You guys have missed a very large point. Harry Reid stated " that if you don't obey the Laws, you are a terrorist" They don't trust the American people. They are afraid, and they know why. They have destroyed this country and they know what's coming. The financial crisis is only inches away from a meltdown and that will be very ugly. Civil disobedience is happening now and it will get worse. Veterans classed as terrorist, and psychopaths. That's why they have NSA collecting all the emails and mega data. That's why there are surveillance cameras are everywhere. That's why they want our weapons. Any question in your mind now? We are all in the governments sights. Cheers, Ottway
Harry Reid lets the cat out of the bag
- Thread starter Ottway
- Start date
rockinbbar
New member
Time to play "Cowboys and Liberals".
Damm right Reid is scared. If he is so innocent, then why does the Senate Majority Leader and his son continue to squeal like pigs under a gate in affair that is none of their business?
Now he calls the people that supported Bundy "domestic terrorist"....?? (Translation: Anyone with guns is a terrorist.)
Damm right Reid is scared. If he is so innocent, then why does the Senate Majority Leader and his son continue to squeal like pigs under a gate in affair that is none of their business?
Now he calls the people that supported Bundy "domestic terrorist"....?? (Translation: Anyone with guns is a terrorist.)
tnshootist
New member
I have always been amazed by people who can chose to believe the "story" when the truth is plain. It must be nice to live in that world.
Wallbass45
New member
Originally Posted By: Ky Col " that if you don't obey the Laws, you are a terrorist"
Well what about Reid, Obama and Holder?? What are they is they don't obey the laws????
They are Political Terrorist!!
Well what about Reid, Obama and Holder?? What are they is they don't obey the laws????
They are Political Terrorist!!
Hooked
New member
Originally Posted By: rockinbbarTime to play "Cowboys and Liberals".
Damm right Reid is scared. If he is so innocent, then why does the Senate Majority Leader and his son continue to squeal like pigs under a gate in affair that is none of their business?
Now he calls the people that supported Bundy "domestic terrorist"....?? (Translation: Anyone with guns is a terrorist.)
I have not kept up with what was happening down there (12 hr night shifts for a week is torture for me), but what I have been hearing is that Reid and son are wanting to sell that land to a Chinese Company that wants to build some solar panel project? Sell it for a fraction of the actual value even ?
Damm right Reid is scared. If he is so innocent, then why does the Senate Majority Leader and his son continue to squeal like pigs under a gate in affair that is none of their business?
Now he calls the people that supported Bundy "domestic terrorist"....?? (Translation: Anyone with guns is a terrorist.)
I have not kept up with what was happening down there (12 hr night shifts for a week is torture for me), but what I have been hearing is that Reid and son are wanting to sell that land to a Chinese Company that wants to build some solar panel project? Sell it for a fraction of the actual value even ?
bluealtered
New member
Try this for a good run down of the Bundy/reid matter.
www.6.8forums.com -general discussion, Bundy/reid is 19 pages and growing.
www.6.8forums.com -general discussion, Bundy/reid is 19 pages and growing.
Rocky1
New member
Now that's a really interesting dot there!!
Quote:Federal Judge: BLM Engaged In A Criminal Conspiracy Against Ranchers
Court opinion exposes BLM’s true intent against Cliven Bundy
Kit Daniels | Infowars.com | April 17, 2014
For over 20 years, the Bureau of Land Management engaged in a “literal, intentional conspiracy” against Nevada ranchers to force them out of business, according to a federal judge whose court opinion exposes the BLM’s true intent against rancher Cliven Bundy.
In his opinion of United States v. Estate of Hage, U.S. District Court Judge Robert C. Jones reveals that after late Nevada rancher E. Wayne Hage indicated on his 1993 grazing permit renewal that by signing the permit, he was not surrendering his family’s long-standing water and forage rights on the land, the BLM not only rejected the permit but also conspired for decades to both deny his family’s property rights and to destroy their cattle business.
“Based upon E. Wayne Hage’s declaration that he refused to waive his rights — a declaration that did not purport to change the substance of the grazing permit renewal for which he was applying, and which had no plausible legal effect other than to superfluously assert non-waiver of rights — the Government denied him a renewal grazing permit based upon its frankly nonsensical position that such an assertion of rights meant that the application had not been properly completed,” Judge Jones wrote. “After the BLM denied his renewal grazing permit for this reason by letter, the Hages indicated that they would take the issue to court, and they sued the Government in the CFC [Court of Federal Claims.]”
And at that point, Jones explained, the BLM refused to consider any further applications from Hage.
“The entire chain of events is the result of the Government’s arbitrary denial of E. Wayne Hage’s renewal permit for 1993–2003, and the effects of this due process violation are continuing,” he stated.
