fact that the Feds were imposing their will over the state and it’s people at gun-point.

Unless We the People begin to take a meaningful stand now, in full support of our patriotic state public servants who are willing to lead us, the domestic enemies of the Constitution will not stop until the West is a land of ghost towns, devoid of people, and we are all crammed into city slums, totally dependent and weak, with no protection of our rights, like third-world urbanized peons under the arbitrary and capricious control of corrupt dictators.  Remember the immortal words of Frederick Douglass:

Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.

Under the Founders design, the states were to control their own land, unless, and until, the federal government purchased a particular piece of land, with the consent of the state legislature, for a fort, magazine, arsenal, dock-yard, etc.

As Article One, Section 8, Clause 17 states, Congress has the power:

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States,and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings.

 

When did the Federal government purchase the millions of acres in Nevada it claims to own?   When did the legislature of Nevada ever consent to it?   Where are the forts, magazine, arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful buildings on that land?  Where in the Constitution does it say the federal government can keep 80% of a state when it is admitted into the Union?  Nowhere.  And yet the federal government totally ignores the limited powers of Article I, Section 8, Clause 17, doctrine of equal footing, whereby new states admitted to the Union were to enter it on an equal footing with the original states.  Why doesn’t Virginia have 80% of its land claimed by the federal government?   Why doesn’t Ohio?  It is only in the West that this absurdity exists (and it is not just in Nevada.  Similar abuses are seen in the rest of the West).

And now, the federal government is not even content with that.  It wants to control all of the land, and stop all beneficial use, by having complicit federal judges use the catch-all “commerce clause” to turn the Constitution on its head, inventing a general police power of Congress to regulate anything and everything, which is the basis for the entire modern regulatory leviathan that is now strangling and stomping rural America into the dust in the name of the Desert Tortoise, the Spotted Owl, the Delta Smelt (used to deny water to California farmers) and even prairie dogs (with Utah farmers who have farmed for generations told by the EPA that they could no longer till their land because it is now “prairie dog habitat”).

We must stand now, or see our children impoverished and enslaved in their own country.

As Thomas Paine said: “If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace.” That is a timeless truth that we must accept and embrace, lest we be cursed by future generations as cowards who sold them into slavery for the sake of our own fleeting comfort.  As Paine also said, “those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigues of supporting it.”

It is vital that the Western States stand up now for the rights of their people and in defense of their state sovereignty.   As Thomas Jefferson and James Madison taught us in 1798, in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, when the federal government violates the Constitution by claiming powers never granted, it is the duty of the states – all three branches of the state, and at every level, from the Governor down to the local dog catcher – to nullify and interpose to protect the rights of the people and to defend the dual-sovereignty design of this Republic.

In contrast to Sheriff Gillespie, who is truly AWOL in his failure to defend the people of his county, there have been Nevada Sheriffs who take their oaths seriously, such as the legendary Sheriff Jones of Eureka County, Nevada and Nye County Sheriff Tony De Meo, who successfully defended rancher Wayne Hage against BLM abuse.

We wouldn’t even be in this confrontation at the Bundy Ranch if Gillespie took his oath seriously, but even without him, it is time to get it done, and with Nevada State Assemblywoman Fiore and her brave coalition of Nevada legislators leading the way, and joined by a growing coalition of staunch constitutionalist public servants from many states, we will defend the West.

We therefore call on all liberty-loving Americans who can possibly make it to Bunkerville, Nevada to join us in this vigil, NOW, in direct support of oath-keeping Western lawmakers and lawmen as they stand guard over the rights of the people and begin to push back against federal abuse.  Come take a meaningful stand, in a real fight where it counts the most – in our states.  This is far, far more important than any trip to Washington D.C. to wave signs and yell at a deaf and blind Congress, White House, or Supreme Court.  This is where the real battle is, and where you belong.  This is where you can make a real difference, and begin the restoration of the Republic, from the bottom up.

