Enemies of Liberty are ruthless. To own your Liberty, you'd better come harder than your enemies..

Monday, April 7, 2014

Patriots looking for a Constitutional Crisis

The pic is pixelated, it reads: First Amendment Area...
BLM snipers are putting reticles on anyone who dares to venture beyond the "First Amendment Areas" they have designated.

This is a problem, one in which Patriots seeking to take a stand may find the real possibility to make a difference.

If you have ever promised "No More Wacos" or "No more Ruby Ridges" - this one has your name all over it.

Here's the story.

Kerodin
III

20 comments:

  1. What an interesting spot that would be, to have a picnic.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey K I'm staying at the same hotel as the rangers...I talked to one guy who said a couple of guys stayed home because they didn't agree with what was going on...I asked him if he agreed and he said he could see both sides but implied that he had bills to pay...I then said I hoped he would draw the line when they wanted to round the citizens up instead of cattle and he looked at me like I was crazy for even suggesting that the government would do that...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, they always look at you like you're crazy. I'm so used to it that when someone actually agrees with me I get suspicious. ;-)

      Delete
  3. Nope! The "...not one more inch" crowd will give one more inch...just this one time of course, but next time they will not give one more inch...swear! "Calling Mike Vanderboegh, Mike Vanderboegh, your "inch" is waiting" Sorry, I forgot, you have a very important Doctors appointment that day, right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Damn, I was going to post that: never fear, Mike is there so everything is under control, but you beat me to it. :)

      Delete
  4. Anonymous, you're showin' 'em how to do it, right? Thanks lineman, that's interesting.

    "Couldn't happen here" I'd like to say to the guy, "THINK. How could it NOT happen here?"

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm confused.

    1-Does Bundy really own the land, or does he just claim to own it?

    2-Or...did he legally own it at one time, and then the Feds took it for the fucking turtle habitat?

    3-Or...it's been Federal land all along, and Bundy has been grazing his cattle on it per some kind of agreement that has recently been changed because of the fucking turtle thing?

    Whatever...I am of the opinion the the fucking Feds have no business "owning" so much fucking land, nor do they have the right to steal someone's property without due process.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. nor do they have the right to steal someone's property without due process.

      There, you said it, either way it is stole! :) Like the state "stole" one half of my land in front and on one side to make a road which I get nothing from, only that if one day they don't need it, they will graciously return it.

      Delete
    2. I've been wondering the same thing...that should scare you! It gets complicated with leases and grazing. What's obvious though, is that something changed and they're taking his cattle.

      "Public land"...neat trick. And then murder a guy who has nowhere else to stay. They did it on that mountain and they did it in those projects.

      Delete
    3. Bundy doesn't actually own the land, but he states that because his ancestors came out West and settled (the gov was more than happy that his family and others spent their treasure and blood to fight for occupation of the frontier so it could be settled) and started a ranch and have used the disputed land all this time - before BLM was even created, mind you - that he should have grandfathered in rights to continue to use the land.

      In many places BLM land is opened up and cattle ranchers are allowed to let their cattle graze there. At some point, BLM started charging ranchers, but it was more or less, a token fee, but later raised. There was also at some point people who objected because they thought the ranchers got too good of a deal at "the public's" expense (people, who, in my opinion don't know shite about raising cattle and just what it entails). In some cases there was the good ole boy's club thing going on, and yes, it was abused by some wealthy and politically connected big ranchers squeezing out the small ranchers. If I were to guess, given what I know of human nature, there is some personality conflicts going on here and they go back aways.

      All I know is
      1-the US gov should not "own" land. I personally don't think any slack jawed politician, especially some urban reared, wouldn't know the back side of steer if he looked in the mirror, let alone know anything about the challenges that come with trying to make a living in some extremely challenging areas of the West should be "handling" land and making policy about it.. Remember, the gov is not an entity, it is made up of individuals who froth and foam at the mouth in anticipation of any power they might hold over us peasants.

      2-the display of what the gov will stoop to doing to enforce unconstitutional laws has been already seen at RR & W. It will continue, they might back off if this gets too much attention, but they'll circle round when they think they can pull it off.

      3-This, like anything the gov touches, ends up being a power struggle and it will continue until some event puts a stop to it.

      Miss Violet

      P.S. Did I mention that I think politicians are one of the lowest life forms on the planet? Also, that I think that their bureaucratic toddies that implement their unconstitutional decrees thinking that they are untouchable make me want to throw up on their shoes?

      Delete
    4. I could be wrong but the way I've understood it is that it was Federal land that he had grazing rights to. Of course, I could be wrong though. Either way, they are wanting him to pay for his cattle eating grass. Gimme a break.
      Josh R.

      Delete
    5. he should have grandfathered in rights to continue to use the land.

      The problem, Madam is that makes perfect sense.........

      Delete
  6. Walter: Here is the article from Fox ......... http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/07/feds-move-in-on-nevada-rancher-herd-over-illegal-grazing/

    This should answer most of your questions.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "No more free Wacos!"
    "No more free Ft. Sumter's"
    Seem like we've heard that somewhere?

    ReplyDelete
  8. It is the reaction and methodology being implemented by the BLM on the ground that is very telling about how .Gov entities have been authorized to treat us all when it is us in the fight. Setting designated "1A Zones" is an abject Fail. Pointing rifles at people outside of those little gravel pits who dare stop their car or raise a camera is an abject Fail. Yet, someone in .Gov has told them, trained them, and taught them how to do it in "workshops" that creating such pens is acceptable and killing people outside those pens is acceptable.

    The next time you have a 2A rally, consider the Capitol Police drawing down because you are not in the "designated 1A area". Or the next anti-abortion rally - same same.

    There are to stories here. The first is whatever beef that exists between Bundy and BLM. The second, the one shaping up to be a bigger Constitutional issue, is how .Gov is trying to impose its will on people who show up. (I'm certain one of the reasons BLM is trying to corral all bystanders is to prevent a Spank & Flank (TM) by people who decide they need to be taught a lesson in Constitution 101)

    K

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree completely.

      I would wager that there is some BLM employee that had a run in with Bundy at some point in the distant past and he's determined to put Bundy in his place...and in doing so, also extends the authoritah of the fed gov. A win-win in any feralgovernment employee's mind.

      Miss Violet

      Delete
  9. I trust you know your blog is acting funky, K. Bottom line is that they're HIS cattle, period. No matter what, unless they can provide a contract that HE signed, acknowledging some monies owed. He should get the cattle back, technically be paid for a "taking" under the BoR, and be given recompense for all the headaches.

    But no matter what, those are HIS cattle. Begin at the beginning.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What's the blog doing?

      Delete
    2. One misthreaded comment, a few times a pic's info without the pic or any posts (a zoomie pic apparently, maybe the one at the top), and this time a comment being zapped into nothingness while being published. Too bad; it was a decent technical breakdown.

      Could be me, or maybe the NSA has tiny glitches.

      Delete

Please post anonymously and include your recognized online handle in the body of the comment.