Judge Jones continued:
In 2007, unsatisfied with the outcome thus far in the CFC, the Government brought the present civil trespass action against Hage and the Estate. The Government did not bring criminal misdemeanor trespass claims, perhaps because it believed it could not satisfy the burden of proof in a criminal trespass action, as a previous criminal action against E. Wayne Hage had been reversed by the Court of Appeals. During the course of the present trial, the Government has: (1)invited others, including Mr. Gary Snow, to apply for grazing permits on allotments where the Hages previously had permits, indicating that Mr. Snow could use water sources on such land in which Hage had water rights, or at least knowing that he would use such sources; (2) applied with the Nevada State Engineer for its own stock watering rights in waters on the land despite that fact that the Government owns no cattle nearby and has never intended to obtain any, but rather for the purpose of obtaining rights for third parties other than Hage in order to interfere with Hage’s rights; and (3) issued trespass notices and demands for payment against persons who had cattle pastured with Hage, despite having been notified by these persons and Hage himself that Hage was responsible for these cattle and even issuing such demands for payment to witnesses soon after they testified in this case.
By filing for a public water reserve, the Government in this case sought specifically to transfer to others water rights belonging to the Hages. The Government also explicitly solicited and granted temporary grazing rights to parties who had no preferences under the TGA [Taylor Grazing Act of 1934], such as Mr. Snow, in areas where the Hages had preferences under the TGA.
It is necessary to note that under the TGA, according to Red Canyon Sheep Co. v. Ickes (1938), a rancher whose cattle had previously grazed in the area based upon adjacent land, water rights on the land, etc., has a right to a grazing permit over others who apply for a permit to graze the area without having previously grazed there.
So in this instance, Hage would have priority over Snow for a grazing permit, but the BLM willfully ignored this court ruling.
And after the agency filed for a public water reserve, according to Judge Jones, the BLM “sent trespass notices to people who leased or sold cattle to the Hages, notwithstanding the Hages’ admitted and known control over that cattle, in order to pressure other parties not to do business with the Hages, and even to discourage or punish testimony in the present case.”
“For this reason, the Court has held certain government officials in contempt and referred the matter to the U.S. Attorney’s Office,” he wrote. “In summary, government officials, and perhaps also Mr. Snow, entered into a literal, intentional conspiracy to deprive the Hages not only of their permits but also of their vested water rights.”
“This behavior shocks the conscience of the Court and provides a sufficient basis for a finding of irreparable harm to support the injunction described at the end of this Order.”
So in other words, the BLM willfully attempted to destroy the Hage family’s livelihood because Hage dared to assert his existing rights to the land which his family has held since the late 19th century.
And unfortunately the BLM is attempting to do the exact same thing to Cliven Bundy.
“Has Attorney General Eric Holder prosecuted any federal officials for criminal activity and violation of the Hage family’s constitutionally protected rights? No,” William F. Jasper, senior editor of The New American, wrote on the subject. “Has Sen. Harry Reid denounced this lawlessness and criminal activity by government officials and call upon President Obama and Attorney General Holder to protect the citizens of his state from the depredations of federal officials under their command? No.”
“With attitudes such as those expressed above by Sen. Harry Reid, it is almost a certainty that the recently defused Bundy Ranch standoff will be replayed again — and in the not-too-distant future. And the outcome could be much less amicable for all concerned.”
http://www.infowars.com/federal-judge-blm-engaged-in-a-criminal-conspiracy-against-ranchers/
Quote:Federal Judge: BLM Engaged In A Criminal Conspiracy Against Ranchers
Court opinion exposes BLM’s true intent against Cliven Bundy
Kit Daniels | Infowars.com | April 17, 2014
For over 20 years, the Bureau of Land Management engaged in a “literal, intentional conspiracy” against Nevada ranchers to force them out of business, according to a federal judge whose court opinion exposes the BLM’s true intent against rancher Cliven Bundy.
In his opinion of United States v. Estate of Hage, U.S. District Court Judge Robert C. Jones reveals that after late Nevada rancher E. Wayne Hage indicated on his 1993 grazing permit renewal that by signing the permit, he was not surrendering his family’s long-standing water and forage rights on the land, the BLM not only rejected the permit but also conspired for decades to both deny his family’s property rights and to destroy their cattle business.
“Based upon E. Wayne Hage’s declaration that he refused to waive his rights — a declaration that did not purport to change the substance of the grazing permit renewal for which he was applying, and which had no plausible legal effect other than to superfluously assert non-waiver of rights — the Government denied him a renewal grazing permit based upon its frankly nonsensical position that such an assertion of rights meant that the application had not been properly completed,” Judge Jones wrote. “After the BLM denied his renewal grazing permit for this reason by letter, the Hages indicated that they would take the issue to court, and they sued the Government in the CFC [Court of Federal Claims.]”
And at that point, Jones explained, the BLM refused to consider any further applications from Hage.
“The entire chain of events is the result of the Government’s arbitrary denial of E. Wayne Hage’s renewal permit for 1993–2003, and the effects of this due process violation are continuing,” he stated.