And we call on all who cannot be there in person to be there in spirit, and to hold a prayer vigil for the duration of this struggle, asking that the Lord grant us wisdom, courage, humility, and His protection while we take this stand for our children’s future.  Truly, “where the Spirit of the Lord isthere is liberty.” 2 Corinthians 3:17

We humbly endeavor, to the utmost extent of our power, to follow in the footsteps of our Founding Fathers when, in their time of great trial, they proclaimed “and for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”

Michele Fiore, Nevada State Assemblywoman, District 4, on behalf of a growing coalition of Nevada State legislators

Matt Shea, Washington State 4th District State Representative, on behalf of a growing delegation of Western state legislators.

Sheriff Richard Mack (Retired), for the CSPOA (as well as a member of the Board of Directors of Oath Keepers), on behalf of a delegation of current serving Sheriffs

Stewart Rhodes, Founder and President of Oath Keepers on behalf of the Board of Directors of Oath Keepers and 40,000 Oath Keepers members

CONTACT:

Michele@votefiore.com

matt@voteshea.com

sheriffmack@hotmail.com

contact@oathkeepers.org

 

Must Watch Bundy Video April 9th

Folks, there are numerous BLM and NPS vehicles including the lovely K9 squads coming out from where Bundy’s cattle are located. There’s a dump truck and a back hoe, but NO CATTLE! The sense is that they are killing the cows and burying them.

If you care about right at all, you must watch this video:

 

Latest on Cliven Bundy vs The BLM

According to this article, the BLM has left…for now. Calves are dying from being separated from the mothers and reports of being tasered and even hit by cars are related:

 

Tensions increase as feds seize Nevada rancher’s cattle

Posted: Apr 09, 2014 6:27 PM CDT

LAS VEGAS – Tensions are growing as people in the community of Bunkerville are trying to stop federal agents from taking cattle off of public land.

During a Wednesday’s night town meeting, community members came out in force to support rancher Cliven Bundy. They gave him a standing ovation when he got up to speak.

“I love you people. And I love this land, and I love freedom and liberty,” Bundy told the crowd.

“I want to tell you and thank you for being brave enough to stand up for me, for my freedom, for my liberties and my land,” Overton area resident Kelly Houston said.

“I openly, publicly and personally say: I stand with the Bundys,” Overton area resident Laura Bledsoe said.

Resident not only showed support for the Bundy family, they also condemned the federal government for what they called heavy-handed tactics.

Earlier in the day, BLM and park rangers had tasers ready to go as they faced a few dozen protesters.

One woman claims federal officers hit her with their vehicle. A man says he was tased twice. In just a matter of minutes, the situation escalated from calm to angry with the protestors shouting and the rangers ready to respond with dogs, tasers and physical force, if needed.

At the center of this battle is the Bundy family and their herd of at least 500 head of cattle. The BLM says the cattle have been allowed to graze on the federal land illegally for the past 20 years.

“You want to tase me? Go ahead,” Ammon Bundy challenged rangers.

He is the son of rancher Cliven Bundy and he claims the rangers tased him twice.

The protesters came within inches of law enforcement trying to get the BLM to leave a section of the public land. The Bundy family says it’s willing to put itself in danger for their livelihood. They claim federal rangers are killing their cattle in the process of rounding them up.

“There’s only one reason they have a backhoe and a dump truck up there and that is because they’re cleaning up their mess from killing our animals,” Ammon Bundy said.

The ranchers say this is calving season and mother cows are being separated from their babies.

“They haven’t been able to feed their calves and that means the calves are starving to death,” Ammon Bundy said.

The BLM has denied killing any cattle intentionally, only saying that there may be some cases where a cow would need to be euthanized.

“Get out of our state! Get out of our state!” protestors yelled.

The BLM has left the area, for now. However, not everyone left the skirmish unharmed. One of the Bundy sisters says a ranger hit her with a car which threw her to the ground.

“I’m shook up, my hand’s cut, my knee’s you know, banged up,” Margaret Bundy-Houston said.