Judge Jones continued:
In 2007, unsatisfied with the outcome thus far in the CFC, the Government brought the present civil trespass action against Hage and the Estate. The Government did not bring criminal misdemeanor trespass claims, perhaps because it believed it could not satisfy the burden of proof in a criminal trespass action, as a previous criminal action against E. Wayne Hage had been reversed by the Court of Appeals. During the course of the present trial, the Government has: (1)invited others, including Mr. Gary Snow, to apply for grazing permits on allotments where the Hages previously had permits, indicating that Mr. Snow could use water sources on such land in which Hage had water rights, or at least knowing that he would use such sources; (2) applied with the Nevada State Engineer for its own stock watering rights in waters on the land despite that fact that the Government owns no cattle nearby and has never intended to obtain any, but rather for the purpose of obtaining rights for third parties other than Hage in order to interfere with Hage’s rights; and (3) issued trespass notices and demands for payment against persons who had cattle pastured with Hage, despite having been notified by these persons and Hage himself that Hage was responsible for these cattle and even issuing such demands for payment to witnesses soon after they testified in this case.
By filing for a public water reserve, the Government in this case sought specifically to transfer to others water rights belonging to the Hages. The Government also explicitly solicited and granted temporary grazing rights to parties who had no preferences under the TGA [Taylor Grazing Act of 1934], such as Mr. Snow, in areas where the Hages had preferences under the TGA.
It is necessary to note that under the TGA, according to Red Canyon Sheep Co. v. Ickes (1938), a rancher whose cattle had previously grazed in the area based upon adjacent land, water rights on the land, etc., has a right to a grazing permit over others who apply for a permit to graze the area without having previously grazed there.
So in this instance, Hage would have priority over Snow for a grazing permit, but the BLM willfully ignored this court ruling.
And after the agency filed for a public water reserve, according to Judge Jones, the BLM “sent trespass notices to people who leased or sold cattle to the Hages, notwithstanding the Hages’ admitted and known control over that cattle, in order to pressure other parties not to do business with the Hages, and even to discourage or punish testimony in the present case.”
“For this reason, the Court has held certain government officials in contempt and referred the matter to the U.S. Attorney’s Office,” he wrote. “In summary, government officials, and perhaps also Mr. Snow, entered into a literal, intentional conspiracy to deprive the Hages not only of their permits but also of their vested water rights.”
“This behavior shocks the conscience of the Court and provides a sufficient basis for a finding of irreparable harm to support the injunction described at the end of this Order.”
So in other words, the BLM willfully attempted to destroy the Hage family’s livelihood because Hage dared to assert his existing rights to the land which his family has held since the late 19th century.
And unfortunately the BLM is attempting to do the exact same thing to Cliven Bundy.
“Has Attorney General Eric Holder prosecuted any federal officials for criminal activity and violation of the Hage family’s constitutionally protected rights? No,” William F. Jasper, senior editor of The New American, wrote on the subject. “Has Sen. Harry Reid denounced this lawlessness and criminal activity by government officials and call upon President Obama and Attorney General Holder to protect the citizens of his state from the depredations of federal officials under their command? No.”
“With attitudes such as those expressed above by Sen. Harry Reid, it is almost a certainty that the recently defused Bundy Ranch standoff will be replayed again — and in the not-too-distant future. And the outcome could be much less amicable for all concerned.”
http://www.infowars.com/federal-judge-blm-engaged-in-a-criminal-conspiracy-against-ranchers/
tnshootist
New member
In the news this morning. BLM plan to take land along Tx/Ok border.
Very interesting details, Rocky. Leaves little doubt as to where the BLM is headed and where Reid is coming from.
Originally Posted By: tnshootistIn the news this morning. BLM plan to take land along Tx/Ok border.
Here ya go, John.
Quote:Republicans warn BLM eyeing land grab along Texas-Oklahoma border
Published April 23, 2014 • FoxNews.
Texas officials are raising alarm that the Bureau of Land Management, on the heels of its dust-up with Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, might be eyeing a massive land grab in northern Texas.
The under-the-radar issue has caught the attention of Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, who fired off a letter on Tuesday to BLM Director Neil Kornze saying the agency “appears to be threatening” the private property rights of “hard-working Texans.”
“Decisions of this magnitude must not be made inside a bureaucratic black box,” wrote Abbott, also a Republican gubernatorial candidate.
CLICK HERE TO READ ABBOTT'S LETTER
At issue are thousands of acres of land on the Texas side of the Red River, along the border between Texas and Oklahoma. Officials recently have raised concern that the BLM might be looking at claiming 90,000 acres of land as part of the public domain.
The agency, though, argues that any land in question was long ago determined to be public property.
“The BLM is categorically not expanding Federal holdings along the Red River,” a BLM spokeswoman said in a written statement late Tuesday afternoon.
The spokeswoman referred to a 140-acre plot “determined to be public land in 1986” – an apparent reference to a 1986 federal court case. Breitbart.com, which reported Monday on the Texas land dispute, reported that a Texas landowner lost 140 acres to BLM in that case, and the agency is now using that decision as precedent to pursue more property.
Tommy Henderson, the rancher involved in that case, told Fox News' Greta Van Susteren on "On the Record" Tuesday that the BLM was "talking about taking another 90,000 acres by using my court case as the precedent to seize the other land...
"They won't talk to us or be straight with us as to what their plans are," Henderson said. "...So I have continued to pay for this land or the federal government would seize everything else I had."
According to background materials put out by Texas Republican Rep. Mac Thornberry’s office, the BLM is revisiting its management plan for lands including those along a 116-mile stretch of the Red River. His office said the possibility has been discussed of opening that land up for “hunting, recreation and management."
Gene Hall of the Texas Farm Bureau told Van Susteren, "we have seen an aggressive overreach by the federal government and in more than one instance, if you have got an agency like this that's very well funded with a lot of people involved, then you shouldn't be surprised if they are going to overreach and extend that aggressive approach."
Abbott, in his letter to the agency, said “it is not at all clear what legal basis supports the BLM’s claim of federal ownership over private property.” He said private landowners have cultivated the property “for generations.”
The debate comes on the heels of a tense standoff earlier this month in Nevada, after BLM tried to round up cattle owned by rancher Cliven Bundy – the product of a long-running dispute over unpaid grazing fees. Hundreds of states’ rights supporters, some of them armed, showed up to protest, and BLM back off citing safety concerns.
In the Texas matter, the Supreme Court incorporated the Red River as part of the border with Oklahoma nearly a century ago.
Congress further clarified the boundaries of the two states in 2000.
It’s unclear how seriously BLM might be looking at laying claim to additional boundary land.
BLM said it is merely in the “initial stages of developing options for management of public lands,” as part of a “transparent process with several opportunities for public input.”
BLM Field Manager Stephen Tryon, in a March 17 letter to Thornberry, said officials would eventually look to “ascertain the boundary” between federal and private land and acknowledged residents’ concerns that new surveys could “create cloud to their private property title.”
But he said no new surveys are currently planned, and reiterated that there are no federal claims to Texas land “as defined by multiple rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court.”
FoxNews.com’s Judson Berger contributed to this report.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/...intcmp=HPBucket
Regards,
hm
Originally Posted By: tnshootistIn the news this morning. BLM plan to take land along Tx/Ok border.
Here ya go, John.
Quote:Republicans warn BLM eyeing land grab along Texas-Oklahoma border
Published April 23, 2014 • FoxNews.
Texas officials are raising alarm that the Bureau of Land Management, on the heels of its dust-up with Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, might be eyeing a massive land grab in northern Texas.
The under-the-radar issue has caught the attention of Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, who fired off a letter on Tuesday to BLM Director Neil Kornze saying the agency “appears to be threatening” the private property rights of “hard-working Texans.”
“Decisions of this magnitude must not be made inside a bureaucratic black box,” wrote Abbott, also a Republican gubernatorial candidate.
CLICK HERE TO READ ABBOTT'S LETTER
At issue are thousands of acres of land on the Texas side of the Red River, along the border between Texas and Oklahoma. Officials recently have raised concern that the BLM might be looking at claiming 90,000 acres of land as part of the public domain.
The agency, though, argues that any land in question was long ago determined to be public property.
“The BLM is categorically not expanding Federal holdings along the Red River,” a BLM spokeswoman said in a written statement late Tuesday afternoon.
The spokeswoman referred to a 140-acre plot “determined to be public land in 1986” – an apparent reference to a 1986 federal court case. Breitbart.com, which reported Monday on the Texas land dispute, reported that a Texas landowner lost 140 acres to BLM in that case, and the agency is now using that decision as precedent to pursue more property.
Tommy Henderson, the rancher involved in that case, told Fox News' Greta Van Susteren on "On the Record" Tuesday that the BLM was "talking about taking another 90,000 acres by using my court case as the precedent to seize the other land...
"They won't talk to us or be straight with us as to what their plans are," Henderson said. "...So I have continued to pay for this land or the federal government would seize everything else I had."
According to background materials put out by Texas Republican Rep. Mac Thornberry’s office, the BLM is revisiting its management plan for lands including those along a 116-mile stretch of the Red River. His office said the possibility has been discussed of opening that land up for “hunting, recreation and management."
Gene Hall of the Texas Farm Bureau told Van Susteren, "we have seen an aggressive overreach by the federal government and in more than one instance, if you have got an agency like this that's very well funded with a lot of people involved, then you shouldn't be surprised if they are going to overreach and extend that aggressive approach."
Abbott, in his letter to the agency, said “it is not at all clear what legal basis supports the BLM’s claim of federal ownership over private property.” He said private landowners have cultivated the property “for generations.”
The debate comes on the heels of a tense standoff earlier this month in Nevada, after BLM tried to round up cattle owned by rancher Cliven Bundy – the product of a long-running dispute over unpaid grazing fees. Hundreds of states’ rights supporters, some of them armed, showed up to protest, and BLM back off citing safety concerns.
In the Texas matter, the Supreme Court incorporated the Red River as part of the border with Oklahoma nearly a century ago.
Congress further clarified the boundaries of the two states in 2000.
It’s unclear how seriously BLM might be looking at laying claim to additional boundary land.
BLM said it is merely in the “initial stages of developing options for management of public lands,” as part of a “transparent process with several opportunities for public input.”
BLM Field Manager Stephen Tryon, in a March 17 letter to Thornberry, said officials would eventually look to “ascertain the boundary” between federal and private land and acknowledged residents’ concerns that new surveys could “create cloud to their private property title.”