Although the BLM rangers are out of the area, they insist they’ll be back to take all of the cattle that are on the land illegally.

In a statement released late Wednesday afternoon, the BLM and park service said in part:

“In recent days, some peaceful protests have crossed into illegal activity, including blocking vehicles associated with the gather, impeding cattle movement, and making direct and overt threats to government employees. These isolated actions that have jeopardized the safety of individuals have been responded to with appropriate law enforcement actions.

Today, a BLM truck driven by a non-law enforcement civilian employee assisting with gather operations was struck by a protester on an ATV and the truck’s exit from the area was blocked by a group of individuals who gathered around the vehicle. A police dog was also kicked. Law enforcement officers attempting to protect the civilian federal employee from the attack were also threatened and assaulted. After multiple requests and ample verbal warnings, law enforcement officers deployed tasers on a protestor.”

The BLM and park service also point out that they have tried to resolve the issue with Bundy for more than 20 years. They accuse him of not complying with several court orders directing him to remove his cattle from public lands.

Besides complaints of tough tactics, people at the meeting Wednesday night also said the dispute was hurting the economic well being of the area because trails are closed and armed federal agents in the area are scaring away tourists.

 

Direct Trade Bill Needs To Be Pushed

 HB 2138, which will open to Missourians the clear and codified right to decide what they want to eat and from whom they would like to acquire their food, needs to move through the process. You can read the bill and a little about it here.
 The bill had a hearing and one of the questions from the committee was, “Don’t we already have the ability to sell directly?” They fully realized that raw milk was a serious exception to that question.
 In reality we do. But in our current regulatory control paradigm, if we do we are likely to be visited by “meat detectives” claiming we’re engaged in illegal meat or poultry sales.Were that true, Morningland could have made cheese for private exchange and milked their cows for the commercial dairy industry while taking some to make smaller batches for direct trade and it would have enabled them to keep the farm operational. Were that true, I could buy 5 pounds of lamb from my neighbor without any concern. I could buy cheese from another neighbor with no issues from regulatory “authorities”. I could buy egg dishes and kefir from anyone I chose…etc, etc.
 Getting this bill out of committee and into Rules then onto the floor will raise the question in the general public’s mind about if they are, or are not, smart enough to decide what they want to eat without a bureaucrat intervening. The Committee Chair, Eric Burlison and the Speaker of the House, Tim Jones, need to be called and encouraged to move this bill. Again, it is HR2138, sponsored by Rep. Mike Moon.

 

Milk Freedom Act of 2014

It’s about time we had someone try to bring some sanity to the issue of criminality behind raw milk. Thank you, Rep. Massie!

Massie Drops Two Bills in Defense of Raw Milk Distribution

 

rawmilk

Farmers across America continue to be harassed and fined for distributing unprocessed milk. This has been a problem to hard-working American families even before former congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) introduced his Unpasteurized Raw Milk Bill, HR 1830, in 2011.

Now, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) has announced he is dropping two separate bills addressing the same issues with the goal of restoring the farmers’ right to distribute milk, and the consumer’s right to choose what he or she wants to put in their own bodies.

Dairy farmers across the country find themselves in trouble with the law over the Food and Drug Administration’s strict guidelines, which end up pushing the raw milk business to the sidelines, turning it into a black market and thus increasing the risks associated with the poor processing quality. When laws are too strict, farmers can no longer make use of the protection of an open market where they compete freely. Consumers are the ones who lose.

While many doctors continue to defend the reasons why people may prefer to drink raw milk, many others will say that raw milk is in fact hazardous and must be kept from consumers, for their own good.

While the open debate is always important, banning a consumer item solely on the premises that it may eventually cause somebody harm is just not compatible with living in a free society, where individuals are aware they might have to face certain risks every now and then but are also entirely free to opt out.