But he said no new surveys are currently planned, and reiterated that there are no federal claims to Texas land “as defined by multiple rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court.”
FoxNews.com’s Judson Berger contributed to this report.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/...intcmp=HPBucket
Regards,
hm
One more of the connecting dots:
Quote: Breaking: Sen. Harry Reid Behind BLM Land Grab of Bundy Ranch
BLM attempted cover-up of Sen. Reid/Chinese gov’t takeover of ranch for solar farm
RELATED: Flashback: Sen. Reid Breaks Ground for Nevada Solar Farm Near Bundy Ranch – Sen. Reid is pushing for multiple solar farms in Nevada, not just the shelved 2012 ENN project
Kit Daniels
Infowars.com
April 11, 2014
The Bureau of Land Management, whose director was Sen. Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) former senior adviser, has purged documents from its web site stating that the agency wants Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy’s cattle off of the land his family has worked for over 140 years in order to make way for solar panel power stations.
Corrupt Democratic Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) working with the Chinese gov’t to take land from hard-working Americans.
Deleted from BLM.gov but reposted for posterity by the Free Republic, the BLM document entitled “Cattle Trespass Impacts” directly states that Bundy’s cattle “impacts” solar development, more specifically the construction of “utility-scale solar power generation facilities” on “public lands.”
“Non-Governmental Organizations have expressed concern that the regional mitigation strategy for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone utilizes Gold Butte as the location for offsite mitigation for impacts from solar development, and that those restoration activities are not durable with the presence of trespass cattle,” the document states.
The first segment of the document pulled by the feds from BLM.gov.
Another BLM report entitled “Regional Mitigation Strategy for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone” (BLM Technical Note 444) reveals that Bundy’s land in question is within the “Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone and surrounding area” which is part of a broad U.S. Department of Energy program for “Solar Energy Development in Six Southwestern States” on land “managed” by BLM.
The second segment of the document pulled by the feds from BLM.gov.
“In 2012, the BLM and the U.S. Department of Energy published the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for Solar Energy Development in Six Southwestern States,” the report reads. “The Final Solar Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement assessed the impact of utility-scale solar energy development on public lands in the six southwestern states of Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah.”
Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone and surrounding area (Click to enlarge.)
“The Approved Resource Management Plan Amendments/Record of Decision (ROD) for Solar Energy Development in Six Southwestern States implemented a comprehensive solar energy program for public lands in those states and incorporated land use allocations and programmatic and SEZ-specific design features into land use plans in the six-state study area.”
Back in 2012, the New American reported that Harry Reid’s son, Rory Reid, was the chief representative for a Chinese energy firm planning to build a $5-billion solar plant on public land in Laughlin, Nevada.
And journalist Marcus Stern with Reuters also reported that Sen. Reid was heavily involved in the deal as well.
“[Reid] and his oldest son, Rory, are both involved in an effort by a Chinese energy giant, ENN Energy Group, to build a $5 billion solar farm and panel manufacturing plant in the southern Nevada desert,” he wrote. “Reid has been one of the project’s most prominent advocates, helping recruit the company during a 2011 trip to China and applying his political muscle on behalf of the project in Nevada.”
“His son, a lawyer with a prominent Las Vegas firm that is representing ENN, helped it locate a 9,000-acre (3,600-hectare) desert site that it is buying well below appraised value from Clark County, where Rory Reid formerly chaired the county commission.”
Although these reports are in plain view, the mainstream media has so far ignored this link.
The BLM’s official reason for encircling the Bundy family with sniper teams and helicopters was to protect the endangered desert tortoise, which the agency has previously been killing in mass due to “budget constraints.”
“A tortoise isn’t the reason why BLM is harassing a 67 year-old rancher; they want his land,” journalist Dana Loesch wrote. “The tortoise wasn’t of concern when [U.S. Senator] Harry Reid worked with BLM to literally change the boundaries of the tortoise’s habitat to accommodate the development of his top donor, Harvey Whittemore.”
“Reid is accused of using the new BLM chief as a puppet to control Nevada land (already over 84% of which is owned by the federal government) and pay back special interests,” she added. “BLM has proven that they’ve a situational concern for the desert tortoise as they’ve had no problem waiving their rules concerning wind or solar power development. Clearly these developments have vastly affected a tortoise habitat more than a century-old, quasi-homesteading grazing area.”
“If only Cliven Bundy were a big Reid donor.”
Update: The Drudge Report, the #1 news aggregate site in the world, has now picked up this story. Unfortunately for the BLM, the documents they wanted to delete are now exposed for the world to see.
Update #2: ENN Energy Group describes itself as a “privately-owned clean energy distributor in China.” However, as the People’s Republic of China is a single-party state governed by the Communist Party, all large companies in China, one way or the other, are either controlled or are heavily influenced by the Chinese government.
http://www.infowars.com/breaking-sen-harry-reid-behind-blm-land-grab-of-bundy-ranch/
Regards,
hm
Quote: Breaking: Sen. Harry Reid Behind BLM Land Grab of Bundy Ranch
BLM attempted cover-up of Sen. Reid/Chinese gov’t takeover of ranch for solar farm
RELATED: Flashback: Sen. Reid Breaks Ground for Nevada Solar Farm Near Bundy Ranch – Sen. Reid is pushing for multiple solar farms in Nevada, not just the shelved 2012 ENN project
Kit Daniels
Infowars.com
April 11, 2014
The Bureau of Land Management, whose director was Sen. Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) former senior adviser, has purged documents from its web site stating that the agency wants Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy’s cattle off of the land his family has worked for over 140 years in order to make way for solar panel power stations.
Corrupt Democratic Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) working with the Chinese gov’t to take land from hard-working Americans.
Deleted from BLM.gov but reposted for posterity by the Free Republic, the BLM document entitled “Cattle Trespass Impacts” directly states that Bundy’s cattle “impacts” solar development, more specifically the construction of “utility-scale solar power generation facilities” on “public lands.”
“Non-Governmental Organizations have expressed concern that the regional mitigation strategy for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone utilizes Gold Butte as the location for offsite mitigation for impacts from solar development, and that those restoration activities are not durable with the presence of trespass cattle,” the document states.
The first segment of the document pulled by the feds from BLM.gov.
Another BLM report entitled “Regional Mitigation Strategy for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone” (BLM Technical Note 444) reveals that Bundy’s land in question is within the “Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone and surrounding area” which is part of a broad U.S. Department of Energy program for “Solar Energy Development in Six Southwestern States” on land “managed” by BLM.
The second segment of the document pulled by the feds from BLM.gov.
“In 2012, the BLM and the U.S. Department of Energy published the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for Solar Energy Development in Six Southwestern States,” the report reads. “The Final Solar Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement assessed the impact of utility-scale solar energy development on public lands in the six southwestern states of Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah.”
Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone and surrounding area (Click to enlarge.)
“The Approved Resource Management Plan Amendments/Record of Decision (ROD) for Solar Energy Development in Six Southwestern States implemented a comprehensive solar energy program for public lands in those states and incorporated land use allocations and programmatic and SEZ-specific design features into land use plans in the six-state study area.”
Back in 2012, the New American reported that Harry Reid’s son, Rory Reid, was the chief representative for a Chinese energy firm planning to build a $5-billion solar plant on public land in Laughlin, Nevada.
And journalist Marcus Stern with Reuters also reported that Sen. Reid was heavily involved in the deal as well.
“[Reid] and his oldest son, Rory, are both involved in an effort by a Chinese energy giant, ENN Energy Group, to build a $5 billion solar farm and panel manufacturing plant in the southern Nevada desert,” he wrote. “Reid has been one of the project’s most prominent advocates, helping recruit the company during a 2011 trip to China and applying his political muscle on behalf of the project in Nevada.”
“His son, a lawyer with a prominent Las Vegas firm that is representing ENN, helped it locate a 9,000-acre (3,600-hectare) desert site that it is buying well below appraised value from Clark County, where Rory Reid formerly chaired the county commission.”
Although these reports are in plain view, the mainstream media has so far ignored this link.
The BLM’s official reason for encircling the Bundy family with sniper teams and helicopters was to protect the endangered desert tortoise, which the agency has previously been killing in mass due to “budget constraints.”
“A tortoise isn’t the reason why BLM is harassing a 67 year-old rancher; they want his land,” journalist Dana Loesch wrote. “The tortoise wasn’t of concern when [U.S. Senator] Harry Reid worked with BLM to literally change the boundaries of the tortoise’s habitat to accommodate the development of his top donor, Harvey Whittemore.”
“Reid is accused of using the new BLM chief as a puppet to control Nevada land (already over 84% of which is owned by the federal government) and pay back special interests,” she added. “BLM has proven that they’ve a situational concern for the desert tortoise as they’ve had no problem waiving their rules concerning wind or solar power development. Clearly these developments have vastly affected a tortoise habitat more than a century-old, quasi-homesteading grazing area.”
“If only Cliven Bundy were a big Reid donor.”
Update: The Drudge Report, the #1 news aggregate site in the world, has now picked up this story. Unfortunately for the BLM, the documents they wanted to delete are now exposed for the world to see.
Update #2: ENN Energy Group describes itself as a “privately-owned clean energy distributor in China.” However, as the People’s Republic of China is a single-party state governed by the Communist Party, all large companies in China, one way or the other, are either controlled or are heavily influenced by the Chinese government.
http://www.infowars.com/breaking-sen-harry-reid-behind-blm-land-grab-of-bundy-ranch/
Regards,
hm
Mr. Poppadopalis
New member
F IN SNAKES!!!!!
American citizens I sure hope you are watching these Democratic crooks try stealing the soil under your feet!
VOTE THEM OUT!!
American citizens I sure hope you are watching these Democratic crooks try stealing the soil under your feet!
VOTE THEM OUT!!
Coondogger
New member
This is all part of Agenda 21 gentlemen, you can expect more of this, and the shredding of the Constitution as they try to bring us under their control..