Rep. Massie’s “Milk Freedom Act of 2014,” which reportedly counts on the support of least 18 co-sponsors, would provide relief to small and local farmers who have been directly affected by the harassment perpetrated by federal government bullies for distributing raw milk.  The “Interstate Milk Freedom Act of 2014” would keep the federal government from interfering with the process of distribution of raw milk across the lines of two states in which the sale of raw, natural milk is already legal.

“As a producer of grass-fed beef, I am familiar with some of the difficulties small farmers face when marketing fresh food directly to consumers,” Massie said in a statement. “Our bills would make it easier for families to buy wholesome milk directly from farmers by reversing the criminalization of dairy farmers who offer raw milk.”

“The federal government should not punish farmers for providing customers the foods they want, and states should be free to set their own laws regulating food safety,” the Kentucky Republican added.

Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-ME) is the leading Democrat on both bills. According to Massie’s office, both bills have received the support from both Heritage Action and Campaign for Liberty.

Folks concerned with the sovereignty of state laws regarding the sale and distribution of raw milk can rest assured that none of the bills’ provisions would interfere with state laws.

The following representatives are co-sponsoring the “Interstate Milk Freedom Act of 2014”: Paul Broun (R-GA), Walter Jones (R-NC), H. Morgan Griffith (R-VA), Andy Harris (R-MD), Raul Labrador (R-ID), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), Tom McClintock (R-CA), Mick Mulvaney (R-SC), Ted Poe (R-TX), Jared Polis (D-CO), Scott Rigell (R-VA), Steve Stockman (R-TX), Marlin Stutzman (R-IN), Dana Rohrbacher (R-CA), Louie Gohmert (R-TX) and Scott Perry (R-PA).

Co-sponsors of the “Milk Freedom Act of 1014” include Polis, Rohrbacher, Gohmert, McClintock, Rigell, Jones, Stockman, Broun, and Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI).

 

Russia Won’t Accept GMO’s

Russia will not import GMO products – PM Medvedev

RIA Novosti / Maksim Bogodvid

RIA Novosti / Maksim Bogodvid

Russia will not import GMO products, the country’s Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said, adding that the nation has enough space and resources to produce organic food.

Moscow has no reason to encourage the production of genetically modified products or import them into the country, Medvedev told a congress of deputies from rural settlements on Saturday.

“If the Americans like to eat GMO products, let them eat it then. We don’t need to do that; we have enough space and opportunities to produce organic food,” he said.

The prime minister said he ordered widespread monitoring of the agricultural sector. He added that despite rather strict restrictions, a certain amount of GMO products and seeds have made it to the Russian market.

 

Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev speaks at a meeting of United Russia deputies from Russian rural villages in Volgograd on April 5, 2014. (RIA Novosti / Ekaterina Shtukina)

Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev speaks at a meeting of United Russia deputies from Russian rural villages in Volgograd on April 5, 2014. (RIA Novosti / Ekaterina Shtukina)

 

Earlier, agriculture minister Nikolay Fyodorov also stated that Russia should remain free of genetically modified products.

At the end of February, the Russian parliament asked the government to impose a temporary ban on all genetically altered products in Russia.

The State Duma’s Agriculture Committee supported a ban on the registration and trade of genetically modified organisms. It was suggested that until specialists develop a working system of control over the effects of GMOs on humans and the natural environment, the government should impose a moratorium on the breeding and growth of genetically modified plants, animals, and microorganisms.

Earlier this month, MPs of the parliamentary majority United Russia party, together with the ‘For Sovereignty’ parliamentary group, suggested an amendment of the existing law On Safety and Quality of Alimentary Products, with a norm set for the maximum allowed content of transgenic and genetically modified components.

There is currently no limitation on the trade or production of GMO-containing food in Russia. However, when the percentage of GMO exceeds 0.9 percent, the producer must label such goods and warn consumers. Last autumn, the government passed a resolution allowing the listing of genetically modified plants in the Unified State Register. The resolution will come into force in July.