Longnkrnch
New member
Vote them out, run them out or take them out. Makes me no difference as long as they are out.
tnshootist
New member
Have they forgot what happened in Texas in 1836. It seems the feds are just hoping and trying their best to get a citizen to fire the first shot. Every day it is something. Maybe they are desperate to get the talk away from the oboma care mess before the midterms. I would hope people will try to peacefully resist till then. The election will not cure all ills, but it could make a difference. If not what better place than TX to have a party, centrally located and all.
Rocky1
New member
Another of those interesting dots... it ain't rocket science, tortoises don't eat much and they aren't very tall. If the cows graze the grass off, and it is shorter, so that the tortoises can reach the lush new growth, they will fair much better than eating a tall, gone to seed, dried out stalk that they have to walk down to reach. And, that don't take no degree in desert turtles to figure out!
Quote:Report: Desert Tortoise Greatly Benefits from Bundy’s Cattle Grazing
Historical record shows desert tortoises thrive when living near livestock
Adan Salazar | Infowars.com | April 15, 2014
The Bureau of Land Management’s ongoing dispute with cattle rancher Cliven Bundy has supposedly been waged over unpaid grazing fees. Bundy’s cattle is said to have grazed in protected areas regulated to preserve endangered species, chiefly the desert tortoise.
Desert tortoise populations thrive in uncontrolled grazing areas.
Desert tortoise populations thrive in uncontrolled grazing areas.
Later we learned the BLM had actually been euthanizing scores of endangered tortoises, as well as releasing some into the wild, in advance of closing the doors to the Desert Tortoise Conservation Center, which they claim lacked funding.
Since the start of the conflict, Bundy has asserted that the cattle he grazes actually benefit the desert tortoise population. “I’ll never get it. If it weren’t for our cattle, there’d be more brush fires out here. The tortoises eat the cow manure, too. It’s filled with protein,” Bundy stated.
It turns out, he’s right, according to one range expert.
Writing for the journal Rangelands in 1990, range ecology expert Vernon Bostick made an outstanding case for the desert tortoise’s dependent relationship on grazing livestock. Beginning with the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, which reduced grazing land use by about 50 percent, the federal government’s increased regulation of grazing lands, Bostick argues, actually makes them directly culpable for the decline of the desert tortoise population.
The correlation, Bostick outlines in a short treatise entitled, “The Desert Tortoise in Relation to Cattle Grazing,” is evidenced by the historical record, and can essentially be summed up in six words, “the more cows, the more tortoises.”
This is because “Desert tortoises feed primarily on dung. The more animals using the range,” Bostick says, “the more dung, which makes more food available for tortoises.”
Because desert tortoises lack teeth, they’ve evolved to be able to subsist on dung. “The tortoise can harvest only tender vegetation, and it can’t masticate even that,” explains Bostick. “The tortoise can’t process enough bulky, low analysis forage fast enough to meet its nutritional requirements. They solved this problem long ago – they allow other animals to do it for them.”
Desert tortoise lacks teeth and depends on dung for water and protein.
Desert tortoise lacks teeth and depends on dung for water and protein.
Additionally, “Fresh cow dung is 85 to 90 percent water,” a valuable commodity in the desert that can mean the difference between life or death.
Moreover, Bostick highlights that the nutrients in cow dung help tortoises stave off various deficiencies. In one finding, when cow dung was absent, the tortoises developed osteoporosis, a condition characterized by a decrease in bone density and brought on by a lack of protein.
Bostick details four main data points from the historical record illustrating that desert tortoise populations thrive when foraging alongside cattle, and suffer when they don’t:
“1. Desert tortoises have coexisted with cattle for 300 years in California and Mexico and at least 100 years elsewhere.
2. The highest tortoise densities known occurred at a time when overgrazing by livestock was the severest ever known.
3. The fewer the cattle on a range, the fewer the number of tortoises.
4. Excluding cattle for many years endangers the tortoise population.”
“The most complete data is from the Beaver Dam Mountains,” Bostick told the Las Vegas Review-Journal in June 2008. “Woodbury and Hardy reported a tortoise population density of 150 per square mile in 1948. BLM reduced cattle grazing a few years later and eliminated cattle in 1970. Coombs reported a tortoise density of 39 per square mile in 1974. In these 26 years cattle use was reduced 100 percent and tortoise numbers were reduced 74 percent.”
In typical big government fashion, the Bureau is fraudulently extorting ranchers for grazing fees to supposedly protect the very endangered animals they’ve been responsible for killing off.
“What most people don’t realize is that, although unwritten, the primary objective of both the Forest Service and the BLM has been, and continues to be, the elimination of all private interest on federally managed lands,” wrote rancher and researcher Cliff Gardner long before the Bundy standoff occurred. “And nowhere, have they been more successful than right in Clark County.”
“In the end,” Gardner says, “the tortoises suffer, honest and hard working citizens are forced to pay exorbitant and illegal mitigation fees. Ranchers and other enterprise are put out of business without benefit of due process or just compensation. Recreationist and sportsmen are forced off of their traditional recreation areas. And for what? So governments can grow in strength and power.”
Considering the extent to which the BLM is responsible for the decline of the tortoise population, it’s no wonder notorious animal rights group PETA hasn’t been more vocal through all this.
http://www.infowars.com/report-desert-tortoise-greatly-benefits-from-bundys-cattle-grazing/
Quote:Report: Desert Tortoise Greatly Benefits from Bundy’s Cattle Grazing
Historical record shows desert tortoises thrive when living near livestock
Adan Salazar | Infowars.com | April 15, 2014
The Bureau of Land Management’s ongoing dispute with cattle rancher Cliven Bundy has supposedly been waged over unpaid grazing fees. Bundy’s cattle is said to have grazed in protected areas regulated to preserve endangered species, chiefly the desert tortoise.
Desert tortoise populations thrive in uncontrolled grazing areas.
Desert tortoise populations thrive in uncontrolled grazing areas.
Later we learned the BLM had actually been euthanizing scores of endangered tortoises, as well as releasing some into the wild, in advance of closing the doors to the Desert Tortoise Conservation Center, which they claim lacked funding.
Since the start of the conflict, Bundy has asserted that the cattle he grazes actually benefit the desert tortoise population. “I’ll never get it. If it weren’t for our cattle, there’d be more brush fires out here. The tortoises eat the cow manure, too. It’s filled with protein,” Bundy stated.
It turns out, he’s right, according to one range expert.
Writing for the journal Rangelands in 1990, range ecology expert Vernon Bostick made an outstanding case for the desert tortoise’s dependent relationship on grazing livestock. Beginning with the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, which reduced grazing land use by about 50 percent, the federal government’s increased regulation of grazing lands, Bostick argues, actually makes them directly culpable for the decline of the desert tortoise population.
The correlation, Bostick outlines in a short treatise entitled, “The Desert Tortoise in Relation to Cattle Grazing,” is evidenced by the historical record, and can essentially be summed up in six words, “the more cows, the more tortoises.”
This is because “Desert tortoises feed primarily on dung. The more animals using the range,” Bostick says, “the more dung, which makes more food available for tortoises.”
Because desert tortoises lack teeth, they’ve evolved to be able to subsist on dung. “The tortoise can harvest only tender vegetation, and it can’t masticate even that,” explains Bostick. “The tortoise can’t process enough bulky, low analysis forage fast enough to meet its nutritional requirements. They solved this problem long ago – they allow other animals to do it for them.”
Desert tortoise lacks teeth and depends on dung for water and protein.
Desert tortoise lacks teeth and depends on dung for water and protein.
Additionally, “Fresh cow dung is 85 to 90 percent water,” a valuable commodity in the desert that can mean the difference between life or death.
Moreover, Bostick highlights that the nutrients in cow dung help tortoises stave off various deficiencies. In one finding, when cow dung was absent, the tortoises developed osteoporosis, a condition characterized by a decrease in bone density and brought on by a lack of protein.
Bostick details four main data points from the historical record illustrating that desert tortoise populations thrive when foraging alongside cattle, and suffer when they don’t:
“1. Desert tortoises have coexisted with cattle for 300 years in California and Mexico and at least 100 years elsewhere.
2. The highest tortoise densities known occurred at a time when overgrazing by livestock was the severest ever known.
3. The fewer the cattle on a range, the fewer the number of tortoises.
4. Excluding cattle for many years endangers the tortoise population.”
“The most complete data is from the Beaver Dam Mountains,” Bostick told the Las Vegas Review-Journal in June 2008. “Woodbury and Hardy reported a tortoise population density of 150 per square mile in 1948. BLM reduced cattle grazing a few years later and eliminated cattle in 1970. Coombs reported a tortoise density of 39 per square mile in 1974. In these 26 years cattle use was reduced 100 percent and tortoise numbers were reduced 74 percent.”
In typical big government fashion, the Bureau is fraudulently extorting ranchers for grazing fees to supposedly protect the very endangered animals they’ve been responsible for killing off.
“What most people don’t realize is that, although unwritten, the primary objective of both the Forest Service and the BLM has been, and continues to be, the elimination of all private interest on federally managed lands,” wrote rancher and researcher Cliff Gardner long before the Bundy standoff occurred. “And nowhere, have they been more successful than right in Clark County.”
“In the end,” Gardner says, “the tortoises suffer, honest and hard working citizens are forced to pay exorbitant and illegal mitigation fees. Ranchers and other enterprise are put out of business without benefit of due process or just compensation. Recreationist and sportsmen are forced off of their traditional recreation areas. And for what? So governments can grow in strength and power.”
Considering the extent to which the BLM is responsible for the decline of the tortoise population, it’s no wonder notorious animal rights group PETA hasn’t been more vocal through all this.
http://www.infowars.com/report-desert-tortoise-greatly-benefits-from-bundys-cattle-grazing/
tnshootist
New member
I had assumed the tortoise and the box turtle we have here are much alike. The best place to find box turtles is in pastures. It is common sense. No turtle I know of can jump very high. Creatures of all kinds use cattle trails for travel. Is the best way to meet girls. What is left out of most everything is plain common sense.