 

A new Problem Arises…

This is a very interesting article. As one who often skims and also often has to print out -at least portions- of lovely government documents so I can be sure to read them in depth, this makes perfect sense to me. We’ve lengthened the short attention span theater affect to not only our information gathering, but I think to our personal relationships as well. I also wonder if there is a correlation here to Kindle reading and right or left brain dominance associated with learning patterns.

Truthfully, there are news sites I avoid because they have entirely too much going on in sidebars and too much flash. It makes me feel like I am being visually raped. Or perhaps a better analogy is being forcefully beer bonged by over caffeinated frat boys.

I find it deeply intriguing that the movement to deepen reading patterns is looking to the slow food movement for some inspiration! Please read this lengthy article and let me know what you think about the observations given and whether or not you have experienced or noticed this in your life.

Serious reading takes a hit from online scanning and skimming, researchers say

By Michael S. Rosenwald, Published: April 6

Claire Handscombe has a commitment problem online. Like a lot of Web surfers, she clicks on links posted on social networks, reads a few sentences, looks for exciting words, and then grows restless, scampering off to the next page she probably won’t commit to.

“I give it a few seconds — not even minutes — and then I’m moving again,” says Handscombe, a 35-year-old graduate student in creative writing at American University.

But it’s not just online anymore. She finds herself behaving the same way with a novel.

“It’s like your eyes are passing over the words but you’re not taking in what they say,” she confessed. “When I realize what’s happening, I have to go back and read again and again.”

To cognitive neuroscientists, Handscombe’s experience is the subject of great fascination and growing alarm. Humans, they warn, seem to be developing digital brains with new circuits for skimming through the torrent of information online. This alternative way of reading is competing with traditional deep reading circuitry developed over several millennia.

“I worry that the superficial way we read during the day is affecting us when we have to read with more in-depth processing,” said Maryanne Wolf, a Tufts University cognitive neuroscientist and the author of “Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain.”

If the rise of nonstop cable TV news gave the world a culture of sound bites, the Internet, Wolf said, is bringing about an eye byte culture. Time spent online — on desktop and mobile devices — was expected to top five hours per day in 2013 for U.S. adults, according to eMarketer, which tracks digital behavior. That’s up from three hours in 2010.

Word lovers and scientists have called for a “slow reading” movement, taking a branding cue from the “slow food” movement. They are battling not just cursory sentence galloping but the constant social network and e-mail temptations that lurk on our gadgets — the bings and dings that interrupt “Call me Ishmael.”

Researchers are working to get a clearer sense of the differences between online and print reading — comprehension, for starters, seems better with paper — and are grappling with what these differences could mean not only for enjoying the latest Pat Conroy novel but for understanding difficult material at work and school. There is concern that young children’s affinity and often mastery of their parents’ devices could stunt the development of deep reading skills.

The brain is the innocent bystander in this new world. It just reflects how we live.

“The brain is plastic its whole life span,” Wolf said. “The brain is constantly adapting.”

Wolf, one of the world’s foremost experts on the study of reading, was startled last year to discover her brain was apparently adapting, too. After a day of scrolling through the Web and hundreds of e-mails, she sat down one evening to read Hermann Hesse’s “The Glass Bead Game.”

“I’m not kidding: I couldn’t do it,” she said. “It was torture getting through the first page. I couldn’t force myself to slow down so that I wasn’t skimming, picking out key words, organizing my eye movements to generate the most information at the highest speed. I was so disgusted with myself.”

Adapting to read

The brain was not designed for reading. There are no genes for reading like there are for language or vision. But spurred by the emergence of Egyptian hieroglyphics, the Phoenician alphabet, Chinese paper and, finally, the Gutenberg press, the brain has adapted to read.

Before the Internet, the brain read mostly in linear ways — one page led to the next page, and so on. Sure, there might be pictures mixed in with the text, but there didn’t tend to be many distractions. Reading in print even gave us a remarkable ability to remember where key information was in a book simply by the layout, researchers said. We’d know a protagonist died on the page with the two long paragraphs after the page with all that dialogue.

The Internet is different. With so much information, hyperlinked text, videos alongside words and interactivity everywhere, our brains form shortcuts to deal with it all — scanning, searching for key words, scrolling up and down quickly. This is nonlinear reading, and it has been documented in academic studies. Some researchers believe that for many people, this style of reading is beginning to invade when dealing with other mediums as well.

“We’re spending so much time touching, pushing, linking, scroll­ing and jumping through text that when we sit down with a novel, your daily habits of jumping, clicking, linking is just ingrained in you,” said Andrew Dillon, a University of Texas professor who studies reading. “We’re in this new era of information behavior, and we’re beginning to see the consequences of that.”

Brandon Ambrose, a 31-year-old Navy financial analyst who lives in Alexandria, knows of those consequences.

His book club recently read “The Interestings,” a best-seller by Meg Wolitzer. When the club met, he realized he had missed a number of the book’s key plot points. It hit him that he had been scanning for information about one particular aspect of the book, just as he might scan for one particular fact on his computer screen, where he spends much of his day.

“When you try to read a novel,” he said, “it’s almost like we’re not built to read them anymore, as bad as that sounds.”

Ramesh Kurup noticed something even more troubling. Working his way recently through a number of classic authors — George Eliot, Marcel Proust, that crowd — Kurup, 47, discovered that he was having trouble reading long sentences with multiple, winding clauses full of background information. Online sentences tend to be shorter, and the ones containing complicated information tend to link to helpful background material.

“In a book, there are no graphics or links to keep you on track,” Kurup said.

It’s easier to follow links, he thinks, than to keep track of so many clauses in page after page of long paragraphs.

Kurup’s observation might sound far-fetched, but told about it, Wolf did not scoff. She offered more evidence: Several English department chairs from around the country have e-mailed her to say their students are having trouble reading the classics.

“They cannot read ‘Middlemarch.’ They cannot read William James or Henry James,” Wolf said. “I can’t tell you how many people have written to me about this phenomenon. The students no longer will or are perhaps incapable of dealing with the convoluted syntax and construction of George Eliot and Henry James.”

Wolf points out that she’s no Luddite. She sends e-mails from her iPhone as often as one of her students. She’s involved with programs to send tablets to developing countries to help children learn to read. But just look, she said, at Twitter and its brisk 140-character declarative sentences.

“How much syntax is lost, and what is syntax but the reflection of our convoluted thoughts?” she said. “My worry is we will lose the ability to express or read this convoluted prose. Will we become Twitter brains?”

Bi-literate brains?

Wolf’s next book will look at what the digital world is doing to the brain, including looking at brain-scan data as people read both online and in print. She is particularly interested in comprehension results in screen vs. print reading.

Already, there is some intriguing research that looks at that question. A 2012 Israeli study of engineering students — who grew up in the world of screens — looked at their comprehension while reading the same text on screen and in print when under time pressure to complete the task.

The students believed they did better on screen. They were wrong. Their comprehension and learning was better on paper.

Researchers say that the differences between text and screen reading should be studied more thoroughly and that the differences should be dealt with in education, particularly with school-aged children. There are advantages to both ways of reading. There is potential for a bi-literate brain.

“We can’t turn back,” Wolf said. “We should be simultaneously reading to children from books, giving them print, helping them learn this slower mode, and at the same time steadily increasing their immersion into the technological, digital age. It’s both. We have to ask the question: What do we want to preserve?”

Wolf is training her own brain to be bi-literate. She went back to the Hesse novel the next night, giving herself distance, both in time and space, from her screens.

“I put everything aside. I said to myself, ‘I have to do this,’ ” she said. “It was really hard the second night. It was really hard the third night. It took me two weeks, but by the end of the second week I had pretty much recovered myself so I could enjoy and finish the book.”

Then she read it again.

“I wanted to enjoy this form of reading again,” Wolf said. “When I found myself, it was like I recovered. I found my ability again to slow down, savor and think.”

 

 

Previous Older Entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 69 other followers